Bucharest’s Mayors: From Communism to the Present Day

By Bucharest Team
- Articles
Bucharest, the capital of Romania, has undergone major transformations over the decades, and those who have held the office of mayor have had a significant impact on the city's development. From the communist regime, when decisions were taken under strict Party supervision, to the democratically elected mayors who promised modernization and progress, the history of Bucharest's mayors is a complex one.
The communist period left a strong mark on the city, but it was in the late '60s that urban changes became really aggressive. With the consolidation of Nicolae Ceausescu's power, Bucharest entered a phase of radical transformations, culminating in the 1980s with massive demolitions and grandiose projects imposed by the regime. Starting in 1968, urban planning was centralized and formalized in a way that completely changed the structure of the city:
1. Bucharest in the Communist Era: Mayors under party dictatorship
During the communist period, mayors had no real autonomy, being appointed by the Romanian Communist Party and directly subordinated to the state leaders. The city was radically transformed during this period, with massive demolitions and grandiose projects, but also the destruction of valuable historic areas.
Dumitru Popa (1968-1972) - He was one of the mayors who oversaw the modernization of the city according to the communist regime's vision. During his term of office, socialist infrastructure and urban development projects were started, but without taking into account the preservation of the historical heritage.During this period, the first systematization plans began and workers' blocks began to replace the city's traditional neighborhoods.Popa contributed to the expansion of the public transportation network and the first projects to create wide boulevards, but all this was done at great sacrifice for the residents, who were forcibly relocated.
Gheorghe Cioară (1972-1976) - A lesser known figure in the administrative landscape, Gheorghe Cioară continued the policy of urban systematization, focusing on infrastructure development and modernization of public transport. During his tenure, projects were initiated to widen some avenues and the construction of collective housing in large working-class neighborhoods was intensified.Efforts were also made to extend the metro network, but these remained in the planning stage.
Ion Dincă (1976-1979) - Nicknamed "Te-Leagă" for his authoritarian style, Ion Dincă was one of the toughest executors of Nicolae Ceausescu's plans, even said to have a gun on his desk. Under his leadership, massive expropriations were carried out and entire neighborhoods were demolished to make way for megalomaniac projects, including the beginnings of the Parliament Palace.
He was responsible for the aggressive systematization of the city and the creation of grand boulevards, but all of this came with the destruction of valuable historical areas.Basically, Dincă was the man who turned Bucharest into a "concrete city" with no clear architectural identity.
Gheorghe Pană (1983-1985) - He managed the period when work intensified on the Civic Center and the major thoroughfares.This period also meant a deterioration in living conditions for the inhabitants who were forcibly relocated to the new Communist block neighborhoods.Pană oversaw the extensive demolitions in the Uranus area and the beginning of the construction of the People's House, as well as the continuation of the program for the systematization of the peripheral neighborhoods.
During his tenure, problems with basic infrastructure (water supply, sewage, heating) worsened, but these were neglected by the communist regime, which prioritized grandiose projects.
2. Transition to Democracy: Mayors in the 1990s
The 1989 revolution brought radical change in local government, and Bucharest underwent a difficult transition. Mayors during this period were faced with a lack of financial resources and urban chaos left by the communist regime.
Crin Halaicu (1992-1996) - The first democratically elected mayor after the Revolution, Halaicu tried to put the city back on the road to modernization, but his mandate was marked by administrative problems and corruption. He tried to attract foreign investment, but the city's infrastructure remained poor. This period also saw the first problems with controversial privatizations and real estate speculation.
Viorel Lis (1997-2000) - Known for his nonconformist style, Viorel Lis tried to bring Bucharest among the European capitals, but faced infrastructure problems and uncontrolled development. His mandate was characterized by chaotic initiatives and lack of long-term vision.
3. Age of Major Projects: 2000 - Present
The last two decades have been marked by investments in infrastructure, but also by unrealized electoral promises. Although progress has been made, the problems of traffic, pollution and the lack of a coherent urban vision have remained topical.
Sorin Oprescu (2008-2015) - He came with the promise of a modern, European Bucharest and initiated infrastructure projects such as the Basarab Passage and the modernization of hospitals. However, his tenure was marred by corruption allegations and he was arrested for alleged bribery. Although he was released and maintained his innocence, the scandal deeply affected the image of the local administration.
Gabriela Firea (2016-2020) - The capital's first female mayor, Firea has focused on social projects and cultural events, but has faced serious problems in traffic management and the district heating system. One controversial point of her tenure was the allocation of funds to various municipal companies, which have been criticized for lack of efficiency and transparency.
Nicușor Dan (2020-present) - A mayor elected on a wave of change, promising to modernize the city and solve chronic infrastructure problems. He took over a city with large debts and unresolved problems, including the collapse of the district heating network. Although he managed to get European funding for some projects, the pace of implementation has been slower than citizens' expectations.