Notes on the Council Meeting - Jan 23rd, 2012

As promised we are publishing below our account of the proceedings at the Council Meeting last Friday (27th January) We wanted to try to give you a full account of what happened and we have attempted to be as accurate as possible in our reporting. Consequently it is a long report of a long meeting! This doesn´t make for easy reading and much of it is not easy to understand, as the terminology is of a legal nature.So what we intend to do, over the next few weeks, is to take many of the issues raised in the Council Meeting and discuss them in this blog. So please, read on and then follow the story as it unfolds in the weeks to come.

Notes from Ordinary Plenary Session of Bedar Town Hall held 27 Jan 2012 at 7:30pm  

In attendance were the Mayor, the Town Secretary, four PSOE councillors (one absent) and all three Opposition councillors.  In the public were members of the local English and Spanish press (Costa Almeria News and Diario de Almeria) as well as ten Local residents mainly non-Spanish. 

The Mayor first mentioned the copies of the “Guia de Concejal”, a guide for procedural matters for town councillors prepared by the Junta de Andalucia, which had been distributed to each councillor.

He also explained the delay in calling the plenary which represented the fourth quarter 2011 session that normally would have been held in the fortnight following the start of the new year.  He said it was caused by the delay in the finalization of details concerning the employment workshop mentioned in Point 5 below on the Agenda.

 1.  The Minutes of the previous plenary of 25 Oct 2011 were passed unanimously.

 2/3.  Acknowledgement of the rulings made by the Court of Contentions No. 2 in Almeria and the Hall of Contentions of the Superior Justice Tribunal of Andalucia in Granada and adoptions of agreements for the execution of same.  (Editor’s Note: Point 2 refers to a suit brought by several El Pinar residents against the developer of Sector 1 of El Pinar and the Bedar Town Hall for incorrect construction of the Junta of Compensation and other matters related to their “land grab” case.  Point 3 refers to a suit brought by the same parties for allowing proposed construction in El Pinar on protected land. The court ruled in favour of the El Pinar residents and against the Town Hall and the Developer).

The Town Secretary said that the two rulings referred to suits brought by El Pinar residents Spencer, Bowling, et al and then declined to read the rulings out loud because he said they were quite long.  The Opposition councillor then read a prepared statement with the following major points:

We understand that Point 3 deals with the cancelling of the Plan Parcial of Sector 1 in the planning of El Pinar and Point 2 with the cancelling of the statutes and governing bases of the Junta de Compensacion of the Plan Parcial…If the Plan Parcial is null, so too must be the statutes and governing bases.  As to the cancelling of the Plan Parcial, we understand that this is because of the existence of a LIC (protected zone) which affects the Plan Parcial…

We also ask ourselves how it is possible that the PSOE claims to give so much importance to the environment and yet how it has failed here in practise.  We wonder if they will remedy this situation where Sector 1 is concerned and we hope that in the future, the necessary importance to the environment and sustainable development is made, not only in words but in deeds…

We ask ourselves how it is possible that certain residents have had to fight for four years in the courts, as well as another four years before getting their matter to court, in order for the law to be carried out. ..Finally, we wish to congratulate those residents who have suffered and paid for these lengthy proceedings for confronting the administrative authorities – something we believe could have been avoided (from the beginning).

The Mayor then argued that in 1996, when the modification of the Plan Parcial related to the suits was made, there had been no regulations requiring planning procedures in LICs.  He also said that only part of the land under dispute, some 600 sqm, was actually in the LIC.  He then attacked, without naming the parties, the residents who had had the affrontery to build a home without a proper building license and who then requested their 3000 sqm to be removed from the Plan Parcial, thereby denying the town hall their just due in land appropriation and contribution towards infrastructure.  (Editor´s Note: Watch out for blog postings  - and possibly local press coverage - to further clarify the case and to rebut the Mayor’s accusations.)

4.  Modification No. 2 of PGOU and adaptation of Normas of Bedar 

The Mayor explained that given that parts of Bedar are now included in the LIC, they had been advised to make quite substantial changes in the PGOU so that people whose land is affected can still carry out entrepreneurial activities.  He referred in particular to the Department of Agriculture and Livestock without giving any further explanations. 

The Opposition spokesperson then requested the formation of a Planning Information Commission so that such matters could be made public and in a language accessible to local residents.  The Mayor replied that these matters were exceedingly complicated and that he was sure the Opposition would ultimately support his proposed changes.

