San Siro towards the sale: the city council of Milan divided between accusations of auction disturbance, underestimated price, opaque properties and risk of appeals
The Milan City Council pulls straight: unless surprises, the final vote on the sale of San Siro should arrive next Monday. But even before the vote, the idea that the operation is surrounded by very heavy risks begins to be consolidated between several city councilors.
This was understood following the session of the Room of Palazzo Marino yesterday, where the resolution began to be discussed despite the fact that several councilors had asked to postpone the discussion. To approve it, 25 votes favorable are needed. At the moment, the bulletor says 24 in favor, 24 against, 1 undecided (Marco Fumagalli of the Sala List): the numbers are currently not there and the PD is shattered. Moreover, among the ranks of the opposition there are those who claim that the crime of auction disturbance could already be configured: the Municipality has treated for years only with Inter and Milan without ever banning a public tender. Not only that. The price set at 197 million appears underestimated, just over half the real value that is around 380 million. Distresses are not collected, because the clubs owe the Municipality to almost 19 million for backward maintenance and another million for advertising spaces. The payment conditions are fragile, with 90 million immediately and the rest diluted over time, covered by instead of bank insurance surety. But above all, as already anticipated by Truththe properties remain opaque because Inter and Milan are clubs controlled by corporate chains that reach up to tax havens. Then there are millionaire consultations, with a dossier in London that speaks of 150 million intended for the advisors in the future resale of the teams. Who is this money to? And above all, there is the risk of appeals, with the historical bond on the meazza that looms and that the junta wants to anticipate by forcing the times.
This is the list that the councilor Enrico Marcora (Fdi) has lined up in the classroom: an X -ray of the political, financial and judicial dangers of an operation that the mayor Beppe Sala He continues to defend as “the best who could be done”. To say it is not alone Marcora. Nando from the church And the Legality Committee have been denouncing the upstream opacity for months and the downstream fragility: upstream, because it is not clear who the actual owners of Milan and Inter are, controlled by international funds that refer to the Cayman; At the valley, because the Milanese construction sites are already fertile ground for corporal and ‘ndrangheta and, without solid guarantees, every maxiprogetto becomes a criminal risk multiplier.
To this is added the most sensitive node: the auction disturbance. It is not just a political accusation, but a concrete legal risk. When a public body sells a good value after long private negotiations with a small number of subjects and without an open call, the suspicion of violating the rules of competition is inevitable. The prosecutor of Milan, where different exposed and already engaged in various investigations on Milanese urban planning have already been deposited, will it be able to ignore this scenario? The disproportion is evident: 13 meetings between the general manager Christian Malangonethe municipal offices and the top of the clubs and just five days to the councilors to ratify it. What the “Band of San Siro” (as the president of the Committee yes Meazza calls it, Luigi Corbani) has treated for four months, the classroom is called to approve it quickly and fury.
Nevertheless Room Pull straight. “I negotiated the best,” he claimed yesterday, translating everything into a clear message: the work is closed, the advice just has to ratify. It is the logic of the fact accomplished. The commissions have been emptied, the compressed discussion, the calendarized vote in five days. And the Secretary General has endorsed the line, arriving to argue that “the formal profile must not prevail over the substantial”: a cultural yield for the left one that for years had made the cult of the rules its flag against the center -right of the amnesty and shortcuts.
The protests were not lacking in the classroom: from the right and left the councilors reported flashing convening, commissions never concluded and documents arrived at the last minute. Inside the Democratic Party is consumed a rift: the management has approved by a large majority a document that defends the resolution, claiming that citizens’ resources go to public services and not to the “football branding”. A choice that appears paradoxical: the Democratic Party, while declaring that she wants to protect the municipal coffers, endorses the sale of a public heritage to speculative funds at a contested price and with uncertain owners. Not surprisingly, the councilor Angel Turkish (PD) He distanced himself by announcing vote against: for him the resolution transfers the economic risks to the Municipality and reduces the role of the Council, making the project unbalanced and dangerous for Milan. Riccardo Truppo (Fdi) recalled that even the Municipality’s lawyer, Alberto Toffolettohe said he was available to answer new questions on the weekend, a sign that the investigation was not closed.
Meanwhile, in the background, a name that seemed to be archived returns to circulate: the “Save Milan”. Born to deal with urban planning emergencies in recent months, today he resurfaces in Parliament, in the new delegation law that incorporates the DDL Mazzetti and rewrites the rules of construction. The heart of the provision is the expansion of the tolerances on the abuses and the introduction of selective amnesty. In the meantime, the Milan prosecutor has filed an appeal to the Court of Cassation against the decision of the Court of Review who revoked the house arrest ad Alessandro Scandurraformer member of the landscape commission, involved in the investigation into the city urban planning with accusations of corruption, fake and building abuse. According to prosecutors, the motivations of the judges are “illogical” for the lack of evaluation of some tests.
