'Disclose information, gather opinions from technical assessment stage'
2.5 billion won Han River bus temporary dock project also scrutinized
The Seoul Metropolitan Government has neglected communication with local residents while pushing ahead with the modernization of the Mapo resource recovery facility, a lawmaker said Wednesday. With public distrust already running high after the city lost an administrative lawsuit over the facility, the lawmaker said restoring transparency and resident confidence must come before any technical feasibility review.
Seoul Metropolitan Council member Chae Woo-jin of the Democratic Party of Korea, representing Mapo District 3, raised the issue of community engagement during an administrative audit of the Climate and Environment Bureau at the 340th regular session on Tuesday, calling on the city to establish concrete measures to incorporate resident input throughout the project.
According to documents Chae obtained from the Seoul Metropolitan Government, community consultations related to resource recovery facilities were held 21 times in Gangnam and nine times in Nowon — but not once in Mapo.
The problem is particularly acute because a technical assessment for the Mapo facility's modernization is already underway, yet no formal process has been established to brief residents on the project's progress or gather their opinions.
Chae said the city's loss in the administrative lawsuit over the Mapo facility had severely damaged residents' trust in the local government, and warned that pressing ahead with the modernization project without adequate explanation and consultation risked repeating the same conflicts.
Chae said the city must move away from the current practice of notifying residents only after technical assessment results are finalized, and instead disclose relevant information transparently and collect resident input from the earliest stages of the assessment.
"Resident distrust in Mapo-gu is high following the city's loss in the administrative lawsuit over the resource recovery facility," Chae said. "Rather than sharing progress and gathering opinions after the technical assessment results are out, the city should do so throughout the assessment process itself."
Chae also demanded that the city draw up and submit a specific communication plan to restore resident trust.
The audit also put under scrutiny the project classification criteria and application methods used in the Seoul Metropolitan Government's climate budget system.
Chae pressed the city on why the approximately 2.5 billion won ($1.86 million) project to build a temporary Han River bus dock at Seoul Forest had been classified as a neutral project and excluded from the fiscal year 2026 climate budget.
Unlike a Han River bus dock construction project included in the 2025 climate budget, the Seoul Forest project was left out of the 2026 climate budget. The city said it had determined the project was climate-neutral because it involved remodeling and maintenance of an existing facility.
Chae, however, cited the climate budget drafting guidelines, which state that even projects classified as neutral must be recategorized — as emissions-reducing, emissions-generating or mixed — if any sub-item worth 300 million won or more involves greenhouse gas reduction, emission or a combination of both.
Chae said the city should not assess climate impact based solely on a project's name or broad character, but should closely examine the specific construction work and facility components to which the budget is actually allocated.
Given that the project carries a budget of approximately 2.5 billion won, Chae said the city should verify the greenhouse gas impact using objective assessment data and review whether the neutral classification is appropriate.
Chae called on the city to examine the detailed breakdown of the Seoul Forest Han River bus temporary dock project and the basis for its climate impact assessment, and to determine whether the neutral classification complies with the drafting guidelines.
The two issues raised at the audit share a common thread: the need for greater transparency and administrative accountability in the city's environmental policies. Adequate communication with residents is needed in the facility modernization process, while consistent standards and objective verification are required in climate budget planning.
7toy7@heraldcorp.com
