The city hall will analyze whether former mayor Adrian Videanu’s 2005 retrocession of almost 12 hectares of the IOR park is legal, and if they find something illegal, the municipality will attack the ownership in court, General Mayor Nikušor Dan told HotNews.ro. It will be recalled that last week the City Hall of Sector 3 finally lost the process in which it demanded the cancellation of the ownership right.

• “This is the fourth process in a series of processes initiated by the Sector 3 City Hall in 2012. According to the incomplete information that I have, the process was started badly, that is, all 4 processes, in the sense that the City Hall of Sector 3 did not refer to the quality of green spaces and the return of this land to the public domain, but to the fact that they received from of the municipality of Bucharest since 1998, the decision to create an administrative headquarters there.
• However, since the right to challenge the title is indefinite and since we have just completed the process of acquiring legal aid contracts with 6 law firms, we will look again at the disposition under which this park was ceded and the hypothesis in which we will find the reasons for illegality, we ourselves will correctly attack the provision by which it was canceled,” said Nikushor to HotNews.ro.

District 3 City Hall says they lost the case because of the “lack of interest on the part of the appeals court.”

• “The City Hall of Sector 3 expresses deep disappointment with Decision No. 3. 1980/20.10.2022 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, according to which 12 hectares in the IOR park remain lost. The land was given in 2005 by the decision of the mayor general, a provision that our institution challenged, disagreeing with the owner of the land, as well as with the city hall, which during all 10 years of legal proceedings supported in court the preservation of the provisions on retrocessions issued in 2005.
• Even if the reasoning of the decision made on 10/20/2022, final and appealed, will be made public, the argument that became the basis for rejecting our claim is the appellate court’s lack of interest.
• Specifically, without going into the merits, the court held that since the City Hall of Sector 3 was neither the owner nor the manager of the land, only the City Hall of the Municipality of Bucharest, which at the time was the owner and administrator of 12 hectares, could claim the annulment clause no. 4333/18.05.2005 (“Ordinance on restitution in kind”) of the mayor-general,” the district 3 mayor’s office said in a press release on Tuesday morning.

The City Hall of Sector 3 appeals to the City Hall of Bucharest with a request to the court to cancel the provisions on retrocession.

“We also express our complete openness to cooperation and providing the necessary documentation to the General Mayor’s Office – archival documents, photo-video documents, etc. – to file a lawsuit in court,” the institution also sent.

At Tuesday’s District 3 local council meeting, councilors USR and PNL proposed amendments to clarify the budget that would allocate money for legal representation, expropriation or foreclosures, but the amendments were not approved.

First, the USR advisers proposed to allocate 53 million lei, to take the money from the festive lights and to increase the social capital of the companies in Sector 3 of the City Hall.

• “IOR Park and Brâncusi Park are green areas of public interest. S3 City Hall should pursue legal or administrative steps to restore them. Funds are needed to continue the effort.
• The budget for 2022 provides 51 million lei for the social capital of companies where S3 is the guardian. These companies have already benefited from very large capitalizations that far, far exceed the average market in their industry. Thus, the allocation of additional capital is not justified.
• The budget adjustment provides for an increase in spending on holiday lighting by 2.2 million lei, although there is already an amount of 650 thousand lei, equivalent to the amount spent by sector 4 in 2021. There is no justification why S3 should pay in 2022, in the event of an energy crisis, for installations 4.4 times more than S4.
• In order to quickly secure the amounts needed for the legal and administrative steps to restore green spaces in S3, I propose 2 amendments to add a reserve fund to the budget,” said Mihaela Vaccaru, USR sector 3 advisor.

But the amendment was lost because PNL and PSD did not vote for it. There were only 7 votes.

Immediately afterwards, the PNL made an amendment proposing to allocate 43 million lei to support any step taken and necessary for the green zone.

• “In line with the desire of the 3rd District City Hall to continue efforts to preserve the IOR/Cuza Park, respectively the entire green area, including the 12 hectares retrograded, we want to provide the necessary funds to the City Hall.
• We start by allocating an amount of 43,000 thousand lei, which can support any step taken and is necessary for the restoration of the entire green zone, and then, depending on the needs, we will supplement in the following years.
• The amount of 43,000 thousand lei (4,300,000 lei) is allocated to create a fund that will cover the necessary costs for the restoration of the entire green zone, including legal assistance,” suggested Andrea Weinerich, local councilor of PNL.

He suggested taking money from the Body Control Authority – 40 million lei, rehabilitation of Pantelimon Park – 1 million lei and 2 million lei from the modernization of the street.

