As if nothing had transpired, possibly due to the fact that they have not yet received the ruling from the Environmental Protection Agency, construction work on the industrial warehouse in Guaza, within the municipality of Arona, persisted yesterday morning as though it had not been halted by the regional urban planning authority since the 16th of this month, despite the executive director’s signature from the 13th.
As depicted in the accompanying photographs, the workers continued with their routine tasks on a property of the car rental company Canary Island Car (Cicar), purchased from businessman Diego Cano—who was also the developer of the El Camisón shopping centre that triggered a crisis, dismantling the absolute majority government of the Arona PSOE in 2020. This upheaval led to the formation of Más por Arona (4 councillors in May 2023) and the alternative governing body constituted by councillors critical of the former socialist mayor José Julián Mena, in coalition with PP and CC.
The resumption of work on this warehouse, which lies at the centre of the PSOE’s schism and its consequent loss of authority, has been reported to the Environmental Agency, the local court number 4, and the Civil Guard since last Friday. This action was taken by the original complainants regarding the reform and extension of the building, which they claim has been in continuous use according to their version and various reports from local Police (supported by neighbour testimonies) since 2012. However, there exists conflicting interpretations and documents from the local Urban Planning department, which has initiated an intense internal dispute between officials (the municipal secretary and secretary against architect Damián Hernández regarding the potential granting of a consolidated commercial use that had been extended and later attempted to be revoked), along with disagreements between Mena and the Urban Planning councillor with the PSOE, and currently, with Más por Arona, Luis García.
This councillor, indeed, testified last July before court number 4, stating he was unaware of the renovation and expansion works in this warehouse. Meanwhile, the complainants argue that these activities have been ongoing and reported since 2021 due to missing requisite permits and licenses, particularly the municipal major works license, the principal reason behind the Agency’s ruling to halt construction.
DECLARATION FROM THE COUNCILLOR
The complainants submitted a document to the court on the 17th of this month (complementing another from July 27th) asserting that the councillor “failed to tell the truth” in his statement by claiming ignorance of the activities. Furthermore, they remind that, on March 31 of this year, they had emphasised that these operations are deemed illegal since 2021 (their initial complaints), but “illegalizable” because they are occurring on rustic land (more specifically, according to the Environmental Agency, categorised as “unscheduled developable, akin to a rustic reserve”). They argue, therefore, that the defendant dishonestly maintained that he was completely aware that illegal activities were transpiring in the warehouses in question, for which he has exhibited a stance of absolute passivity.
They also challenge his claims that “overseeing these works was not his responsibility” since, in a resolution issued by the current mayor, the conservative Fátima Lemes (PP), dated June 30, 2023, “she delegates Luis García the inspection of construction and urban planning enforcement” of the council as the Urban Planning Councillor. Nevertheless, as the aforementioned document highlights, “he has maintained an attitude of total inaction, contrary to the unavoidable duty to exercise his restoration powers (art. 324 of the Land Law of the Canary Islands).”
However, according to the complainants, he ends up admitting in that same statement “that he was aware (having consulted information to craft his complaint) that the works in the Guaza warehouses were illegal. Notwithstanding this, construction has proceeded unabated from his statement to the present, and the defendant (in a presumably prevaricating conduct) has neglected to exercise his obligatory powers,” as stated in this document. Consequently, this group has lodged a complaint for an alleged crime of prevarication, forwarded the facts to the Environmental Agency, and demands immediate action due to the council’s “inaction.” They also note that the regional body itself highlighted the absence of a response from the council to its queries as of last July (the 24th).
POTENTIAL WITNESSES
Considering this series of events, the complainants are requesting that Court No. 4 summons the following officials from the local Urban Planning department as witnesses: the head of the management and enforcement service, Damián Hernández Fumero; the head of the legal division of the Planning department, Yurena Noda García; the head of the management section, Sergio Martín; and the head of the technical section, Ruth Rodríguez Montañez. They are also seeking the statement of the municipal secretary, Tania Rodríguez Reguiro, and the former Urban Planning councillor, Leopoldo Díaz Oda. Additionally, they are requesting that the council provide all documentation from files opened on the complaints concerning these “illegal works,” including those pertaining to urban planning enforcement and licenses, alongside a report from the local police on the current condition of the building in recent years.
These matters have already been raised with the local opposition from the PSOE in committees and council bodies, confirming the sharply contrasting interpretations between the Urban Planning Councillor and the Socialists. The “conflict” that initiated in 2020 persists with no signs of a truce or resolution.
