Having clear answers on what happened, on what could be done and understanding any responsibilities regarding the flood of May 2023. With this aim, the “We are here” committee, born in Fornace Zarattini and then expanded to also include flooded citizens of other hamlets and locations in the Ravenna area resort to the preventive technical assessment (ATP) instrument, presented to the court of Florence. As the president of the committee, Alessandra Musumeci, who leads the families (about twenty) who signed this assessment, explains, the objective is to “recognize the causal link between the dramatic flood events that hit our territory in May of last year and the responsibilities of the various bodies responsible for protecting the territory”.
The committee, which after the disaster proved to be very active on the topic, has in fact begun to study the area “finding various inconsistencies”, explains Musumeci, compared to what was said by bodies and institutions. The president criticizes the Municipality of Ravenna in particular, with the majority of the City Council having rejected the requested commission of investigation into the flood in September. For Musumeci there would in fact be “evidence on the safety of the territory which indicates a different reality” compared to that presented by local institutions. Hence the request for investigation to reveal “the truth that led to this disastrous event”, specifies the president, “a truth operation” conducted with the support of the lawyers Giuseppe Della Casa and Leone Spadoni and the geologist Riccardo Galassi. Through the assessment, the aim is in particular to highlight any responsibilities of the “Region, Province, Municipality and Reclamation Consortium of Romagna”.
The ATP tool will allow the technicians called upon to verify the various questions asked and provide answers. The central question is: “Are we faced with a universal judgment or the news of an announced death? – asks the lawyer Della Casa – Did the bodies have knowledge of what would happen in a few hours?”. The doubts concern above all the flooding of Fornace Zarattini and other areas of the Ravenna area, where perhaps “the damage could have been contained”, hypothesizes the lawyer. “It’s not a lawsuit, the ATP is aimed at ascertaining the truth – clarifies Della Casa – Checking whether everything that needed to be done has been done”.
The geologist: “80% of the damage to the area could have been avoided”
Serious doubts about the actions of the local authorities are then raised by the geologist Galassi. The expert highlights above all a report from the Romagna Regional Basins Authority, drawn up between 2002 and 2003 in which, according to the geologist, some critical issues relating to the Ronco, Montone, Lamone and Savio rivers requiring intervention were already “highlighted”. In May 2023 “all the overlaps and critical issues concerned those points – underlines Galassi – it cannot be said that we didn’t know”.
The geologist also expresses doubts about the extent of the meteorological event that then triggered the flood. “These are events that repeat themselves with a frequency of about 20 years – says Galassi – a not exceptional event”. While the shortcomings of the institutions would have been many. Starting from the “areas not to be built on”, the technician notes, where there was “a high probability of flooding”, areas in which “special works” were required. In addition to land consumption, the geologist points the finger at the maintenance of the riverbeds and attacks the Region: “No maintenance has been carried out on the embankments”, and also wonders whether the companies that then intervened for the works added urgency (therefore after the flood) had the “necessary skills” and again “how were the embankments rebuilt?”. Even the documents relating to the degree of danger, according to Galassi, would be inadequate: “There are maps created without taking into account the risk of collapse or overtopping of the embankment – and furthermore “the cartographic basis used for those models is 86”.
In conclusion, according to the expert, there would be “high discrepancies between what happened and the predictions” of the competent institutions. “If those things had been done, 80% of the damage to the territory would not have occurred”, he declares, attributing “serious responsibilities” to the bodies responsible and adding that in his opinion he is “the head of the Region” (Bonaccini, ed) should have resigned. Galassi also criticizes the Civil Protection because, despite “excellent plans” prepared at municipal level, in practice “what should have not been done, the Civil Protection has failed”. In short, the geologist judges the entire management of the emergency to be “ridiculous” in the face of “a Civil Protection plan that said it all”, adding a warning on the topic of prevention: “Everyone must know how to behave”.
