Controversy Over Notification to District Council About Event Plan Involving 100 Residents

Mapo-gu Council's Administrative and Construction Committee Enacts Ordinance Requiring Notification of Major Project Plans to the Council... Regulations Mandate Immediate Notification to the Council for Construction Plans Over 50 Million KRW, Procurement and Service Contracts Over 10 Million KRW, Events Involving Over 100 Participants or Costs Over 10 Million KRW, and Other Projects Closely Affecting Residents' Lives... Strong Backlash Against Mapo-gu's Excessive Interference

With the general election just over a year away, conflicts between ruling and opposition parties are intensifying over bill approvals, and local councils are showing similar patterns, sparking controversy.

The Seoul Mapo-gu Council passed an ordinance at the Administrative and Construction Committee meeting of the 261st Seoul Mapo-gu Council extraordinary session held on the 30th of last month, which has raised concerns over excessive infringement on local government authority, leading to strong backlash.

The controversial ordinance, titled "Ordinance on Notification of Major Project Plans to the Council of Seoul Mapo-gu," was primarily proposed by Council Member A of the Seoul Mapo-gu Council (Democratic Party of Korea) along with four other co-sponsors. It stipulates that construction plans exceeding 50 million KRW, procurement and service contract plans exceeding 10 million KRW, event plans involving costs over 10 million KRW or participation of more than 100 residents, and other project plans closely affecting residents' lives or requested by the council must be immediately reported to the council once the plans are established.

Regarding the ordinance, a Mapo-gu official stated, "The ordinance passed by the standing committee lacks specific delegation provisions under the law, which poses a risk of legal disputes. Its scope is excessively broad and comprehensive, and it is vaguely and abstractly defined, leading to ambiguous interpretation. This could result in unlimited pre-submission of materials, causing enormous administrative resource waste."

Furthermore, despite local councils having sufficient authority and means under the Local Autonomy Act to check executive agencies through voting rights, document submission requests, administrative audits and investigations, and rights to administrative reports and Q&A, Mapo-gu Council is attempting to impose additional obligations on the district without legal delegation. This has raised concerns that the council is using hasty legislation to control the administrative agency.

Within the Mapo-gu Council, the ordinance sparked a debate between supporters and opponents. During the Administrative and Construction Committee's agenda review on the 30th, no unanimous agreement was reached, leading to a secret ballot vote resulting in 5 votes in favor, 3 against, and 1 abstention, thus passing the ordinance.

It is reported that all five Democratic Party members among the nine committee members voted in favor.

The Mapo-gu Council currently has 10 members from the Democratic Party and 9 from the People Power Party, creating a ruling minority opposition majority situation, making the ordinance's passage in the plenary session highly likely if pushed forward.

Accordingly, Mapo-gu has confirmed sending an official letter titled "Notification of Cooperation Matters for the Implementation of Local Autonomy" to the Mapo-gu Council. The letter includes content stating that requests for attendance of relevant officials and document submissions must be made by official letter within the deadlines stipulated by the Local Autonomy Act, indicating that what was previously done as a matter of council cooperation will now be handled strictly according to principles, likely escalating conflicts between Mapo-gu and the council.

Meanwhile, the Seoul Regional Headquarters of the Korean Government Employees' Union, Mapo-gu Branch (Branch Chief Lee Seong-il), issued a statement demanding the immediate withdrawal of the ordinance and has been conducting one-person protests in front of the Mapo-gu Council, with plans to hold a press conference urging the ordinance's repeal soon.

A member of the Government Employees' Union Mapo-gu Branch, A, said, "Although the Mapo-gu Council has sufficient oversight authority and means, codifying new obligations without legal basis into an ordinance is unprecedented excessive oversight that only causes conflict between the executive agency and the council. Instead of creating an ordinance that does not exist in any of the 243 local governments nationwide (17 metropolitan and 226 basic), we should work together with the executive agency to improve administrative services for residents."