Varaždin County rejects Markovic's claims: "Is he deliberately deceiving the public?"
The Varaždin County administration has rejected the claims made by deputy mayor Miroslav Marković regarding the review process of the waste management permit for the company Tipos Resurs. The county emphasized that in 2021, they did not reject the request for a review but stated they lacked legal grounds for such action. Marković claimed that in 2019, the relevant ministry revoked the company’s permit, followed by the county office, but the company quickly reapplied and received a new permit with increased capacity. He also noted multiple complaints and inspections over the years, yet the permit was never revoked. The county clarified that they had not received any formal requests from environmental inspectors to revoke the permit, as required by law, and therefore could not conduct a review. They further pointed out that after the permit expired in March 2024, the administrative body requested the inspection reports, which were then submitted.
The Varaždinska County administration has rejected claims made by deputy mayor Miroslav Marković regarding the review process of a waste management permit issued to the company Tipos Resurs. According to the county, it did not reject the request for a review in 2021, but rather stated it had no legal basis to conduct such a review. The dispute arose during a meeting of the City Council, which discussed issues related to waste management at the former industrial complex of Mundus Florijan Bobić in Varaždin. Marković alleged that in 2019, the relevant ministry revoked Tipos Resurs’s operating license, after which the county office also revoked it. However, he claimed the company immediately submitted a new application for a permit the following day. According to Marković, the county office issued a new permit one month later, increasing the capacity from five to 10 thousand tons of waste. He further stated that numerous complaints had been received over the years, with inspections conducted on-site, yet the company's permit was never revoked. In response, the county clarified that the information suggesting the administrative department responsible for spatial planning, construction, and environmental protection within the county had rejected the 2021 request for a review of Tipos Resurs’s permit was incorrect. It emphasized that the department did not have a legal basis to perform such a review at that time. The county directed Marković to seek clarification from Slađana Miočić, currently the head of the city of Varaždin, who held the position of head of the administrative department from September 15, 2017, until February 8, 2022. The county noted that the administrative body had already responded to Marković’s letter in November 2021, stating they had never received a proposal from the environmental inspection requesting the revocation of the permit, as required by law. Consequently, they had no grounds to review the issued permit. The county added that even after this, no reports from the environmental inspection regarding conducted inspections or requests for permit revocation were ever received. According to the county, the documentation concerning the conducted inspections was received on March 1, 2024, upon request by the administrative body itself, following the expiration of Tipos Resurs’s permit. The county reiterated that the administrative department had not rejected the review of the permit in 2021 but instead clearly stated it lacked a legal foundation to proceed with such a review. It questioned whether Marković’s statements might intentionally mislead the public and accused him of urging the county to act unlawfully outside its jurisdiction. The controversy centers around the management of waste at the former Mundus industrial site, which has become a focal point for local governance and environmental concerns. The situation highlights the tension between municipal authorities and private companies operating under permits, particularly in areas with historical industrial significance. The issue has drawn attention due to the potential environmental impact of waste management practices and the regulatory framework governing such activities. The dispute involves multiple layers of bureaucracy and legal interpretation, with both sides presenting their perspectives based on different interpretations of regulations and procedures. The county insists that its actions were strictly in accordance with the law, while Marković argues that there was a failure to properly oversee and regulate the operations of Tipos Resurs. This disagreement underscores the complexity of managing environmental compliance in urban settings, especially when dealing with legacy industrial sites. Local officials have expressed concern over the implications of these disputes, emphasizing the need for transparency and adherence to legal standards in all administrative decisions. They have called for continued dialogue and cooperation among all stakeholders to ensure that environmental protections are upheld without compromising legitimate business operations. The situation remains under scrutiny, with ongoing discussions expected to address the underlying issues and clarify the roles and responsibilities of each party involved. The incident has sparked broader conversations about the balance between economic development and environmental stewardship, reflecting wider societal debates on how best to manage resources and protect public health. As the situation unfolds, the focus will remain on ensuring that all actions taken are lawful, transparent, and in the interest of the community.
Go to the primary sources (1)
The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.
