Trying to bring environmental issue in the decision process

summery of links to various information Index_list.html
historical data  related to the previous contamination and request for information regarding sell of 25:12 Ven-adm-links.html
  an ecological scandal
Landskrona TUNA 25:12
grannehörande  TUNA 25-12 BYGG:2021.68
25:12 and 32:3 were the same combined and owned by Glenn Björne

grannehörande  TUNA 25-12 2021
Due to the negligence of the "miljö"-environmental authorities in Landskrona the major contamination was allowed to proceed under 20 years and the culpable för the contamination Glenn Björne was illigaly to transfer property to his son Lucas Björne thus escaping responsibility of cleaning the micro plastics
vi   varnade mydigheterna vad som sker
  an introduction to corruption
Landskrona TUNA 89:5
grannehörande  TUNA 89-5 2022
grannehörande  TUNA 89-5 2022
bedrägeri och förfalskning av dokument.
There are good reason to suspect that the process was manipulated and an incorrect information was provided to one or more of the participants.
BYGG 2021.68 and BYGG 2021.69
kronofogdens målnummer U-18091-22/1250
  protocol 2022-01-26
dokument relaterad till anmärkningar om Tuna 25:12 och Tuna 32:3 history 2015-2017
Historien av Tuna 25:12, korrespondens med Miljöchef Jörgen Hanak  
Grannehörande begäran från stadsarkitekts-avdelningen
Datum 2022-02-17
grannehörande 89-5 2022
Svar från Tuna 32:3
Datum 2021-03-02
grannehörande 25-12-2021
Svar från Tuna 32:3
Datum 2022-01-04
grannehörande 89-5-2021
svar från Tuna 32:3
Datum 2022-03-04
grannehörande 89-5-2022
corespondence with Mr. Hanak index
  postings on twitter
  Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4
protokoll 2022-04-26
svar till ansökan TUNA 89:5 BYGG 2021.819 2021-01-10 remiss 2021-819
neclection of citizen rights, communication with Ms. Warming
May 2022
tuna 25-12
comparing 2 different evaluations tuna 89-5
  index plast

Short chronology
in 2017 Kjell Anselius, neighbouring 25:12 reported a garbage, ensilage mixed with the manure being deposited on the 25:12
at some poing 25:12 and 32:3 had one owner Glenn and Ninna Bj;rne
there is a long series of dating many years back
in 2017 Kjell Anselius, neighbouring 25:12 reported a garbage, ensilage mixed with the manure being deposited on the 25:12
disrespectfully mocking a citizen, is not worthy of the Swedish administration culture
correspondence with Mr. Hanak
kronofogdens målnummer U-18091-22/1250
Let's follow it step by step
to Hanak 2022-05-24
the entire e-mail

the answer of Mr Hanak   
below the photo of 25:12 taken by Mr. Anselius from his property in 2017
here is the photo made by Kjell Anselius
the neighbour rapporting ensilage storage on the property 25:12
The photo is taken by Kjell Anselius from the house as on the picture below, the complatn is made by Anselius 2017-04-10 see below 

under the view alligned with above photo direction 
here is the clear reference to the issue
  the first attemt to get an answer from mr Hanak and
the first "confusing answer"
  correspondence with mr Hanak, as one can see Mr. Hanak deflects the question by answering someting else. In order to confuse the citizen Mr. Hanak in a response doesn't include the original e-mail  where there is a question. Very clever way to to fool citizens what I know from the countries where I have worked with Mr. Hans Blix. The same approach.
Let's follow step by step
to Hanak 2022-05-17 no answer
to Hanak, reminder 2022-05-24
from Hanak
Mr Hanak refers to anther property not the property I ask for i.e. 25:12
he removes the e-mail with the question  so  nobody sees that he just trying to confuse the citizen
BYGG 2021.68
and BYGG 2021.69
kronofogdens målnummer U-18091-22/1250

we at 32:3 did not allow to dig in manure/silage plastic as we want to have a proper disposal of the plastic not threatening he ecology of  Ven and Öresund.
The plastic at 25:12 was dig down somewhere, see the photo of Mr. Anselius
major consideration  
we do not consent with the decision  
no decision papers and justifications regarding above case where provided to me and I had no chance to exercise basic civil rights.  
administrative weakness, information is only sent by registered letters. If citizen is not available at the living location the citizens civil rights are neglected