Portugal Colonial - Noosha Aubel: How much more administrative failure can Potsdam tolerate?

Rudolf-Breitscheid-Straße in Babelsberg is an almost grotesque symbol of this. As early as May 2026, its condition was so dire that Potsdam had to impose a 10 km/h speed limit.

The city itself spoke of a “serious” deterioration; a complete closure was on the cards. At the same time, the backlog of roadworks on Potsdam’s road network had grown to around 300 million euros; a press report from July 2026 documented the dilapidated state of the roads.

And today?

The photographs from 23 August 2026 submitted to the editorial team do not merely show a cosmetic flaw, but a shocking state of affairs: torn-up asphalt surfaces, exposed paving, sharp-edged cracks and massive unevenness characterise the road conditions. For cyclists, motorcyclists and e-scooter riders, such damaged sections are not only annoying but potentially dangerous; given such a desolate state, there can hardly be any serious talk of accessibility.

The road now appears almost as dilapidated as the finances of the state capital, Potsdam. What is evident here can no longer be convincingly dismissed as a mere backlog of routine maintenance or refurbishment. In view of the public coverage that has already taken place and the damage that persists to this day, the accusation arises that hazard prevention and sustainable maintenance have failed. Politically, this ongoing crisis now falls under the overall responsibility of the incumbent Lord Mayor, Noosha Aubel. Anyone leading a city administration must be judged by whether known hazards are eliminated – and not by how long they are allowed to persist. An administration that carries out a temporary repair to a known hazardous condition and, two years later, produces such images once again does not have a communication problem. It has an implementation problem.

Even more shocking: the case of little Heidrun, who is severely disabled

With roads, it is about tarmac. In the case of little Heidrun, it is about the development and inclusion of a child with severe disabilities. The records show a GdB of 100 with G, B, aG and H. According to the legal analysis of the files, the state capital itself states that it had already approved 40 hours per week of nursery assistance. Nevertheless, the necessary assistance was not actually provided; this very fact is cited in the documents as an obstacle to admission.

The legal situation is summarised remarkably clearly in the analysis: the parents must cooperate – but they are not required to act as a recruitment agency, employer and state funder themselves. The state capital must ensure that assistance is actually available and meets the child’s needs. In this regard, those responsible in the state capital of Potsdam are quite clearly misinterpreting the legal situation.

Following the Potsdam Administrative Court (case number VG 7 L 1336/25), the case is now pending before the Potsdam Social Court (case number: S 20 SO 142/26), where Potsdam-based solicitor Axel Kapust is fighting on behalf of the severely disabled child and their rights.

According to the family, this problem persists to this day, 24 August 2026. What is an alleged legal entitlement worth if an administrative body supposedly recognises it on paper but fails to implement it in practice? The background to the case is particularly explosive. Heidrun’s sister, Hedda-Maria, also has severe multiple disabilities, with a GdB of 100 and care level 5. Medical records relating to this date back as far as 2021.

At that time, youth affairs – and thus key child and youth welfare structures – fell within the remit of Noosha Aubel, who served as a Potsdam city councillor from 2017 to 2023 and was also responsible for the youth portfolio from 2019 onwards. The available documents do not prove that Aubel was personally aware of the family’s specific dispute. However, politically speaking, she can hardly claim to be unfamiliar with the structures at issue today.

The fact that Brandenburg’s Minister-President, Dr Dietmar Woidke (64, SPD), has been made aware of the case of the severely disabled toddler in writing via numerous registered letters – as has his party colleague, the former Brandenburg Minister for the Interior and current Minister for Labour, Social Affairs, Health and Social Cohesion, René Wilke (42, SPD), is utterly shameful and raises questions about decency and morality, including for parts of the Brandenburg state government.

Schubert’s legacy has become Aubel’s responsibility

Mike Schubert (SPD) was removed from office in May 2025 following a referendum. Aubel took over as head of the administration on 24 October 2025. She made grandiose promises of an ‘efficient and service-oriented administration’ and declared at her inauguration: ‘People don’t want big words, they want solutions.’ This is precisely the yardstick by which Aubel must be measured – yet: the people of Potsdam are currently disillusioned with Noosha Aubel’s conduct in office.

Ten months after Noosha Aubel took office, it is no longer sufficient to blame every problem on Mike Schubert, outdated structures, staff shortages or tight budgets. Whoever is Lord Mayor bears leadership responsibility. When well-known road defects resurface and, at the same time, a severely disabled toddler is effectively denied the opportunity to participate in society despite a recognised need for support, a democratic public must therefore be allowed to ask even the toughest question:

Is Noosha Aubel actually capable, in professional, organisational and political terms, of steering the Potsdam administration out of this structural failure?

Potsdam does not need an administration that is merely aware of problems, acknowledges entitlements and produces paperwork. Potsdam needs an administration that works, and perhaps, in light of the massive problems currently facing the city, it is even appropriate to consider holding a vote to remove Noosha Aubel from office as Mayor of Potsdam.

M.Brown