Four provinces merge in the call to stop the current REFORM of the reform model

Members of the four municipality - Jelgava municipality, Daugavpils municipality, Ventspils municipality and Rēzekne municipality council have voted in favour of sending a public letter to both President of Latvia Egil Levitam, Prime Minister Arthur Krišiknim Kariņš, and the Latvian local government, THE Latvian Academy of Sciences, and LR Saeima, with a call for halting the progress of territorial reform in the implementation of the current environmental protection and regional ministry. By representing four administrative territorial units covering rural areas without cities and successfully demonstrating their development and economic growth, they want a democratic and unhurried reform of the reform, taking into account the three preconditions: the principle of voluntary participation, the assessment of existing reforms and the backdrop groups, and a clear vision of the eligibility criteria at the time of the “post-reform”.
Rēzekne District Council Chairman Monvīds Švarcs:
The administrative territorial form of Latvia shall be such as a container which must conform to the content and extent to which it is intended to be held. We understand that there is an objective justification for the implementation of the reform right now, since the municipalities, both by size of the territory and by the number of population and the ability to realise their tasks with comparable functional and financial efficiency, vary sharply. In my view, the process initiated is incomplete and superficial and, to some extent, it reminds the drawing and staining of the map without analysing “the compliance of the container with its contents”. Our call is not emotionally-political, but a desire to involve all the common objectives in the pre-opening process – creating an effective national governance model at municipal level, creating conditions for a quality living environment, regardless of the “postal code”.
Jelgava District Council Chairman Ziedonis Caune:
“The situation currently being observed leads to the conclusion that WE CAN go forward in the implementation of our model as a bulldozer, neither the criteria nor the analytical vision of other sectors in relation to combined areas. The ministry“ represents ”the involvement of all parties in the debate, although there is no such discussion. The fact that every time in the Ministry's model“ arises ”a new municipality, as if it has earned the right to be separate, leads to the conclusion that this model of reform is absolutely incomplete at its stage of work. There are four provinces – territorial large, which has so far been administratively existent without cities - even during the Soviet times these areas have been separate. For the time being, none of the ministries have heard the arguments why we, as rural areas, see risks in development, to be added to cities, nor to provide a constructive vision of how the redistribution of resources between sectors is planned to make it clear that it has been discussed and thought. All four council members agree that we want to address the President and the Saeima not to rush and stop the direction and implementation of this model. We emphasise that we are not against the reform, but we are against its performances at the current level."
Ventspils District Council Chairman Aivars Mucenieks:
“It has been only ten years since the previous administrative territorial reform, and in these years we have verified that the results of this reform have been successful. The creation of four major provinces – Jelgava, Rezekne, Daugavpils and Ventspils – has been considered positive, which has proven to be a municipality that ensures a smooth development of the territory, functions the functions entrusted to the local government and provides quality services to the residents. I want to ask the public authorities now, why should the system be dismantled in the municipalities that are working well, why should it be done at a time when there are hundreds of unsettled cases in the country? Are they the ambitions of individual people living in Riga, people who do not understand what is happening in rural areas, how they are maintained, what investments are linked and how successful projects have been implemented? '
Daugavpils District Council Chairman Arvīds Kucins:
“On 16 August, Daugavpils municipality council sent a letter to the Saeima of the Republic of Latvia, WE CAN and the local government of Latvia regarding the fact that a model of administrative territorial division is put forward for public consultation, indicating that THE information report, which covers the characterisation of the situation of all Latvian municipalities and sketches their lives in the future, is tendency and unilateral. By highlighting the Daugavpils municipality in the new map with the city and the Ilūkstes municipality, IN the information report Daugavpils municipality's profile contains inaccurate information and unilateral data. Consequently, there is no impression that there has been no development during the years of their existence, but that is not the case. Since 2009, we have attracted quite a large amount of funding. In assessing the impact of administrative territorial reform on the overall geopolitical location of Latvia, it should be noted that almost half of Daugavpils municipality border is the border of Latvia. According to the new model, Daugavpils municipality would be the second largest municipality in the country. I believe that such large cities, which are centres of national significance, must develop in their own plate. Our functions can be said to be the same, but the implementation of urban functions is different from the municipality. The area of Daugavpils District is sufficiently large and the population is also high, so we believe that the proposed administrative territorial outlook for Daugavpils municipality is unacceptable and we want to stay within our borders as so far. It is important to know what instruments will be used for further development of the country. We wait and hope to get a reply to our letter. Let our proposals and objections be taken into account in detail. We, Daugavpils municipality, Rēzekne municipality, Ventspils municipality and Jelgava municipality, which are the largest in the country, want to be separate from the big cities, because historically administratively, we have existed without cities.”
Letter Text