Portal de Lorca
www.portaldelorca.com
Antonio Mecca, and Spokesman Councillor municipal group Citizens in the City of Lorca, would make the following statements to the press:
After full monograph devoted to planning agreements of 2005 and 2006, we wish to make the following conclusions:
Planning agreements were an organized plot of urban corruption.
Brains and perpetrators of the plot were well aware that the commitments of reclassification of the land could not be met, that is, not dependent on the city council, nor was it possible approval by the CARM.
Policymakers who signed these agreements, abusive and fraudulent accepted for local administration, knowing the damage and fraud posed to citizens Lorca clauses.
(Obligation to return the money within 3 years).
The PSOE and the PP author for its management, are equally responsible for this economic ruin.
The plot had the following purposes:
Get easy task to pay waste money for partisan purposes.
Benefit corporation members and buddies, involved in planning agreements ("8 Lorca surnames").
The condition for these agreements were approved was: make a deposit in case the city hall and give other amount in a bag.
But what is really significant is what happened in the plenary of October 31, 2005, full likely to be considered null by the various irregularities that emerge from the Act itself.
Explanation of irregularities:
Composition of the corporation 25 councilors (-14 PSOE, PP 9 IU 2).
Attending the plenary - 23 councilors (13 PSOE, PP 8 IU 2).
Vote on the request of opposition groups lay on the table the motion of conventions for 10 (PP 8 IU 2), to 12 (PSOE).
There were 23 councilors and 22 voted.
Follow the full and approval of agreements will vote, get out of the plenary hall 8 PP councilors, are therefore in the plenary room 13 councilors.
Voting takes place and vote for 12 (PSOE) against two (IU).
Again missing a councilman.
The Act does not include the impact, who is the council that has not voted?
According to the spokesman of the PSOE, Don Diego José Mateo, the councilman was Don Bartolomé Soler PSOE and voted no words for this by being an interested party spokesman and directly from one of the Conventions.
Why these very important and relevant circumstances and facts that occurred in that city not listed in the Act?
We therefore consider that the Act, the most important document that should be collected with rigor what is happening in the municipal council, presents several irregularities that must be clarified by the consequences that may result, inter alia,
-The Possible annulment of that city of 31 October 2005 and therefore the cancellation of all resolutions adopted by it, especially the approval of those agreements.
If all declared null, it is even the possibility of not having to repay the sums claimed by the promoters, this of course depends on the decision of Justice.
Source: C´s Lorca
Privacy policy
- Legal notice
- Cookies