The motion was passed, five votes in favour from the PSOE group to three against from the Opposition.

5.  2012 Employment Workshop for Bedar

The Mayor said that Bedar had received a subsidy for approx. 276,800€ to organise an employment workshop in ecological agriculture and food preparation for 12 participants + instructor.  The Opposition requested specifications regarding the selection process.  The Mayor explained that procedures were decided by the Junta de Andalucia; that the selection process began at a national level; that the applicant had to make an initial application with SAE, to the relevant administrative body; that candidates who passed the first round would be notified in March/April to attend a second round personal interview.

The motion was passed unanimously.

6.  Motion from Popular/Independent Group to change location of proposed Mining Museum

The Opposition spokesperson read the motion which contained the following main points:

It appears there are plans underfoot to establish a museum in the school in Serena…Although local residents have not been informed, we understand this refers to the ethnographic and mining museum previously mentioned several times by the Bedar town hall...for which we believe that a 60,283.65€ subsidy has been received… This sum should be enough to carry out the project but several problems remain.

We think the proposed location in the centre of Serena which can only be reached by a narrow, winding road and where there is a complete absence of parking space, especially for buses. This demonstrates that there has been no real planning related to this venture. .. This location is also far from the respective mining and water walking routes which Bedar is trying to promote as well as the Tortoise House… We also decry that no qualified locals were invited to participate in the original planning of this project although they have since been approached to contribute information.  We also do not understand how, in these difficult times, no employment was provided for unemployed locals in regards to this project.

Based on the aforementioned arguments, we propose that the Bedar Town Hall reconsider the location of the Mining Museum bearing in mind the town’s future tourism needs, including the fact that tourists might also want to visit the town of Bedar, and so that local businesses and construction companies might benefit financially from the project.  Also that the Bedar town hall attempt to provide employment for local residents during the creation of the Mining Museum.  

In his rebuttal, the Mayor first attacked the new PP president of Spain, saying that for years Sr. Rajoy had been saying that raising taxes would cause more unemployment, and that now, after only 15 days in power, he had raised taxes.  As to the accusation that local residents were not advised about the Mining Museum, the Mayor said that residents were first told of the proposed plan in the PSOE’s electoral campaign of 2007 and since residents had chosen him to be Mayor, that indicated that they had tacitly approved the project.  He said that he had in fact approached several local residents, as well as a member of the Opposition group itself, to be involved.

He said the choice of Serena as the location for the Mining Museum was to revitalise the area.  He said he would be amused to hear what Serena residents were going to think when they hear that the PP group doesn’t support the choice of their hamlet. 

As to the accusation that he did not provide employment to locals, he then cited four names of residents who had been employed by the town hall for six months.  He then added that roughly half of the 60K euro budget for the Mining Museum had been earmarked for works to renovate the old Serena school and that all contracts had been given to local tradesman, again naming the parties.  He said the only work which had been granted to non-local tradesmen was making the showcases and this only because there was nobody in Bedar capable of doing the work.

The Opposition spokesperson defended Rajoy’s change of stance regarding taxes by saying that conditions had changed over time.  Against the Mayor’s argument that residents had been informed about the project in 2007, she said we were now in the administration that began in 2011 and that information the Mayor was providing now would have been welcome earlier. Finally that the one area which was not mentioned in his breakdown of expenses for the Mining Museum was the information for the contents of the museum which could only come from locals. 

The Mayor began speaking again about Sr. Rajoy and then interrupted himself, saying that it was better to stay on the Agenda.

The motion was overruled, five votes against from the PSOE and three in favour from the Opposition.

7.  Motion from Popular/Independent Group to change location of Bedar weekly market

The Town Secretary read the motion which contained the following main points:

The current location of the weekly market blocks traffic to the post office, the school and even the town hall…Local businessmen have complained about how this affects their operations and have previously filed complaints with town hall, the last time in 2010 where they gave suggestions for suitable alternate locations for the market where nobody would be adversely affected. Both petitions were ignored.

In the meantime, one of the businesses, the souvenir shop, has been forced to shut down.  This is particularly unfortunate given the ecotourism focus that Bedar has been trying to promote in the press and other media.

We also decry, in these difficult times, the lack of support from the Bedar town hall of local businesses, for example, when the town hall purchases products from outside suppliers for its fiestas and other activities, instead of those produced locally.   

