Bergisch Gladbach battles €49M deficit amid rising costs and shrinking state funds
In his budget speech, CDU parliamentary group leader Michael Metten explains why his faction is calling for fundamental cuts to the draft budget. He argues that binding limits on personnel costs are essential to curb spending, but that significant tax increases are simply not justifiable.
"Mr. Mayor, dear colleagues, I would first like to express my sincere thanks to the treasury department—particularly to Mr. Eggert and Ms. Steidle. Regardless of political priorities, the budget figures have been prepared with great care and clarity.
The 2026 budget is shaped by numerous challenges: on the one hand, the state's key allocations have plummeted by €16 million. At the same time, transfer expenditures are rising by €14.5 million, and operating subsidies for daycare centers are increasing by €7 million.
Behind us lie 14 days of intense budget negotiations and discussions. Why have we made this so difficult for ourselves? Why have we delved so deeply into the details of the proposed draft budget?
There are three key reasons for this:
- Bergisch Gladbach is already the fourth most expensive city in Germany in terms of the burden placed on residents by municipal taxes and fees. In the annual ranking of the 100 most expensive major cities—compiled by Haus & Grund—we are nearly at the bottom. Life in Bergisch Gladbach is already extremely costly.
- Further fee hikes are looming. Under agenda item O22, we will indirectly have to approve a dramatic increase in wastewater fees in this very session due to the €427 million invested in what is deemed a necessary wastewater disposal concept. These investments will lead to a sharp rise in wastewater charges over the coming years. As a result, we risk slipping even further down the ranking. There is simply no room for additional tax increases of 100 percentage points!
- The economic situation in Germany—and unfortunately in the world—is contributing to a renewed surge in inflation, making life even more expensive. The broader economic impact of the Iran crisis remains unpredictable, but it is highly likely that prices and interest rates will rise significantly.
For these reasons, our clear objective has been—and remains—to prevent any increase in property tax rates beyond revenue neutrality through an amendment to the budget.
To achieve this, we must cut spending—specifically, we need to scrutinize expenditures and take a highly critical look at planned staff increases. We must not forget that the projected result for the 2026 budget stands at –€49.0 million—far from a balanced budget.
With this goal in mind, we approached the red-green coalition. Remarkably, in the first three rounds of negotiations, they did not present a single proposal on how to move closer to this objective. It is all the more surprising, then, that they now portray themselves—and allow themselves to be quoted—as the parties that have always been clear: savings are necessary.
A look at the city's history over the past 21 years shows that taxes were raised most aggressively under SPD mayors: under Klaus Orth, Frank Stein, and now Marcel Kreutz, taxes were increased on average twice as much as under CDU Mayor Lutz Urbach.
Mayor Kreutz rightly pointed out in his budget speech that we are at a tipping point in municipal finances. Unfortunately, the draft budget submitted by the administration is neither ambitious nor forward-looking enough to address this critical juncture.