The Varaždin County administration has rejected the claims made by deputy mayor Miroslav Marković regarding the review process of the waste management permit for the company Tipos Resurs. The county emphasized that in 2021, they did not reject the request for a review but stated they lacked legal grounds for such action. Marković claimed that in 2019, the relevant ministry revoked the company’s permit, followed by the county office, but the company quickly reapplied and received a new permit with increased capacity. He also noted multiple complaints and inspections over the years, yet the permit was never revoked. The county clarified that they had not received any formal requests from environmental inspectors to revoke the permit, as required by law, and therefore could not conduct a review. They further pointed out that after the permit expired in March 2024, the administrative body requested the inspection reports, which were then submitted.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the claims made by Marković and the rebuttal from the Varaždin County administration without overtly favoring either side. It includes direct quotes from both parties and provides contextual information about the legal procedures involved. There is no evident bias in the ph
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports the Varaždinska županija's denial of Marković's claims regarding the revocation of Tipos resurs's waste management permit. It provides specific details such as the year 2021, mentions the lack of legal basis, and references Slađana Miočić as the current head of the dep
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains a neutral tone by presenting the županija's response without overtly favoring either party. It uses formal language and avoids emotional or biased phrasing, though it does include some direct quotes from the županija's statement.
The article reports on a dispute between Varaždinska županija (district administration) and Miroslav Marković, deputy mayor of Varaždin, regarding claims made by Marković about the revocation of a waste management permit for the company Tipos Resurs. Marković alleged that the district administration revoked the permit in 2021 after it was initially issued in 2019. The district administration refutes these claims, stating they did not reject the revocation request but lacked legal grounds to proceed. They emphasize that no formal inspection report or proposal for revoking the permit was ever received, and that the permit was only revoked after its expiration in March 2024. The district administration questions whether Marković is misleading the public with his statements and urges him to seek clarification from the current mayor of Varaždin, Sladjana Miočić.
Bias read (Center): While the article discusses a local administrative dispute involving a municipal authority and a city official, it presents both sides of the issue without overtly favoring either. The district administration challenges Marković’s claims, while Marković provides his version of events. The tone is ex
Why factuality (95): The article accurately summarizes the Varaždinska županija's rebuttal of Marković's claims about the revocation of Tipos resurs's permit. It includes key details such as the year 2021, the lack of legal basis, and references to Slađana Miočić. This aligns directly with the content of the first artic
Why objectivity (90): The article remains neutral in tone, presenting the županija's position without taking sides. It uses objective language and avoids emotional or biased expressions while quoting the official response.
The article discusses a dispute between the mayor's office of Varaždin and former council member Marković regarding claims made by Marković about the revocation of a waste management permit for the company Tipos Resursu. Marković alleged that the municipal authority revoked the permit in 2021 after it was initially issued in 2019, but the mayor's office denies this, stating there was no legal basis for such action. The mayor's office emphasizes that they did not revoke the permit and that inspections conducted over time did not result in the revocation. They also note that any claims about the revocation were based on incorrect information and suggest that Marković may be misleading the public. The article highlights the disagreement over the legal procedures and the validity of the claims made by Marković.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the dispute as a challenge to the accuracy of Marković's claims, suggesting he may be misrepresenting the situation. It presents the mayor's office as defending its actions based on legal grounds, which aligns with a more institutional or regulatory perspective often associated on
Why factuality (95): The article accurately conveys the Varaždinska županija's rejection of Marković's claims regarding the Tipos resurs permit. It includes precise details such as the year 2021, the absence of legal grounds, and references to Slađana Miočić. These facts match those presented in the other articles cover
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains an objective tone by presenting the županija's response without showing preference for either side. It uses formal language and avoids emotional or biased phrasing, though it includes direct quotes from the official statement.
An article from the Croatian newspaper 'Večernji list' discusses a local incident in the Zagreb neighborhood of Sopot where residents were upset by someone discarding cardboard waste next to a recycling bin. The incident was shared on a Facebook group, sparking complaints about laziness and lack of cultural awareness among some residents. Commenters suggested that the behavior reflects a disregard for proper waste management practices and proposed measures such as installing surveillance cameras to enforce responsibility. The article highlights community concerns over littering and the need for greater civic responsibility.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a community issue without overtly taking a political stance. While the discussion involves social norms and civic responsibility, which can be politically sensitive, the tone remains neutral, focusing on public concern rather than partisan commentary. The framing does not favor左
Why factuality (60): This article focuses on a different topic entirely, illegal waste disposal in Zagreb's Sopot district, not related to the Varaždinska županija dispute over Tipos resurs. While it contains factual descriptions of local complaints, it has no bearing on the main event covered in the other articles.
Why objectivity (50): The article exhibits strong bias through emotionally charged language like 'čisti bezobrazluk' ('pure disgrace') and 'lijenosti i nekulturi' ('laziness and lack of culture'). It presents only the perspective of residents who are upset about the behavior, without offering any counterpoints or officia
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
Croatia
