| Bulgaria | Minimum population size 6,000Distance to the town hall must not exceed 40 kmFinancial viability of the new municipality | Petition by 25% of population of the part to secedeLegal check by regional governorLocal referendumFinal decision of Central Government approved by the President | Increased population threshold from 4 to6,000 (1998)Increased acceptable distance to town hall from 20 to 40 km (1998) |
| Croatia | No clear conditions or criteria | Initiative of the municipal council or at least 33% of residents of the part which wants to secedeThe secession has to be approved by the Parliament | Compulsory consultations with residentsin the case of a split initiated by the localcouncil (1997) and in all cases of split initiatives (2006)Compulsory opinion of local council and county assembly (1997)Compulsory approval of the Ministry of Finance (1997), of the whole cabinet (2006) |
| Czech Rep. | Minimum population size 1,000 | Local referendum with threshold consent of 50% of registered voters Formal approval of regional government | Increasing threshold from 300 to 1,000 population (2000) |
| Hungary | Positive demographic trendInfrastructure developed above national averageOperating costs below national average | Referendum in the whole municipality (not only part to secede) with turn-out threshold of 50%Minister can reject the proposal, and local government may appeal to the court | Much lighter rules before 2013.Minimum population size 300 until 2011Until 2013 the referendum was organized only in the part which wanted to secedeConditions concerning costs and infrastructure introduced in 2013 |
| Lithuania | Minimum population size 15,000 with central settlement unit of minimum 3,000Sufficient administrative capacity and financial resources | Central government initiative with local consultation processFormally the initiative may be undertaken by local governments, and the final approval requires decision of the Parliament |
|
| Poland | The new local government must not be smaller than the smallest currently existing (ca. 1,300 population) and not poorer than the current lowest per capita local tax base.Required opinion of the Ministry of Finance. | Neither the initiatives of local government nor the results of consultations (which may take the form of a local referendum, but this is not obligatory) are binding for the final decision of the Central Government |
|
| Romania | Minimum population size 1,500Sufficient financial resourcesTransport network from the proposed municipal centre to other villagesSufficient social infrastructure facilities (school, health care centre etc.)At least 25% population not in the agriculture sectorMore than 45% of houses built after 1960 | Application checked formally at county levelLocal referendum with turnout thresholdApproval by Parliament requires 2/3rds majority | In 2001–2003 Central Government sent proposals to the Parliament not on an individual basis, but as one list of all applications, which made the process much smoother. This was part of the 2001 government strategy for public administration reform which set the objective of “giving commune status to 1000 villages which meet the legal criteria, so as to make local administration closer to the citizens”.The current, stricter rules were imposed in 2007 |
| Slovakia | Minimum population size 3,000New municipality must not have infrastructure which serves the whole territory of the old, pre-split municipality | Splits formally possible in election years only.Required referendum with 50% turn-out threshold.Agreement to secession is the discretionary decision of Central Government. | Central Government stopped issuing permits for splits after 2002Since 2002, splits are formally possible in election years only. A population size limit was also introduced in 2002 |
| Slovenia | Minimum population size 5,000Capacity to “satisfy needs of citizens” | Required referendumFormal approval by the Parliament | Before 2010 exceptions to the rule of “minimum 5,000” were allowed in case of justified “geographical, historical or economic reasons” and the list of actors who could initiate the split process was longer (e.g. 2010 amendment eliminatedsub-municipal units from that list) |
