If in recent weeks the increase in attendance fees for city councilors has remained on stand-by it is for only one reason: before proceeding, the Administration was waiting for an opinion from the regional Local Government Department. An opinion that did not so much concern the municipal councilors, but those of the districts and the presidents of the municipalities themselves. That opinion arrived yesterday, signed by the manager of Service 1 of the Local Autonomy department, “General guidelines and litigation. Large area entities”, Bernardo Santomauro.
A document in which, essentially, it is limited to saying that the direction already given by the general secretary of the Municipality, Rossana Carrubba, must be fully shared: the increases do not concern the Constituencies. Neither the presidents nor the individual councilors. An opinion that will create discontent, just as much as the Administration’s decision, in the summer of 2022, to retrace its steps compared to the very first decision to increase the allowances of the district presidents, as done with the mayor, the deputy mayor and the councillors. Now that we are in the process of “enriching” the tokens of the city councilors, the doors remain closed for the former neighborhoods. The principle expressed by the general secretary is simple: the fact that that increase was never expressly foreseen, unlike the other positions, makes it clear that, evidently, it was not the legislator’s intention to foresee it. Point.
«The automatic increase for the presidents of the constituencies could not occur, since the primary rule that allows it is missing», wrote the general secretary Carrubba in a first opinion expressed on 14 September. And almost a month later, in the opinion sent yesterday to Palazzo Zanca by the regional department of local authorities, the principle remains unchanged: «Having recalled the legislation in force on the matter and having taken note of the opinion expressed by the municipal secretary, deeming it shareable as it is absolutely founded in the premises and in its conclusions, it is represented that this Department shares the aforementioned opinion”. Case closed? Perhaps. The political one could reopen soon.