The City Council met: The Left Party’s motion on land degreasing was rejected due to the city’s tight budget situation

Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar: Zum deutschen Artikel.

It was not only Left Party city councillor Susanne Scheidereiter who was deeply disappointed when, at the council meeting on 1 July, the latest motion to reduce the city’s impervious surface area was rejected by the council majority. The Greens’ parliamentary group, too, had repeatedly failed with its motions in recent years, even though the people of Leipzig have been suffering increasingly frequently from oppressive heat since 2018 in a severely overheated urban area. But protecting citizens’ health is – strange as it may sound – a voluntary task. And Leipzig has no money for that.

This was made quite clear by Thomas Dienberg, the councillor responsible for urban development, at the council meeting on 1 July. Nor will there be any budget for de-sealing measures within the city limits in the forthcoming 2027–2028 two-year budget. Although, as Dienberg noted, he could only support the general aim of The Left’s motion.

However, the city’s excessive debt burden – caused by the federal government’s mandatory tasks that are not fully funded – means that, particularly when it comes to its voluntary tasks, Leipzig must either make cuts or is not even permitted to fund them in the first place, precisely because they are voluntary tasks. Even though, in the age of climate change, this is utter nonsense. Dienberg would never say that, of course.

But the public can feel it; they noticed it during the hot spell just before the council meeting, with peak temperatures reaching nearly 40 degrees, how the urban area heated up particularly severely precisely where it is heavily sealed and, above all, lacks shade from vegetation. But as mentioned: even the Greens have been repeatedly failing for the past eight years with motions to reduce urban sealing, whilst construction projects continue to build over more and more land.

In the long term, the city could even save money

De-sealing areas would actually save money, explained Susanne Scheidereiter in her speech on the Left Party’s motion. The city would gain more green spaces and more shade, areas for rainwater infiltration would be created, and the city would save on surface water drainage costs.

These are all sound reasons. And Scheidereiter also received support from Sascha Jecht (BSW) and Dr Tobias Peter (Greens).

But the fact remains that Leipzig is not permitted to allocate funds for this. Precisely because it is ‘merely’ a voluntary initiative. The State Directorate would probably cut it ruthlessly from the budget.

Which is why a majority in the City Council was ultimately found to vote in favour of the administration’s position – as proposed by CDU city councillor Sabine Heymann. Whilst this did not constitute a rejection of land unsealing, it did point out that “the proposal for targeted land unsealing is already being applied more widely in municipal construction projects.”

Rejecting land unsealing is life-threatening

But Susanne Scheidereiter, environment spokesperson for the Die Linke group on the city council, was nevertheless deeply disappointed, because the majority decision also made it clear just how much Leipzig is now struggling financially and that the city council has hardly any leeway left to pass meaningful resolutions beyond the budget.

“Anyone who, after a heatwave such as the one we have experienced in our city over the last few days, still turns a blind eye to the dangers of climate change is probably beyond help. The fact that a majority of the council has dismissed our motion on the grounds of a lack of funds and staff is short-sighted – especially given that funding of up to 90 per cent would be available through the KfW programme ‘Natural Climate Protection in Local Authorities’,” said Susanne Scheidereiter.

But 90 per cent funding also means that the city would have to come up with the remaining 10 per cent. And that is precisely what it cannot do in the current budgetary situation. Hundreds of other towns are in the same position and would like to access the KfW funding, as Green Party city councillor Dr Tobias Peter noted: they are not allowed to, because they are all caught in the same budgetary squeeze created by the federal government.

Susanne Scheidereiter: “The city of Leipzig spends around 24 million euros annually on surface water drainage for public roads, paths and squares – a sum that is constantly growing and must be critically scrutinised! These costs should be significantly reduced by unsealing traffic areas. This does not necessarily have to be achieved through additional new construction projects, but can also be implemented as part of complex construction measures that are already planned and due to be carried out anyway.”

Unsealing surfaces and allowing rainwater to infiltrate on-site offers numerous environmental benefits: it leads to cooler cities, less flooding, cleaner air, greater biodiversity, improved groundwater recharge and, overall, enhances cities’ ability to adapt to climate change. The burden on the sewerage system is reduced, and disaster risk management is strengthened.

“Consistent de-sealing of asphalted or concreted surfaces would also have significant positive effects on the city’s finances. Given the tight budgetary situation, no opportunities to reduce the City of Leipzig’s expenditure should be left unexploited – particularly when this would simultaneously enable the achievement of far-reaching environmental goals and aspects of disaster risk management,” emphasised Susanne Scheidereiter. “Failing to seize this opportunity is quite simply life-threatening.”