Resignation of Pölla Mayor Kröpfl after abuse of office required!

Resignation of Pölla Mayor Kröpfl after abuse of office required!

Pölla, Österreich - On June 4, 2025, Mayor Günther Kröpfl von 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 final. The allegations relate to the approval and the later withdrawal of a permit for a construction project, which included the conversion of a garage into a guest room and the construction of horse boxes. The prosecutor accused Kröpfl that he had "reimbursed a truthful complaint and deliberately justified".

The FPÖ Pölla, represented by club spokesman Franz Wögenstein, criticized Kröpfls as illegal and demands his resignation. With the support of all five community mandatars, the FPÖ sees this step as a matter of course. Alois Kainz, chairman of the FPÖ in the Zwettl district, joined this claim and described it as unmistakable.

process of the procedure

The construction project, for which Kröpfl granted the approval on August 20, 2020, was partially implemented in the summer of 2023, when terrain fillings and a partially built stone wall were carried out. On August 30, 2023, Kröpfl issued a notice of termination because there was no valid permit for the construction activities. This was done without giving the building owner the opportunity to comment.

The public prosecutor argued that Kröpfl knew about the building authorities, which he later revoked. The process received great attention among other mayors in surrounding communities. However, the judge mitigated the ordinary lifestyle of the accused and the long time since the act, which could not be caused any difficulty.

context and legal bases

According to the legal provisions, the mayor, as a first instance, is responsible for the granting of permits and the implementation of demolition procedures. He is obliged to report grievances to the administrative authorities. In this case, the mayor was seen in the responsibility because of his negligent handling of the procedure, since he neither issued a termination order nor had he filed a complaint with the district administrative authority.

The cause was originally initiated by an FPÖ council and not only affects the personal measures against Kröpfl, but also has a signaling effect for combating abuse of office in the municipal administration. Although the judgment will only be finally decided in the appellate body, it is already clear that dealing with such procedures is being examined more strictly.

The stone wall that was built during the construction site continues to be, and the municipality has so far taken no further steps in this matter. While the legal disputes are going on, the question of the order and the responsibility of community representatives remains central in the event of abuse of office.

Overall, the case of Günther Kröpfl shows the challenges with which Mayor are faced with when it comes to the proper management and approval of construction processes. The legal standards used in such a procedure are clear, and errors can have far -reaching consequences.