The amendment received only 13 votes, although the UDR voted in favor as two councilors were absent.

How the City Hall of Sector 3 lost the process

Sector 3 City Hall ultimately lost the ownership challenge process that saw nearly 12 hectares of IOR Park expropriated in 2005 by former mayor Adrian Videanu. The decision was made by the Supreme Court after 10 years of legal proceedings. Over the past year, several trees in the green area have mysteriously withered and the vegetation caught fire several times, but no government agency has found the culprits. The only solution to preserve green spaces is buyout/expropriation.

Thanks to the decision handed down on Thursday by the High Court of Justice and Cassation, the ruling handed down by the Bucharest Court of Appeal in 2021 was virtually unchanged.

“Rejects the appeal filed by the plaintiff, the Mayor of Sector 3 of the Municipality of Bucharest against Decision no. 1334A of October 13, 2021, issued by the Court of Appeal of Bucharest – Civil III Section and in cases involving minors and family. Irreversible,” the court portal says.

The District 3 City Hall overwhelmingly lost the case in appellate court, according to the court’s reasoning, because it could not demonstrate that it had made specific park improvements there. This, although satellite images from 2005, when the land was returned, show alleys and trees. Several alleys are visible even now.

The City Hall of Sector 3 could not prove that there is a park there

In the context of the trial, the appellate court ordered an expert examination to verify the actual condition of the land plot in question, “the expert was asked to check whether from the biblical point of view this land was part of Titan Park, if from the actual point of view the land was located at the time restitution in Titan Park, the former Balta Albă Park or IOR Park, if the restitution land was developed on the date of restitution – 18.05.2005 – as a recreational area or if there were other communal objects of local interest at that time.”

According to the results of the examination, it was established:

• According to the General Urban Development Plan effective in 2005, the land plot, which is the subject of this file, located in the CB3 zone – is intended for construction;
• The general appearance of the land plot at the time of the examination had the appearance of a wasteland, on which natural vegetation, shaggy trees, bushes grew, without the presence of any facilities and parks;
• According to local town planning regulations, the land plot in question is located in the CB3 zone – the main urban pillars. This CB3 zone is designed to accommodate multi-purpose buildings with maximum height, land utilization ratio (LUT), percentage of land occupation (POT), number of levels, etc., so something other than green space;
• The land returned on 05/18/2005 has no buildings or remains of objects that existed before 2005.

“Taking into account the fact that there were no sources of gas, electricity, water and sewerage on the plot of land, which is the subject of legal proceedings, and there are currently no sources, the court considers that the creation of a recreational area in the absence of public lighting, sources of drinking water or domestic sources of water to irrigate the supposed green spaces and sewer connections intended for rainwater and possible public toilets, proving once again that the land was not part of Titan Park (or the former Balta Albă Park or IOR Park, currently Alexandru Ioan Cuza Park) and was not created as a recreation area at the time of issuing the order for restitution in kind,” the court noted.

In a lawsuit filed since 2012, the City Hall of Sector 3 has always claimed that the nearly 12 hectares are part of the public property of the Municipality of Bucharest, being the subject of a development intended to meet the public needs of the local community, namely a public park and recreation area.

Another reason is the insufficient quality of the procedure, that is, it should have been the administration of the park at the time of retrocession. The City Hall referred to the fact that by the Decision of the General Council from 1998 the land was given to it for administration in order to place its administrative center there, but it seems that the argument was not strong enough, it remains to be seen, the reasoning of the court.

The capital’s mayor’s office, led by Nikusor Dan, defended the property rights granted to Videan

Instead of protecting the green spaces, the city hall has protected its ownership, which was granted in 2005 together with the owner of the land, Maria Kokoru, says Evgeny Matei, a member of the local council of Sector 3 from USR.

• “As a citizen, I was interested in the retrograded territory of the IOR Park in the hall. Having no experience in this area of ​​litigation, I could see that in the 10 years since the trial had been going on, evidence and evidence had been used extremely poorly.
• I felt that the public interest was not protected in the full sense of the word, and many documents that could have been challenged were not challenged, cross-examinations were not conducted.
• For example, the examination by which the court recognizes that the green zone is not a square, made in 2020, was not appealed by the city hall, no other evidence was provided that would show that on the geoportal, on satellite images, you can see how that room was arranged, they did not submit the original cadastral documents at the appeal stage.
• On appeals, if they were filed, they were rejected. It is sad that the capital’s mayor’s office and the owner of the land walked side by side, worked together, they had a common interest, not a public one,” Yevhen Matei explained.