While it is true that the opposition clings as best it can to put the Mayor of Nice in a difficult position, transparency should not be an option but an obligation in the exercise of an elective office.
There is no obligation to include one’s request on the agenda of the City Council, the municipal administration responded to Patrick Allemand, who raised the issue of the comments made in the Regional Audit Office’s report on the stadium’s case.
Handling things manually, it is certainly like that. But, even without a public debate, the problem remains.
In fact, wouldn’t it be better to address the questions rather than hide behind the regulations?
Especially since, by not doing so, it gives the impression of having something to hide.
Following the request from the group “A Different Future for Nice” dated October 27, 2017, I can only regret the Mayor of Nice’s refusal to put on the agenda of the last City Council a discussion on the Audit Office’s report regarding the Euro 2016 stadiums.
Relying on the fact that there is no legal obligation for communication to a municipality’s executive, the mayor was able to not address important questions raised by the Audit Office, which are of interest to the people of Nice:
- Is there really a risk of Europe demanding the repayment of its subsidy?
– Is there a similar risk concerning the State?
– What will be the position of the Mayor of Nice in response to the Audit Office, which considers that the level of the annual fee paid by OGC Nice, which is the club using the Allianz Riviera, is so low that it could be considered a disguised subsidy?
Patrick ALLEMAND, Municipal Councilor of Nice, Metropolitan Councilor Nice Côte d’Azur
