I've read what Jeff has posted... totally unbelievable!!! Regardless of whether any of it's true, or who it's aimed at - what on earth is a Councillor doing slagging off anyone in public like that? Sounds like school playground behaviour to me. And definitely NOT the behaviour of a grown man entrusted with running our Urbanisation. Any chance he ever had of winning my vote just went out the window - I'm not voting for a recalcitrant school boy.

According to the lamarina.info web site Councillor Wiszniewski has been summoned to court on Thursday this week to face charges of corruption. Could this be the reason why he is attacking opposition Councillor Mark Lewis.

I must agree that this type of behaviour from our councillor is totally unacceptable, however, what I find most interesting in his blog is that a decision was apparently made to cut the animal ambulance and vet bills out of the budget.
No matter how much Jeff will protest he was the instigator of these decisions!
If it was the case that Jeff was interested in budget savings I wonder how he justifies a situation where he gets approx. €35000 a year for putting his hand up at a few meetings a month, by his own admission he has no teeth in council matters and he tells us that on occasions the mayor has not kept him fully informed.
How does Jeff justify the creation of a party political office a.n.a. office for the urbanisation only meters away from the satellite town hall, staffed with I believe 5 or so assistants, none of whom have any knowledge other than that available from the town hall personnel?
It has been suggested that the above package is costing us, the residents on this urbanisation, well in excess of €150000 a year, is this true Jeff and if so what is your justification?

Jeffrey Wiszniewski is the first British Councillor in Spain to be denounced for alleged political corruption. Here is the article in the La Verdad newspaper:
http://www.laverdad.es/alicante/v/20131113/orihuela/juez-imputa-concejal-pipn-20131113.html

BING TRANSLATION OF ABOVE ARTICLE

Partner of independent Government of the Popular Party in San Fulgencio, Jeff Wiszniewski, has been summoned to testify at the Palace of Justice of Orihuela tomorrow, in quality of accused, following the complaint filed by PSOE and Aspfu in relation to the organisation of the festivities of La Marina urbanization in 2011. The opposition decided to put the issue in the hands of the courts since he suspected that there was an alleged amano of the contract with the company that was responsible for the Organization of these celebrations. The letter of complaint highlights that the trading company which was made with the services after rating the three chosen offers claimed the 28.970 euros more VAT of the contract despite the fact that the City Council made a series of modifications involving the direct recruitment by the consistory of events valued at more than 9,500 euros, so it was considered that this could have resulted in a prejudice to the public coffers.
In addition to that the company presented an invoice of 15.383 euros on August 3, 2011, the day before the signing of the contract which was held on July 4 while it is unknown if it was paid before the provision of the service. However the opposition considered that there were more elements to suspect that recruitment "was agreed prior to the administrative procedure of recruitment". This comes from the fact that e-mails and a Facebook page in which it appears the poster of parties that coincided with the offer submitted by the merchant before producing their recruitment, since the envelopes with the proposals of the various companies were presented on 27 July on July 21 of that year appearedi.e. six days later. Since the opposition is indicated, in addition, that the rest of companies offered bids does not correspond at all with the official programming or the winner, at the time telling that on 1 August the Mayor sent the invitation with the Festival program «bottomed, among others, the actions offered by the successful bidder». For PSOE and Apsfu contract not be had formalized when such documentation has been sent and therefore asked the Mayor for information on the implementation of the programs whose response was 'he ran by the company won the contract for the parties'. All of this was that both groups decided to put the case in the hands of the courts.

Sounds like a pay day for the legal establishment that will go on for years (innocent until proven guilty remember). Are any of the pro Mark Lewis lot going to give an update on how many animals and owners were stopped at the dog show 'sham'.

Do Alicante council have a cross party standards committee. If they did it would save so much of this muck throwing that all parties indulge in.
Matters like this should go to a standards committee. The committee listen to the facts and make a decision on weather there is a case to answer or not.

Thanks ASL for using the Bing translator to help us understand the translation.
Cant really say that I understand the translation, except that it appears that Jeff is accused of accepting a bid for the fiesta 2011 before the closing date of tendors was reached. If this is the case why did the opposition parties not also accuse the rest of the Council, as we are told the procedure would be to vote on all requests for all actions taken by the Council. I may have this completely wrong ,but there again, Am I surprised at anything I read about dodgy dealings in Town halls up and down the Country. It is, as some people write on Forums "This is Spain live with it".
I think the only thing we can guarantee is that this case will still be going on long after the next election , and and certain people, who are in opposition parties will be screaming to voters not to vote for Jeff, because he has this case still pending.
Don't let a good rumour put about by the opposition, stand in the way of the possible truth.
Of course only my personal opinion, but Jeff isn't the only person who tells the occasional lie

Clicked on the link and Google Translated it for me already. It States below which should make more sense.

The independent government partner's Party in San Fulgencio, Jeff Wiszniewski, has been called to testify in Orihuela Courthouse tomorrow, as a defendant, following the complaint filed by PSOE and Aspfu in relation to the organization of parties urbanization La Marina in 2011. The opposition decided to put the matter to the courts because they suspected that there was an alleged rigging of the contract with the company that was responsible for organizing the festivities. In the letter of complaint notes that the company that took the services after assessing the three bids requested cashed the 28,970 euros plus VAT of the contract even though the City Council made a series of changes that led to the direct recruitment by the Consistory of events worth more than 9,500 euros, so it was felt that this could have been a detriment to the public coffers.
Besides that the company filed a bill of 15,383 euros on August 3, 2011, a day before the signing of the contract to be performed on day 4 if it is unknown if it was paid before the service. Yet the opposition felt that there were more elements to suspect that hiring "was agreed prior to the conduct of the administrative procedure of recruitment". This comes from the fact that on July 21 of that year appeared emails and a Facebook page on which it appears the poster of the celebrations which coincided with the offer made by the company before their recruitment occurred because the envelopes containing the proposals of the various companies were presented on July 27, which is six days later. The opposition is also indicated that the rest of the offerings of companies bidding does not match at all with the official program or the winner, while recounting the August 1st Mayor sent the invitation to the program party "which includes, among others, the performances offered by the contractor." For Apsfu PSOE and the contract had not been finalized when it sent that documentation and therefore asked the mayor about the implementation of programs which responded that "was conducted by the contractor of the organization of the parties." All this meant that both groups decided to put the matter in the hands of the courts

Please note I only copied and pasted this from the source/link and these are not my opinions or have anything to do with what is commented. For legal reasons!!

Hiya Folks!

It seems that Jeff is avoiding the question as to how much his office costs and his justification for these costs in the light of his extreme budget cuts since elected?
I think that just about tells us that either he does not know or he is just ignoring difficult questions from the electorate!