We present the following reasons, gathered from complaints of local businesses, as to why the location of the weekly market should be changed:

·    Many delivery vans can’t reach the businesses when traffic is cut and cannot justify making a detour for just one delivery. 

·    Residents who find it difficult to get to the shops in Bedar will go to other commercial areas with easier access.

·    Bedar residents with cars, especially the elderly or handicapped, are especially affected when normal traffic is disrupted. 

·    In the case of a real emergency, the blocked road could cause serious problems. 

We propose that the town hall urgently:

·    Returns the location of the weekly market to its previous location with improved organisation of stands and a requirements that the vehicles which bring the stands be parked elsewhere

·    Moves market location to parking lot by cemetery which is both large enough for all merchants and still conveniently located

We also propose that the Bedar town hall henceforth give priority to locally made products when making purchases for its fiestas or other activities.

Once again, the Mayor replied at length to this motion, referring to notes on several occasions.  First he maintained that Bedar has two main arteries and another seven access points, which he then named, asserting that in the event of an emergency, there were plenty of ways for traffic to circulate.  He claimed that if the emergency occurred on a Wednesday morning, an ambulance could pass without any difficulty.  He said that in the unlikely event of a major emergency, it would take only 20 minutes to dismantle the market, less time than it would take for emergency services to reach Bedar.  He further claimed that it was possible for a car to reach any of Bedar’s public services or commerces, although he did concede this would depend on the size of the vehicle.  He also added he did not believe that any delivery vans were deterred by the tiny weekly market. 

He then went on to say that of course the town hall always supported the local market.  He stated that he did not believe that the arguments made in the motion were the real issue.  He explained how after each election, depending on the rise or fall in the number of votes garnered, it was necessary to analyse the reasons and to look at external factors.  He then claimed that in the eight years since he was elected in 2003, he had granted work to 16 local companies for a total of 627,500€ or over 12 mn old pesetas per annum. 

The Mayor then launched an attack on a blog posting, purportedly written by someone from the Opposition group, where the writer criticised the choice of a builder for a statue found in one of Bedar’s squares as evidence of the town hall’s unquestioned support of construction as the only viable future for the town.  The Mayor said it was lamentable to ridicule anyone who had contributed so much to the growth and prosperity of the town.  

The motion was overruled, five votes against from the PSOE to three in favour from the Opposition. 

8.  Motion from PSOE on supporting “Encamina2” plan (relates to Junta de Andalucia plan for the construction of roads and accesses to agricultural farms)

The Town Secretary read a prepared statement released from the PSOE regarding the arguments for this plan.  The Opposition spokesperson said the group would be voting in favour but asked to know when the plan would be in fact put into place.  The Mayor replied that it had only been three months since the plan was first made public and six months were allowed for its activation.  He further explained that some 100,000€ were earmarked for Bedar which would be used for the access road from Los Matreros.

The motion was passed unanimously.

9.  Motion from PSOE on supporting plan related to agricultural employment (currently PFOEA, previously PER)

The Town Secretary read a prepared statement released from the PSOE regarding the need for providing supplementary income to agricultural workers who were struggling to adapt and survive during these difficult times.

The motion was passed unanimously.

10.  Motion of PSOE in defence of agriculture in Almeria

The Town Secretary read a prepared statement released from the PSOE regarding the unfair competition in agriculture from Morocco, Spain’s principal competitor, and in particular the practice of dumping produce at below cost.  It mentioned that the EU was currently making a new agreement with Morocco which would further harm Spanish farmers.  The statement concluded with several recommendations, including one whereby Bedar would agree to show its disapproval of the proposed new EU/Morocco agreement.

The Opposition spokesperson said that this measure did not affect Bedar residents.  The Mayor replied that since agriculture represented one of the largest sources of revenue for Almeria province, the town hall was under a moral obligation to support the motion.

The motion was passed unanimously.

As there were no Urgent Matters, Requests or Questions, the session was adjourned at 20:45.

Editor´s Note: Readers should be encouraged to know that in the five years since this editor has been attending Bedar town hall plenary sessions, this session resulted in the most information that the Mayor has ever divulged regarding town hall matters, expenditures and other procedures.  We believe this is because the Opposition group is now working effectively, raising concrete and specific questions to which the Mayor, in his zeal to defend his actions, can only rebut by giving real information.  We sincerely hope that he will begin voluntarily releasing similar information of public interest, on a regular basis, without requiring the Opposition to submit written motions and questions several months in advance.