Piazza Cittadella, more guaranty chaos. The FdI council group at Palazzo Mercanti raised the problem. The warranty presented by the dealer Piacenza Parking, to protect the construction of the underground car park, has not been updated since the signing of the contract in 2012, as emerged after access to the documents of the minority councillors. What has not been changed is the estimated amount for the work which, over 12 years, has risen from the 7 million and 860 thousand euros estimated at the beginning to the 14 million and 700 thousand euros put in black and white in the PEF – plan economic and financial, of the Municipality of Piacenza and reported in the famous addendum signed in recent months. A further novelty that demonstrates how, they underline Sara Soresi, Nicola Domeneghetti And Gloria Zanardi“the entire Piazza Cittadella practice was treated with a superficiality that it did not deserve” and above all without adopting real protections for the institution.
And even in the 2012 guarantee there is something wrong, says the group leader Soresi, anticipating a topic that will certainly be at the center of the legality commission set for May 27th, before the city council meeting on June 3rd. “Fortunately, for this match there are only two guarantees, linked to each other” adds Domeneghetti, recalling again FdI’s request to reach the termination of the contract with Piacenza Parcheggi, after the affair of the false guarantee. The 2012 version, explains the councillor, reports the initial cost of the work: the cost of the underground car park in Piazza Cittadella was expected to be 7 million and 860 thousand euros. “But now we know that, after the rebalancing of the PEF and the addendum, the work will cost 14 million 700 thousand euros -. At the moment the Municipality, in addition to being without a guarantee to protect the concession fee (for the management of the blue parking areas), could only be protected for half of the estimated amount for the car park concerned. The Honorable Paola De Micheli and Mayor Katia Tarasconi continue to say that the Municipality is in a strong position with respect to the signing of the addendum and prior to the discovery of the false guarantee. I leave every consideration to you.”
“The analysis of this further documentation makes us say that the management of this complex practice was treated with a superficiality that it did not deserve – adds Zanardi -. Regarding the addendum, we were told that it would fill some gaps left over from the signing of the 2012 concession agreement, to put the City in a strong position. We disagree: the forecast aspect is missing, as emerged when checking this latest policy. It did not provide penalties for late payments and creates further problems: it justifies the delays in submitting the documentation relating to the so-called bankability, attributable to the processing time of the case. The addendum, then, given that it modified some substantial aspects of the 2012 concession, had to be brought to the attention of the city council” and not just presented to the commission.
“This practice was treated superficially, since the beginning of 2023 the municipal attorney’s office has been completely ousted – concludes Soresi – and the effects can be seen. They saw each other in the story of false guarantee and the drafting of the addendum, a document that we have always defined as imprecise and not very protective for the institution. I am convinced that if the Lawyers Office had been involved in the drafting it would have foreseen the adjustment of the guarantee. The only one who benefits from all this superficiality is the dealer. With Piacenza Parcheggi the Municipality, inexplicably, not only turns one eye but closes both. The administration is granting more than it should: we have been waiting for bank guarantees since January 20, it allowed itself to pay the 2023 fee extremely late, which happened precisely because the fake guarantee was discovered. Piacenza Parcheggi presented this Municipality with a false policy, and it doesn’t matter whether the company was defrauded or not. To date, the Municipality is not guaranteed and the administration is doing nothing to protect itself, it has not sent a formal warning for the termination of the contract and no formal deadline has been requested within which to receive the new guarantee. Today we discover this new favor: maintaining an inadequate and insufficient surety, which guarantees the Municipality for half of what is owed. Why doesn’t Palazzo Mercanti put in place all the necessary protections instead?”.
