Something had been thought of for handing over the signatures. The “Bayreuth Climate Decision” initiative had laid out a carpet, had instruments ready and handed over 5,000 signatures to the mayor, neatly packed in a suitcase. How the city is trying to ensure more climate protection is far from enough, that was the message from the climate decision-makers. They wanted to use the signatures to force a referendum on climate policy in Bayreuth.
For the time being it was in vain because the city wouldn’t allow it. In June 2022, the city council declared such a decision to be inadmissible. The city argued that the number of signatures was sufficient, but the necessary “material requirements” were not met. Mayor Thomas Ebersberger (CSU) had already expressed concrete doubts after the signatures had been handed over. A referendum is not permissible if it disrupts the balance of the city’s budget so massively that “the constant fulfillment of tasks” is not ensured. This is the case with the plan to make the city climate neutral in 2030. The city council ultimately agreed with this stance by a vote of 25 to 15.
The “Climate Decision Initiative” had already emphasized before the vote in the city council that they would reserve legal recourse in the event of a rejection. And the climate decision-makers have actually decided on this path. This Thursday, the fourth chamber of the Bayreuth Administrative Court will hear their lawsuit orally. A court spokeswoman explains in advance that the plaintiff side has submitted a citizens’ petition to the city, which essentially aims to have Bayreuth draw up a “binding action plan” in order to achieve “real climate neutrality” by 2030. After the city viewed this request as inadmissible, the plaintiff turned to court.
It is unlikely that a verdict will be reached in the case on Thursday. On the one hand, the situation is complex. On the other hand, the lawsuit is considered to be new legal territory in its form. The lawyer Veronika Thalhammer, who represents the activists in court, has done scientific work on climate decisions. She says in an interview with SZ that she has not yet come across such a lawsuit.
At its core, the negotiation is likely to be about various complexes. Firstly, the question of whether the activists’ demands are actually too vague, so that voters might not be able to recognize exactly what they should decide on. Especially since it might be difficult to see which measures would really be necessary for “climate neutrality in 2030” – and what this would cost. The lawsuit argues that the demands are well understood and that one should not assume that voters are underage. The exact quantification of any costs cannot be the task of a citizens’ initiative.
Secondly, the question in Bayreuth is likely to be whether the activists’ demands are actually impossible to implement at the local level; So it’s a question of whether climate change isn’t more of a global issue and whether the financial resources of municipalities are not far too limited for this sort of thing. The climate decision-makers deny that this is supposed to be the case. Last but not least, they hope that the lawsuit will also ensure that “unresolved legal questions” regarding citizens’ initiatives and the municipalities’ climate protection efforts will now be clarified in court.