The Court of Instruction number 13 of Valencia collected declarations from workers Aumsathe municipal public company investigated within the framework of the Valencia City Hall commission and denounced the situation of “harassment at work” And “threats“who suffered for opposing the development of urban plans with “irregularities”.
Some of the personnel were summoned to testify by the Civil Guard and the court in the trial of Azud affairthe cause that brought to light 20 years of looting at Valencia town hall.
One of these appearances took place last time July 5 in court itself. The worker stated that “He was afraid in case he might face retaliation.” after it emerged that investigators were questioning employees of this state-owned company.
The witness, however, confirmed that she “received no call or indication” before going to court to testify.
The employee showed up in July to “hand over the documents she was keeping because she They were papal labor“, certain documents which were not stolen from the public company, he clarified. He kept them because they were “his own working documents and a letter” which detailed a series irregularities.
According to this witness, Aumsa employees “recently suffer from harassment situation at work and they are preparing to take mandatory legal action.”
Furthermore, he said that a few days before his appearance, “they had a meeting to see if a solution could be found to the situation, without being given a solution, even if it was temporary.”
Among the documents he gave to the instructor was “a written document that a lawyer for the State sent to the declarant.” dated May 22, 2015“.
In this document, “the protester and other people are threatened that it would be possible to directly demand that they responsible for damages and losses caused“, in relation to a negative report he prepared.
This report warned of a series of irregularities in the actions that Aumsa was going to carry out in the Grao PAIan ambitious urban planning action in the Valencian capital which has not yet been carried out.
Leaves
One of the lines of investigation followed in this case is linked to the development by the Axis group of the businessman Jaime Febrerof a sector of activity linked to the construction and operation of protected housing in the municipality of Valencia.
The summary of Azud affair revealed that Febrer sent up to one million euros to the United States to bribe Alphonse Grauvice-mayor of Valencia with the mayor Rita Barbera and one of the axes of the plot.
This worker explained that Febrer “regularly went to Aumsa headquarters” to meet Carlos Masiá, former manager and Grauformer manager, and Grau.
From that moment on, the employee revealed a series of irregularities in the Grao PAI project.
“At that time, Carlos Masiá was no longer the manager, but José Antonio Martinez Roda. “With the arrival of the new director and following the instructions of Alfonso Grau, Aumsa considered selling all the rental housing stock it had to obtain funds,” he said, as he indicates in his statement, to which he had access to EL ESPAÑOL.
The destination of these funds was the development of the PAI del Grao, going so far as to launch two public calls for tenders which were not awarded for the amount of 28 million euros.
Regarding this competition, he said that “many irregularities occurred.”
“Let us remember that even during a meeting in which the specifications were drawn up, collaborators from the law firm Broseta and Jaime Febrer were present, an aspect that caught the attention of the declarant given that could even be a potential bidder and helped in the preparation of the specifications“, includes the minutes of his statement.
Jaime Febrer”gave his opinion and made contributions“and she prepared a file which she presented to the Aumsa check-in and of which she kept a copy. This copy is the one which she provided to the court and which would motivate the work problems reported by part of the staff.
This version was confirmed by another witness who declared that “the comments made at that time in Aumsa were of the type of”You opened a newspaper and Jaime Febrer came out», an expression which “reflects the number of projects he had with Aumsa”.
The witness reiterated that “certain things that happened in relation to the development of the PAI del Grao by Aumsa caught his attention and this is what led the declarant a series of problems that ultimately led to his dismissal in 2022“.
Thus, he reported that “in 2014 the first call for tenders was launched, through an open procedure” and that “two companies presented themselves, Rover-Alcisa and Iberfil Capital“.
It was found that the second company “did not have financial solvency” and, once its accounts were analyzed, “was able to verify that it was a company with no activity“.
Staff reported this irregularity and, as a result, this second witness told investigators that “she was threatened by the manager of Aumsa“, José Antonio Martinez Roda.
Martínez Roda has led the entity since 2013, during Rita Barberá’s last term in the municipality.
With the arrival in 2015 of the left-wing government, composed of Compromís, PSPV and Valencia en Comúthe Department of Urban Development and the presidency of Aumsa, fell into the hands of the socialists, notably to the councilor Vicent Sarrianow a PSOE deputy in Congress. Sarrià has decided to keep the director of the public company in his position until 2021.
According to this testimony, this manager “told him that he was going to open a file if he did not correctly justify the lack of solvency”.
“Subsequently and in relation to this lack of solvency, in an attempt to justify it, the company provided insurance” and they contributed to this matter. Aumsa rejected staff warnings, was deemed solvent and proceedings continued.
As reported by the first employee who testified, she explained that “in this process, there was even a report from a state attorney in which it was said that there was no need to accredit or provide guarantees and which contained in its last section a warning to Aumsa technicians declared that specific actions could be taken against them.
Ultimately, Rover-Alcisa was excluded from the procedure due to a formal defect,
Therefore, only the company remains without solvency, which “could not obtain approval and the competition was declared void“.
New price
A few months later, a second procedure was launched, in this case through
a negotiated procedure without publicity.
A series of companies were invited, but none of them bid and later the company submitted a bid. Value for the seaa company “which had been created a few days previously but which had not been summoned to the procedure”.
Ultimately, the award was not granted and the matter was taken to the board of directors. This body determined that no compensation was owed to the company.
However, a few months later, in October 2016, already on the left at City Hall, José Antonio Martínez sent an “email (to his personal address) saying that was negotiating compensation for this company for expenses incurred in connection with this procedure.
