The cartographic adjustment necessary to accommodate, in the general urban plan, some changes to the methane pipeline project was passed with only one abstention vote (that of CSN) and with the favorable votes of Pd, Cesena 2024, Cambiamo, Lega and Mixed Group. which Snam is preparing to create.
A very technical and bureaucratic step which testifies to the absolutely marginal skills of the Municipality on this work. However, the resolution became an opportunity for all the council groups to reiterate their closeness to the people who are directly affected by the implementation of such an impactful project.
The project involves the construction of an energy infrastructure considered strategic for the State and took its first steps almost twenty years ago but has only undergone an acceleration recently, after the start of Russia’s invasion war in Ukraine and thanks to the resources of Pnrr. The responsibility for this mega project which crosses an important part of the country from Minerbio to Puglia lies with the Ministry of the Environment which has already authorized the project. What arrived on the table of the city councilors yesterday is the request to adapt the current urban plan in light of six changes to the already approved project. These are all very specific changes and are part of the broader process of optimizing the project.
«It’s the umpteenth wound in an already heavily infrastructured area», intervened Denis Parise, group leader of Cesena Siamo Noi. The vote of abstention is his, motivated by a certain skepticism about the strategic nature of this work, “which comes late, after years of right-wing and left-wing governments agreeing to keep it in the drawer”.
From Parise, but also from the other minority councilors who instead said they were in favor of the work to which they recognize a strategic value, the criticism addressed to the administration was that of not having done enough over the years to accompany the residents for whom the project impacts directly, but also the city, in acquiring information and awareness about the project and its impact on the city.
«Approving this resolution, recognizing the importance of the project, does not mean that on our part there is no empathy towards those who fear seeing their assets threatened or compromised – the PD councilor Gianni Ceredi intervened – or that we do not share a certain annoyance for the way in which a giant like Snam has moved towards citizens in some cases. A note on method, not on merit.” Ceredi in his speech on the one hand admits: “perhaps we could have done more”, but at the same time warns against the risk of “promising citizens a possibility of intervention that in reality we do not have”.
Mayor Enzo Lattuca also spoke on the topic and on the one hand reminded that to anyone who turned to him and the other councilors, the administration made its channels available so that these people could communicate directly with Snam, sometimes putting spaces were also available when there was a request for these meetings to take place “on a neutral ground”.
With respect to the role of the administration in making the project known to citizens, the implications of the Lattuca project revealed that «at the end of October when I met the committee I proposed organizing a public discussion with Snam, making the municipal spaces available, offering the possibility to submit the questions to Snam a week in advance so that they would be able to respond, but that proposal was rejected by the committee. A legitimate choice, but perhaps it would have been an important opportunity for the city.”
