He had already expressed his opinion twice on the issue of the second Palace of Justice in Messina Nino Principality. So today the councilor’s question Alessandro Russo of the PD sounds like a warning sign that the Basile administration must respond to. To tell the truth, it would have been the case, however, that he had also responded to the historian and citizen Nino Principato who had made his harsh observations on 23 October last year and 20 March this year.
TWO BUILDINGS PAID WITH THEIR WEIGHT IN GOLD?
The doubt that arises from what they write Principality and Russian and this. Because two properties purchased by the company “Unire 54 Spa” respectively 3 million and 200 thousand euros the former Cassa di Risparmio Vittorio Emanuele e 600 thousand euros for the former Bank of Romeare valued at least at triple their value and is this value even higher than the already high one considered “appropriate” by the architect Giovanni Rizzo on behalf of “Patrimonio Spa”, one of the companies of the Municipality itself which is the buyer? And why don’t we wait for the estimate and opinion of the Revenue Agency instead, which would not have been “available” until the moment of stipulation? The price has thus risen beyond measure, even beyond the maximum value per square meter defined byReal Estate Market Observatory of the Revenue Agency? The value of the two buildings, in fact, goes from 1,800 and 1,200 euros respectively former Cassa di Risparmio di Vittorio Emanuele and for the former Bank of Rome, up to a starting value of 2,132 euros and 1421 euros. The Municipality thus purchases the two properties for a value that is, as mentioned, triple that of the purchasing company’s purchase and well above the value considered appropriate by the architect Rizzo himself: we therefore go from the appropriate value, according to Rizzo, equal to 6,314,000 euros for the former Cassa di Risparmio Vittorio Emanuele building and 2,679,000 euros for the former Banca di Roma building well 11,300,000 for the former Cassa di Risparmio Vittorio Emanuele building and 5,829,503.40 for the former Banca di Roma building.
This is how Nino Principato asks: “As never in the purchase and sale contract stipulated in July 2023 ‘The sale of the properties is agreed upon per unit and not per measure‘, that is, the price was established in relation to the overall size of the property regardless of its actual dimensions, since there was the architect’s opinion of adequacy. Rizzo who, it is presumed, will have given the valuation of the two properties on an empty x full square metre, i.e. gross surface area and therefore measured in such a way as to have precise reference points?”. As stated in Alessandro Russo’s question, architect Rizzo carries out the estimate based on the plans and an external inspection. That is, he will never enter the two rooms.
MORTGAGES TO PURCHASE THEM
Principality also specifies: “The Municipality, however, he purchased the two properties not with his own funds but with two mortgages from the Ministry of Economy and Finance (art. 19 L. 119/81) which assumes the amortization installments (the use of which, it should be noted, is subject to the evaluation of Cassa Depositi e Prestiti SpA). The authorization from the Ministry of Justice for the use of mortgages aimed at the purchase of properties to be allocated to the second Palace of Justice dated 30/10/2022 prot. n. 709522, was made BEFORE the adequacy opinion of the Arch. Giovanni Rizzo dated 07/17/2023: we wonder whether this opinion on adequacy, given that it is later, was sent to the Ministry of Justice for its decisions on the matter, since the two mortgages are his responsibility”.
The risk now is that the tax damage could materialize given that the process for carrying out the seismic adaptation works has not yet begun and that the 14 month expiry date is getting ever closer.
