The Plenary of La Laguna approved the municipal budget for 2025 yesterday, with the votes from the Government Group (PSOE and CC), the abstention from the PP, and the rejection from Vox, united can be, Drago Green Canarias, and the councillor not attached.
The municipal accounts for this year amount to 210 million euros, reflecting a drop of 3.07% in comparison to those for 2024 (216 million euros). The consolidated budget, which includes that of the City Council, the autonomous bodies for sports and musical activities, the Urban Planning Management, and Muvisa, totals 226 million euros. The budgets will take effect 15 days after their publication in the BOP, provided there are no objections. Finance Councillor Paqui Rivero advocated that this is a “realistic, cautious and balanced budget, maintaining the expenditure lines of previous years, focusing on enhancing social services, housing, culture, security, and infrastructure for the social cohesion of this municipality.”
Rivero also noted that the accounts are set within “an international and national setting characterised by considerable economic uncertainty, which has been alleviated by positive momentum and national growth.” He highlighted that La Laguna concluded 2024 “with a 15.82% unemployment rate,” representing a decrease of 1.67% compared to 2023, in a region experiencing continuous population growth.
The mayor outlined the key items and reminded everyone that the 2025 budget “is fully financed through our own resources,” contrasting it with the 2024 budget which incorporated a loan of 18.5 million euros that will continue to be utilised for various projects this year.
In the meantime, Fran Hernández, Councillor for Municipal Services and spokesperson for CC, argued that “these budgets epitomise a balance between financial responsibility and addressing the genuine needs of the citizens, despite attempts to misrepresent them,” referring to opposition criticism. “A significant budget that fosters the development of our municipality,” he stressed.
From the opposition, the spokesperson for United can, Rubens Ascanio, condemned the “clear lack of political management” within the budget and denounced the reduction of funding in areas such as investment, social welfare, heritage, and the environment. “This conservative budget is not what La Laguna deserves,” he concluded.
Carmen Peña and Alberto Rodríguez from Drago Verdes Canarias expressed that there are “superfluous” areas of funding, such as those for tourism, festivities, and management bodies, advocating for the reallocation of six million euros to “more beneficial initiatives for citizens.”
Meanwhile, the PP spokesperson, Juan Antonio Molina, claimed that “this is the budget of a fatigued government that has exhausted its ideas, lacking the ability to manage and does not reflect the reality of many towns and neighbourhoods,” further denouncing the fiscal pressure. Vox spokesperson, Manuel Alejandro Rodríguez, critiqued that the local government is only “capable of executing half of the annual budget,” thereby “losing credibility.”
Amendments
Regarding the amendments, Unidas submitted one for the entire accounts, which was rejected with votes against from the local government, Vox, and the councillor not attached, alongside the abstention of Drago and the PP.
None of the 27 partial amendments submitted by Unidas, valued at 3.7 million euros, or those from Drago, seeking six million euros, were approved, save for one from CC, unanimously accepted, to rectify a technical error and secure funding for community entities. The auditor had previously indicated that some amendments could not be accepted due to their technical infeasibility or because they breached budgetary balance. The PP and Vox did not put forth any amendments.
During the discussion, Unidas councillor Idaira Afonso mentioned that it seemed the local government would accept three of the 27 amendments, although ultimately none were approved, much to the party’s surprise.
PSOE spokesperson Badel Albelo responded that the vast majority of amendments were already incorporated into the budgets, while others were technically unviable or fell under the purview of different administrations. “This does not imply that we are not open to collaboration. We extend our hand to work in the form of motions,” he stated.
