<![CDATA[This study examines how Batu City's regional asset (Barang Milik Daerah, BMD) governance policy has performed against two distinct benchmarks: the city's long-standing record of clean financial-statement audit opinions, and the underlying legal and physical readiness of the assets those statements report on. A descriptive quantitative, ex post facto design was used, drawing on official secondary data from Batu City Government and its Regional Finance and Asset Agency (BKAD), audit-result announcements from the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia (BPK), and credible mass media, analyzed through trend analysis of audit-opinion and fiscal-realization data, a proportion-based gap analysis of asset-certification status, a documented case analysis of a long-idle high-value asset, and a content analysis of the rationale behind an ongoing regulatory revision. Batu City has received an unqualified (Wajar Tanpa Pengecualian, WTP) audit opinion for eleven consecutive years, 2015 to 2025, with 2025 revenue realization reaching 99.20% of target and own-source revenue (PAD) reaching 92.37% of target. Despite that record, the Audit Board's 2025 findings still flagged persistent weaknesses specifically in the management of certain local taxes and of investment property, and the city's own Rp1.3 trillion asset base across 874 parcels shows that only 28.0% of trackable parcels are fully certified, while 56.9% have not yet begun the certification process. A Rp6.4 billion official residence in East Jakarta, vacant for approximately ten years and carrying Rp65 million in unpaid property-tax arrears, illustrates the practical consequence of this gap: it failed to attract a single bidder when put up for public auction. In direct response to these patterns, Batu City's government proposed in May 2026 a revision to the decade-old Regional Regulation No. 3/2019 on regional asset management, citing misalignment with national regulation, weak sanctions, and information-system gaps. The study concludes that a clean audit opinion is a necessary but insufficient indicator of regional asset governance quality, and that closing the certification and utilization gap identified here should be treated as a distinct policy priority alongside maintaining the city's audit-opinion record.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
