The councilor proposes the recall of members of the Supervisory Board

Slatina municipal councilor Andreja Flucher proposed to recall members of the Municipal Supervisory Board (NO). She warned that they did not allow her to attend a March session, although the work of the Supervisory Board was public. The Ministry of Public Administration replies that the councilor cannot be present at the meeting. They cannot comment on the work of the Slatin Supervisory Board, and only the Court of Audit could be carried out.

“I wanted to attend sessions to get acquainted with the final review of the final account, but I was called to leave the session before it started because it was closed to the public. The reasoning was that my function of a municipal councilor with presence at the meeting was incompatible. The public can be present, but not?! In my opinion, the facts and articles of the law and the statute that allow me to give me the presence, the President NO demanded that I leave the session so that the police would not have to call. Because I insisted that I would not remove myself, the NO was held in other rooms, I hope not in the inn, « she wrote Andreja Flucher, initiating Slatinski NO members.

The Ministry of Public Administration told us that the obligation of public sessions of the collective bodies does not mean that access to sessions is free and that anyone can attend, but that the decisions taken by these authorities are accessible to the public with publicly published minutes, materials and decisions, journalistic conferences, public transfer of sessions… The sessions are not accessible to the public: « The participation of a member of the municipal council at the meeting of the Supervisory Board would be an attempt to influence the decision of the supervisory board in this case, while at the same time an intervention of a member of one municipality of the municipality into another. » They added that it did not review the final account.

Problematic work

Flucher has repeatedly warned that she is not doing well. She emphasized that they had not submitted a work plan or accepted it with almost a one -year delay, and the final report on last year’s control was accepted at the local inn. This is confirmed by a publicly published record of this meeting, which was 27 in December. The councilor also warned that they had monitored the use of funds in 2023 and 2024, and one of the clubs was noted only at the end of December: “In the final report, he wrote that they did not have data for 2024, but the final report was adopted. The record of the meeting shows that they adopted the final report on the control of the intended use of funds for the Society in the years 2023 and 2024!

The ministry warned that the report by recommendations of the Supervisory Board is information of public character, which the municipal administration must publicly publish on the municipality website. The ministry does not comment on concrete decisions of the municipality’s bodies: « The credibility of the work is created by each supervisory board through its work. » They replied that the inn is not a place for the session: « The municipal authorities perform their work on the premises of the municipality, the municipal administration and the mayor, as its head, are obliged to provide the supervisory board to provide professional and administrative assistance and premises for the performance of tasks. »

There will be no recall

The councilor suggested that all alleged violations be discussed at the municipal council, the session is this afternoon, and the members of the Supervisory Board recalled. Mayor Branko Kidrič is behind Work He said that there would be no debate: “It is clear that the public’s work of the Supervisory Board is provided through the minutes, not ten people sitting at a session. But we handed over the writing of the saint for a hearing. It is necessary to have arguments to recall. But there are none. « 

Considering the composition of the Slatin Municipal Council, however, it cannot be expected to be voted at all. Asked who could dismiss the members of NO if they did poorly and the municipal council would not decide to dismiss, the ministry said that the only supervision of the state bodies of the Supervisory Board was determined by the Court of Auditors Act: « It stipulates that the Court of Auditors may propose the dismissal of the municipality if it finds that it does not perform its tasks or performs them inadequately. »