The mayor of Santa Cruz, José Manuel Bermúdez (CC), reported yesterday during a new local plenary session about the “intimidation” that the Ministry of Transportation is subjecting municipalities with over 50,000 residents to. This pressure involves compelling them to accept state funding for public transport in exchange for implementing low emission zones (ZBE), a measure that has already been rejected in several regions. In our case, this decision has been contested by the Vox municipal group.
The councillor elaborated that, as outlined in article 5 of the Royal Decree-Law dated January 28, 2025, “to obtain these funds, the State necessitates a responsible declaration confirming the effective execution of the ZBE. This does not consider the significant legal challenges surrounding this issue and the uncertainty it might entail for the municipalities involved. Consequently, I am deeply concerned about the implications that this obligation may carry. Projects have been invalidated by the courts, as seen in Madrid, Barcelona, Badajoz, Gijón, or following the French National Assembly’s decision to suspend its implementation across the nation, even against the president himself,” he stated.
The mayor described it as “outrageous that we must approve a ZBE to secure funding for public transport, particularly when such implementation lacks the legal assurance necessary to proceed.” In this regard, Bermúdez emphasised that “this predicament not only creates uncertainty for the City Council but also poses a serious threat to the funding for public transport in this city, leading to a potential legal and financial liability for the Council, which is additionally committing substantial budget allocations for an initiative that we cannot guarantee will continue.”
He asserted that “it is unacceptable to demand that we initiate something which does not possess strong legal foundations, contingent upon our ability to secure funds for public transport.” Therefore, he appealed to the Government of Spain for a “clarification on this matter because we cannot misrepresent the truth, as this could have financial ramifications and impact public transport in this city.”
Bermúdez made this declaration following a motion introduced by PSOE spokesperson, Patricia Hernández, who urged the Government to enhance the funding for Titsa to increase service frequencies and routes in areas such as health. Despite not gaining plenary consensus, the proposal led to accusations against the mobility councillor, Evelyn Alonso, who was criticised for her management of a mobility ordinance recently annulled by the courts.
In addition, the Plenary addressed the issue of motorhomes in specific areas of the municipality, particularly at Las Teresitas beach, where numerous uncivil incidents involving users of these nomadic vehicles are frequently reported. Following a motion put forward by VOX, which included input from the Adeje Autocaravan Club, the Council pledged to regulate and enhance monitoring of these vehicles, as well as explore options for establishing designated camping areas for caravans and motorhomes.
In this context, the Mobility councillor, Evelyn Alonso, announced that she would convene next week to discuss the potential introduction of a mobile application (app) that would enable local police to oversee parking for these vehicles in designated spaces, which “will facilitate better management.”
Additionally, she mentioned that “discussions are ongoing with the Cabildo to find a more extensive service area for parking and services for caravans, including facilities for waste disposal and camping spaces that will enhance the service offered.” Meanwhile, the spokesperson for motorhome users, Juan Luis Martín, emphasised that “we do not advocate for free camping but rather the overnight stay in designated areas, which remain insufficient in the case of Santa Cruz.”
During yesterday’s plenary, the two municipal parties set election dates for 2026, scheduled for May 4 and February 17. Furthermore, a motion from PSOE to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the surreal exhibition was supported. However, proposals to improve economic benefits for social care and promote the availability of vacant housing for affordable rents were rejected.
