Ever since the members of the Pullach holiday committee on August 29th recovered the consent already given by the municipal council for a citizens’ petition by opponents of the conversion and expansion plans of the chemical plant United Initiators, it is certain that the dispute will go through judicial rounds. Accordingly, the legal counsel of both sides are currently positioning themselves. The lawyer for the citizens’ initiative, Maximilian Stanglmeier, has now described the decision of the holiday committee as sheer nonsense and also void in a harsh statement to the community. In his opinion, it is fundamentally not possible to retrospectively reject a petition that has already been approved. There is an objection from the town hall, the legal supervision of the Munich district office is holding back and does not want to anticipate possible court decisions.
Stanglmeier focused his statement on the decision of the holiday committee to overturn the citizens’ petition, which the municipal council had approved despite considerable legal concerns, after the citizens’ initiative had filed a temporary injunction against the council’s request with the Bavarian administrative court and also announced a lawsuit against the council’s request in the main . “There can be no effective municipal council decision to revoke the approval of the citizens’ petition,” says Stanglmeier’s letter. However, his law firm is willing to write legal history with the community and have the legal situation confirmed by a court, writes the lawyer. He is convinced that Article 18 paragraph 9 of the Municipal Code is decisive for a decision: “Once the admissibility of the citizens’ request has been established, a decision by the municipal bodies contrary to the request may no longer be made (…) until the referendum has been carried out, (… ).” This article is decisive and not Article 48 ff of the Bavarian Administrative Procedures Act, “where one is considering the cancellation of administrative acts”. There appears to be a deep legal misunderstanding here.
You see it differently in the town hall. Of course, an administrative act can be withdrawn if it turns out to be incorrect, according to a press release from the municipality. The declared intention of the municipal council decision in favor of the admissibility of the citizens’ petition was that citizens’ petitions and council petitions take place at the same time. Out of the motivation to let the citizens vote on the controversial issue and to compare both questions and justifications – that of the citizens’ initiative and that of the municipal council – the citizens’ request was admitted despite considerable shortcomings in the justification. With its application for a temporary injunction to be issued to the administrative court, the citizens’ initiative wanted to stop the procedure for the council request. It would no longer have been possible to have both requests voted on at the same time. In addition, the citizens’ initiative had again argued with false statements in the new draft to present their opinion. Against this background, the majority of the holiday committee has withdrawn its initial willingness to compromise.
A final discussion of the content of Stanglmeier’s letter is still pending, the district office announced. Should the citizens’ initiative file a complaint with the administrative court, the legal supervisory authority would first await the court’s decision.