Maribor before the first reading of the 2027 budget and on new borrowing

The city council of Maribor is preparing for one of its most significant sessions this year, set to take place on Thursday, June 18, 2026. This will be the 36th regular session of the Maribor City Council, held in the Hall of General Rudolf Maistr. The agenda includes 36 points, indicating that discussions will be extensive and intense. While the council members will address various topics ranging from spatial planning to the operations of cultural institutions, public and political attention will primarily focus on the financial aspects of the city's future. Central to these discussions are the first review of the budget for the upcoming year, 2027, and a proposal for new borrowing by the municipality.

The proposed document, which outlines the financial direction of the city, is the Draft Decision on the Budget of the Municipality of Maribor for the year 2027. Mayor Aleksander Saša Arsenovič emphasizes the importance of early adoption of the budget as a sign of responsibility towards the city. He argues that adopting the budget now allows for potential rebalancing in January, should the next mayor or the same one find it necessary. In contrast, failing to adopt the budget would leave the city in a position where it could not proceed with tenders or other activities until spring, potentially harming ongoing projects.

According to Alenka Tovornik from the Office for Finance and Budget of the Municipal Administration of Maribor, the document spans 691 pages and includes over 2,300 entries and 3,300 fields with explanations. She highlights the importance of avoiding temporary financing, which could hinder the operations of sports clubs, cultural organizations, and social groups funded by the municipality. Early preparation allows for a 30-day public discussion period during the summer holidays, enabling thorough examination of all proposals from council members.

The proposed budget for 2027 amounts to €233,238,635, which is €36 million less than the approved budget for the current year after the last rebalancing. Revenue is planned at €206.2 million, including €77.7 million from income tax, €1.3 million for the balance of development between municipalities, and €9.3 million for legal obligations, based on the average of €835 from last year. On the expenditure side, traditional expenses amount to €222.4 million, while debt repayments are estimated at €10.8 million.

Despite the lower total sum, investments remain high. Investment transfers and investments amount to €80.6 million, representing 35% of the entire budget, while €141.8 million (61%) is allocated for current operations. Council members will also decide under point 6 whether to approve the agreement for entering into loan agreements (GMS-947), allowing for maximum possible borrowing of €25 million from banks. However, the net borrowing, after subtracting principal payments, is expected to be around €14 million. Additionally, the municipality has opted for a fixed interest rate for new loans, which appears to be a strategic move given the rising EURIBOR rates.

Mayor Arsenovič emphasized the significant financial success achieved in the project related to the Rotovž Center, where the city secured €20 million in state co-financing, substantially reducing the budget burden. If nothing else happens, the debt for 2027 will decrease by nearly €21 million compared to the figure currently visible in the budget.

In another part of the session, the city council voted to replace four representatives of the Municipality of Maribor in the supervisory board of the Public Holding Company Maribor. This decision was supported by the majority of council members but sparked criticism from the opposition regarding political maneuvering and lack of transparency. The change occurs amid decisions about the future mandate of Holding Director Andrej Rihter, whose term expires in November this year.

Some members of the supervisory board reportedly advocated for the publication of a public tender for the director of the Public Holding Company Maribor, while others were allegedly inclined to extend the current director's mandate directly. The issue of the company’s future leadership thus appears to be a key reason behind the tensions within the supervisory board.

A public tender for the director of the Holding Company was published today in the newspaper Večer, with interested candidates able to apply until August 17. Andrej Rihter, who has led the Holding since 2021, did not comment on this matter during his press conference before the council meeting on Thursday. He also did not indicate whether he would apply for the position.

Aljaž Bratina from the Arsenovič for Maribor list stated that the Supervisory Board of the Public Holding Company Maribor is ineffective, though the proposed removal does not represent a professional assessment of the qualifications or personal characteristics of the board members. Instead, it relates to the decision of the founder regarding the composition of their representatives in the supervisory body, which is the exclusive right of the capital representative or founder.

Igor Jurišič from the Stranka mladih – Zeleni Evrope opposed the joint consideration of removing four members of the supervisory board of the Public Holding Company Maribor and pointed out questions regarding the legality of the procedure. He requested specific evidence from the proposers regarding alleged internal disputes within the supervisory board, supposed burdens on professional services, and references to European directives on gender quotas. He also highlighted the illogical nature of the proposal, noting that one of the proposed individuals for removal, David Kastelic, was also scheduled for reappointment to the supervisory board.

Vladimira Cokoja from the Democrats said that, in her view, the proposal represents a purely political decision with little connection to the professionalism and responsibility of the supervisory board members. She noted that the reasons cited in the council member documents—internal disputes, inefficiency of the supervisory board, and failure to meet the female quota under EU directives—are presented very generally. According to her, the proposal lacks concrete reasons for the removal, as it does not specify which tasks the supervisory board failed to perform or what consequences resulted from this. Therefore, she interprets the proposal mainly as a political change of the supervisory board.