As for an old dress: many patches, many spot interventions and many resources spent. Money invested to make an immediate stop, but which never guaranteed stable and efficient maintenance. This is the hypothesis on which the prosecutors of the Accounting Prosecutor’s Office are working, in relation to the sinkhole in Via Morghen. Investigative checks also aimed at clarifying the use of public resources, which – over the years – have been invested to close leaks, stem collapses, control episodes of instability in the heart of the city, without however a unified vision. And strategic.
This is the investigative hypothesis that prompted the Prosecutor’s Office of the Court of Auditors of Naples to turn its spotlight on what happened last February in Vomero. Do you remember the scene? One of the most beautiful streets in Naples – we are talking about via Morghen – has collapsed, probably due to the poor functioning of the sewerage infrastructure. Mud everywhere, cars swallowed up, trees broken, people miraculously saved by the Army. And twenty families evicted until last Easter.
A scenario on which the Power of attorney accountant decided to pursue a specific lead: failure to use funds and failure to plan, in a scenario which – if confirmed at the end of the investigation – would also put at risk some projects financed by Pnrr funds. But let’s proceed in order to describe this new line of investigation. As is known, the Prosecutor’s Office of Naples – we are talking about the ordinary prosecutors at the Management Center – is investigating for collapse or negligent disaster, during an investigation conducted by the prosecutor Federica D’Amodio, under the coordination of the deputy prosecutor Simona Di Monte.
In the meantime, however, the Accounting Prosecutor’s Office has taken action, deciding to follow the trail of the money and resources put in place in recent years. An investigation conducted by the deputy prosecutor Ferruccio Capalbo, who in recent weeks has been knocking on the door of the municipality Vomero-Arenella. The request from the Accounting Prosecutor’s Office is clear: the acquisition of the complaints signed by the Municipality’s top management, the emails, the reminders, the reports made in recent years. According to what emerges from the offices of the Municipality hilly, the investigators in via Piedigrotta are looking for all requests for intervention from 2021 to today, addressed both to the offices of ABC (the municipal company that deals with the management of water resources) and to the municipal administration itself .
There is a need in the background, which animated this request for papers by the investigators: the aim is to analyze where the maintenance interventions were carried out: in which point of the city and how much they cost. Second point: how many requests for intervention have remained unanswered; third knot to untieconcerns another need: that of verifying how many disputes have been started over the last three years in the area close to the sinkhole of February 21st. Why the disputes? Because they are a particular expense item for the Municipality’s coffers. And it is not just a question of legal costs, but of the method, of the strategy adopted in recent years on which the need to carry out checks is felt. In what sense? According to what emerges from complaints and reports, the method used in recent years to deal with patches and disruptions it was structured on several levels, starting from one point in particular: trying to understand whether landslides and disruptions were caused by non-compliance by private individuals, to investigate whether entire groups of condominiums did not finance maintenance works related to the appurtenances of their apartments. In the event of non-compliance by private individuals, requests for compensation for damage caused to roads and street furniture have been triggered, in a scenario that has given rise to quite a few disputes.
How did they end up? Generally – reading the documents acquired in recent days by the Accounting Prosecutor’s Office – things ended in two equal and opposite ways: if the condominium owners succumbed, they paid compensation for the repair of the roads; if instead the residents obtained recognition of their reasons, then it was the public service accountants who shelled out the money to repair pipes or roads. A series of steps on which the Accounting Prosecutor’s Office intends to clarify, in an attempt to focus on all aspects related to the maintenance of the subsoil of the hilly area. As is known, the office led by the regional prosecutor of the Court of Auditors Antonio Giuseppone is sifting through a series of expenditure items linked to the management of project financing with Pnrr funds and ordinary administration. Not just maintenance, therefore. We work on the management of real estate (including housing, commercial premises, even quarries given out to private individuals), but also on the choices that local authorities make to make their assets productive. One more reason to shine a light on the patches made (or not made) close to via Morghen.
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Read the full article at
The morning
