Muro sul Fiora, M5S Montalto di Castro: “Explain why the administration has always given a positive opinion to work”

«Yesterday, February 13, we learned from a press release that the municipal administration sent a report with the agreed changes to the Lazio Region.

According to whom?

The administration – commented by the Montalto di Castro M5S – affirms that there is no time for proposals that are obviously late and incompatible with the resources currently available.

However, it is since 2013 that M5stelle has been asking the administration for an alternative study to the project. Eight years ago, not a day.

Chi is late?

In February 2018 we asked the city council to form a technical commission to analyze all design problems. Three years ago.

Chi is late?

Basically they tell us that the games are made and there is nothing more to do than accept them and the only thing that can be achieved is no longer a wall but a low wall.

There is only this belated attempt to remedy the wall by replacing the concrete with 80 centimeters of mobile bulkheads that will remain fixed from September to June. So the total height of the wall will always be the same.

Explain why since 2012 in the different service days you have always given your positive opinion to the work where the wall has always been in the project.

Explain why you did not give your negative opinion by requiring an updated feasibility study that also included the effects of the 2012 flood.

Explain why you did not require an environmental impact assessment to be conducted

Explain why you did not defend the survival of the nautical sector at the mouth of the river from the beginning, because even if no one says it openly, navigation will disappear with this project.

Explain why you did not expect the two arms of the sea to be insured and tested, which, remember, are now off limits.

Explain why you did not expect the estuary sedimentation problem to be resolved.

Explain why he did not demand the cleaning and maintenance of the riverbed and the protection of the right bank of the river where there is a wonderful natural oasis.

Explain why you did not raise the issue of filling the Vulci Dam basin and the possibility of finding other areas of undulation or expansion upstream.

These are just a few of the questions that need to be answered and as eight years ago we are told that the situation is take it or leave it because any solution is incompatible with the resources currently available. So it all comes down to money?

The safety of the Navy is important to everyone, not just the administration, but have the courage to say that this project has been talked about for thirty years after the disastrous 1987 flood! It should be clear that those who were children in 1990 now have children and families.

Now, however, the administration says the request to reopen the services conference would lead to a lengthening of the project implementation time with a real risk of flooding the Navy. And hasn’t the Navy been flooded in these thirty years? Was there any damage to the business?

On the other hand, what finally seems evident is the need to review the project by requesting the reopening of the services conference, to come to the table with the other organizations involved, to assert the reasons of our territory, to defend our environment and our economic activities. ”. .