[Insight & Opinion] Mayor Oh Se-hoon Should Take the Lead in 'Restoring Resident Autonomy'

[Asia Economy] On October 20th, the ‘Policy Forum on the Realization of Resident Autonomy in Seoul’ hosted by Seoul Metropolitan Council members Park Seong-yeon and Song Kyung-taek was held. This forum is significant in that it sought clues to desirable solutions regarding the ‘intermediate support organizations’ in relation to the conflict between Jogyesa Temple and the ‘Seoul Village Community Support Comprehensive Center (Seomajong)’ project, which Mayor Oh Se-hoon halted as part of his ‘Restoring Seoul’ initiative. Particularly valuable was the shared agreement that Mayor Oh needs to actively address the issue from the perspective of ‘restoring resident autonomy.’

Last year, Mayor Oh Se-hoon strongly pushed for cuts to the budget supporting civic groups, stating that "Seoul’s treasury has become an ATM exclusively for civic groups," and the Seoul Metropolitan Council opposed this move. At the National Assembly’s Public Administration and Security Committee’s audit of Seoul on October 12th, Mayor Oh announced that civil and criminal proceedings had been initiated against illegal elements found in private consignment projects during former Mayor Park Won-soon’s tenure. This signals potential future conflicts with civic groups.

At the forum, Jeon Sang-jik, President of the Korea Resident Autonomy Central Association, stated, "Former Mayor Park Won-soon’s Seoul-type resident autonomy committee places civic groups at the top and residents below," and argued that "budget support for power-centralized civic groups that maintain and expand their organizations using Seoul’s budget for personnel expenses is unnecessary." He emphasized that "Mayor Oh should correct the Park Won-soon-style Seoul resident autonomy model and directly support the resident autonomy committees’ budgets as part of ‘restoring resident autonomy.’"

Considering the various opinions expressed at the forum, there is a view that Mayor Oh’s ‘Restoring Seoul’ initiative is a ‘half success,’ indicating the need for supplementation and alternative measures. The core issue is to avoid the proverb ‘kyo-gak-sal-u (矯角殺牛),’ meaning ‘killing the ox while trying to straighten its horn,’ which warns against killing the resident autonomy committees by cutting their budgets. In other words, while it was appropriate to abolish the intermediate support organizations centered on civic groups and stop their funding, the budget necessary to strengthen the self-sustainability of resident autonomy committees should not be reduced.

In other words, Seoul City should directly support the necessary budgets for resident autonomy committee organizations instead of civic groups. To this end, Mayor Oh should support ordinances and budgets to build organizations composed of resident autonomy committee members, such as the ‘Tongliban Resident Autonomy Council ? Eup/Myeon/Dong Resident Autonomy Council ? Si/Gun/Gu Resident Autonomy Council.’

It is now time for civic group activists to change their perception of intermediate support organizations. Since resident autonomy committees are being established as hub institutions of village communities, the status of intermediate support organizations should be viewed as auxiliary bodies that strengthen the capabilities of resident autonomy committees growing from the grassroots. It should be acknowledged that resident autonomy committees are not created by external injections such as money, administration, and activists’ agendas from intermediate support organizations. Therefore, a shift from the ‘village-making concept’ used so far to a ‘resident autonomy nurturing concept’ is necessary.

Especially since resident autonomy committees at the Eup/Myeon/Dong level are too large for residents to easily participate, there should be a shift to resident autonomy committees at the Tongliban level to accommodate residents’ desire to participate and diverse motivations, nurturing them to grow with self-sustaining power. The core resident autonomy committees of village communities should not be made from the top down (making down) but should be nurtured to grow from the bottom up (growing up). Civic activists need to focus on the role of ‘gardeners’ rather than ‘makers.’

Chae Jin-won, Professor, Kyung Hee University Public Governance Research Institute

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.