Council Secretariat's Main Budget Halved Followed by 99% Cut in Supplementary Budget
Budget for Purchasing Copy Paper Also Cut, Effectively Paralyzing Key Functions of the County Council
Chairman Covers Official Car Fuel Costs Personally, No Travel Expenses Even for Using Staff Vehicles on Business Trips
The Gangjin County Council in Jeollanam-do is facing severe criticism from the local community as the council members, who were at the center of controversy last year for halving the 2024 main budget of the Council Secretariat, have now indiscriminately cut the supplementary budget for the Council Secretariat.
According to the county council on the 24th, during the 2nd plenary session of the extraordinary meeting held on the 23rd, the council members cut 275 million KRW, which is 0.26% of the supplementary budget requested by the executive branch. However, they slashed 575 million KRW, accounting for 99% of the 584 million KRW supplementary budget re-requested for the Council Secretariat, which had been cut from last year’s main budget.
During the review of the 2024 main budget last year, the executive branch’s budget was cut by 0.5%, but the Council Secretariat’s budget was drastically reduced by 500 million KRW, which is 51% of the total 970 million KRW. Moreover, no reason for the cuts was specified in the reduction report, raising suspicions that the cuts were a targeted move to check the council chairman, who was in conflict with the council members.
Meanwhile, the Budget and Accounts Special Committee reconvened that morning, and although some council members tried to partially restore the Council Secretariat’s budget, their efforts failed, and only three executive branch budget items totaling 188 million KRW were reinstated.
Gangjin County council members are holding a meeting in the plenary chamber. [Photo by Gangjin County Council]
Additionally, during the budget review process, a revision proposal was introduced by Representative Councilor Noh Du-seop in an attempt to normalize the council’s functions, but the vote resulted in a 4:4 tie, causing the proposal to be rejected. The Budget and Accounts Special Committee’s supplementary budget plan was approved with six votes in favor and two against.
The controversy surrounding the council’s budget review stems from conflicts among council members, which led to the complete elimination of necessary budgets for council operations. This has paralyzed the council’s functions to the extent that the Council Secretariat staff do not even have funds to purchase copy paper, halting their work.
Furthermore, the budget for fuel expenses for official vehicles was cut, forcing the council chairman to cover fuel costs out of personal funds. Staff members have been using their personal vehicles for fieldwork and business trips, but going forward, they may not even receive travel expenses.
Amid this situation, on the 18th, during a field inspection by the Budget Special Committee, council members were criticized by residents for alleged abuse of power after they used their personal vehicles for transportation while the official vehicle for council business was left parked.
A Council Secretariat official lamented, “Subscription fees for newspapers and advertising expenses were completely cut, so we are unable to place any council advertisements in local media during annual festivals as we used to. Most of the office management expenses for purchasing consumables like copy paper and ink were also cut, causing significant difficulties in council operations.”
They added, “Not only were the budgets related to sessions and councilors cut, but also staff training and travel expenses. We tried multiple times to meet and persuade the council members to at least reflect the minimum operating costs for the council, but it was to no avail.”
Regarding the council members’ budget review, the local community interprets the heavy cuts to budgets related to the chairman’s emphasized ‘communication’ and ‘public relations,’ as well as the budget for legal costs responding to lawsuits from media outlets due to false reports, as an attempt to tie the chairman’s hands and feet by holding the budget hostage and to intimidate the Council Secretariat staff.
Councilor Noh Du-seop, who introduced the revision proposal, criticized, “The budget cuts to the Council Secretariat without justification or logic will not be accepted by the residents. Exercising authority without grounds, swayed by personal emotions, is nothing but tyranny disguised as democracy.”
Chairwoman Kim Bomi, in her closing remarks, stated, “Through this supplementary budget review, our council has lost the opportunity to escape self-inflicted harm, and the normalization of the council’s roles and functions has become a pipe dream. I earnestly ask the council members to act as representatives and public officials for the residents, prioritizing the public interest and the people of the county over personal feelings.”
The residents are casting a critical eye on the ironic situation where the council, which should monitor and check the county mayor and executive branch, is instead obsessively focused on checking only the chairman and the Council Secretariat with a distorted standard.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
