Resignation of Pölla's mayor Kröpfl demanded after abuse of office!

Resignation of Pölla's mayor Kröpfl demanded after abuse of office!

On June 4, 2025, Mayor Günther Kröpfl of Pölla (Zwettl district) was convicted of abuse of office in connection with a construction project. He received a conditional prison sentence of one year at the Krems regional court, which is not yet legally binding. The allegations relate to the approval and later withdrawal of a approval for a construction project that included the conversion of a garage into guest rooms and the construction of horse boxes. The public prosecutor accused Kröpfl of having “filed untruthful reports and deliberately given untruthful reasons for decisions”.

The FPÖ Pölla, represented by club spokesman Franz Wögenstein, criticized Kröpfl's actions as illegal and called for his resignation. With the support of all five municipal representatives, the FPÖ sees this step as a given. Alois Kainz, chairman of the FPÖ in the Zwettl district, agreed with this demand and described it as unambiguous.

Course of the procedure

The construction project, for which Kröpfl granted approval on August 20, 2020, was partially implemented in the summer of 2023, when the site had already been filled and a partially built stone wall had already been built. However, on August 30, 2023, Kröpfl issued a demolition notice because there was no valid permit for the construction work. This was done without giving the building owner the opportunity to comment.

The public prosecutor's office argued that Kröpfl knew about the building authority's permit, which he later revoked. The process received widespread attention among other mayors in surrounding communities. When reaching the verdict, however, the judge took into account the defendant's normal lifestyle and the long time since the crime, which meant that no aggravating factors could be identified.

Context and legal basis

According to the legal provisions, the mayor, as the first instance building authority, is responsible for issuing permits and carrying out demolition procedures. He is obliged to report irregularities to the administrative authorities. In this case, the mayor was held responsible for his negligent handling of the process, as he had neither issued a demolition order nor filed a report with the district administration authority.

The case was originally initiated by an FPÖ local council and not only concerns the personal measures against Kröpfl, but also has a signal effect on combating abuse of office in the local administration. Although the verdict will only be finally decided in the appeal court, it is already clear that the handling of such proceedings will be subject to stricter scrutiny.

The stone wall built during the construction site remains standing and the municipality has not yet taken any further action on the matter. While the legal disputes continue, the question of the mandate and responsibility of community representatives in the event of abuse of office remains central.

Overall, Günther Kröpfl's case highlights the challenges that mayors face when it comes to the proper management and approval of construction procedures. The legal standards applied in such proceedings are clear and errors can have far-reaching consequences.