Former federal official Simon Levy has made headlines again. If what I propose next is not shocking because it is self-referential (perhaps there is no way it is not, my apologies about it), I return to columns that I have published about who this week we saw in a video kicking the door of one of her neighbors.
In the first of the columns that I return, there is talk of irregularities while the building that we now see in the video was being built. After that publication, he denied that his address was there.
In September 2018, a video of Xóchitl Gálvez was detailed here, who was a delegate to Miguel Hidalgo before becoming a senator that year.
The column was named Simon Levy, real estate mysteries of the IV. In it, a 2017 transmission of Periscope was recovered where the then delegate visits, after a neighborhood complaint, the construction of the northeast corner of Campos Elíseos and Hegel, or Campos Elíseos 113. In the video it can be seen that, despite being suspended by authority, the work on that work continued. The PAN is heard asking the masons if they work for Levy, and there is one out there who says “yes”. The video has been published again this week by Ciro Gómez Leyva in Imagen Noticias. https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/opinion/salvador-camarena/simon-levy-misterios-inmoviliarios-de-la-iv/
After that column, Levy told, among others, the San Ángel citizen activist Susana Kanahuati that he did not live on that property. “I do not live there nor am I the owner of anything.” I consigned those words in a new installment, this one called Levy and legality.
Contrary to what was told to Kanahuati by the former official at the time of Miguel Ángel Mancera, in that second text it was contrasted that Levy denied something that he did acknowledge before a court: he sued a person –Jaime Francisco Gutiérrez Valencia– who was involved in the construction of a department of the building that has now regained media visibility. And when he made his complaint, he gave as his address … the property he denied was his.
“What Levy demands is that Mr. Gutiérrez Valencia pay him 3 million 430 thousand pesos because, according to the next undersecretary, the contractor did not do the agreed work. And since Gutiérrez Valencia had signed a promissory note for that amount as a guarantee for the work to be carried out, today Levy wants the contractor to pay him, or to have his home in Iztapalapa seized ”, I wrote on that occasion about the property.
In that same installment, an administrative resolution of the Miguel Hidalgo (DMH / DEJ-SLBC-1307/2018) was cited where there was talk of closure and that two floors should be demolished (which would be exceeding the maximum height of the properties in that area of Polanco). https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/opinion/salvador-camarena/simon-levy-y-la-legalidad/
This is new: what did Víctor Romo, who succeeded Gálvez in MH, do with regard to the administratively pending property of Levy’s residence? Documents are circulating that indicate that the administration abandoned by the Morenista Romo, after his defeat on June 6, regularized that property last September. How could they go from one thing that it claims to demolish to one that it regulates? Perhaps this is the most relevant matter: the government of Claudia Sheinbaum and the recently elected PAN mayor Mauricio Tabe could review this now so famous building.
Finally, the former official Levy, in his time promoter of a controversial and defeated commercial development in Chapultepec, also made headlines years ago for things he says he did in China to promote Mexico, or Mexican interests, and what those who were then said. there, that they remembered very different things. https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/opinion/salvador-camarena/levy-en-china-mentiroso-compulsivo/