Second translation of the open letter from A.Garcia to C. Garcia.

[PSOE2011]

   Second translation of the open letter from A.Garcia to C. Garcia.  As it appears that the previous translation was not entirely clear, we hope that this secondary translation will clarify any doubts.


   AS IS WARRANTED, I HEREBY RESPOND.  Making it clear however that whilst I respect freedom of expression, there are times when one should remain silent, not enter into discussion or choose another route.

   I also will say that I will only respond to specific matters.

   TO BEGIN:
   
   1. BUDGETS.  I have been explaining over the past two years that the budget does not always equate to the final expenditure.  Anyone who has been Mayor for 20 years should know this, and as I have already told you before, in your last 4 years of mandate you approved the budget a year after the expenditure occurred, producing a 20% shortfall.

   2. 2000 dwellings in Los Llanos.  This area is classified exclusively for commercial and touristic use.  It does not include one single dwelling.  It has been dealt with on numerous occasions in the General meetings, and the minutes of those meetings are public.  Even your own people did not oppose the plan and you will remember that in the last meeting you did not vote against the proposal (you abstained), quite possibly because pressure of approval did not allow to vote against a plan which will generate employment and investment for our town.  We should not be mixing in public opinion, this was your opinion back in  2009. Either you have changed your mind yet again or in a campaign anything goes.

   3. Reclassifying land for building?  Show me one singlemeter which we have proposed reclassifying to build residential dwellings.  We are only trying to regularise those already built, and remember who owns them and when they were built.

   4. Are you realloy trying to compare the budgets in a linear form, for a town with 5000 inhabitants to those of 1.300?  Are you telling us that the level of staff, the costs, the prices, the income, etc. should be the same as in "your 20 years"'.  This is called correlation and you also have to take into account other variables.

   5. Requesting the transfer of the road.  I have already explained that this was a joint Arboleas-Albox request (I suppose you also think that Albox is wrong), which was through Public Works, to give it a sufficient budget to make it a boulevard. You should not be so obsessed with the commercial centre;  both this and the road improvement are for the benefit of the town.

   6. Dolmen.  Yes they bought the land, and now they cannot sell the houses, like so many others and no-one builds if they can´t sell.  And now I am going to get personal: I understand that it will not sit well with another construction company to have lost out on this purchase, because you form part of a group that was pusing for this licence, it is well documented.  However, in business there is always loss and gain.

   7. Don´t tell me that the plot in Los Torres on which your house is built is outside planning regulations!  Did you build on non-regulated land? Make no mistake and remember that this land was classified in 2001.  (I have never reclassified one single meter of my property?).

   8. Unanswered questions.  Give me one single example whereby you have not had a written answer or it has not been discussed in a formal Council meeting.  Of course it is different if it is not the answer you wanted, understandably.

   9. The Child Day Care Centre.  Look at the figures on the notice board, the construction has been adjudicated for over 100.000 euros less than you are claiming, this is called good business practice. Under this adjudication the following stipulations were made:  that it be done by a company with previous experience in building such centres, that the company should contract the workforce fromArboleas and that it must keep within budget.  So, the board convened to this effect, comprising a member of your part, agreed unanimously to which company the work should be adjudicated.  It is quite different that within your own party there has been disagreement as to the general interest.

   10. The duty of an opposition.  From what I can see, your duty is simply to oppose.  For example. In 4 years we have had approximately 35 Plenary Sessions, at approx. 8 matters per meeting, around 280 matters covered.
Can you tell me if you or any member of your group voted in favour of more than 10?
Can you tell me if any of you have supported something really important?
Do you really think that this can be called "responsible opposition", or is just a 4-year tantrum?
Why do you always find some superficial reason to oppose reasonable proposals?
I would remind you that you neither opposed nor supported measures such as:  the bridge at LaCinta, the Health Centre, the Nursery, the Morgue, the innovations to reclassify land currently classified as rustic, the park next to the school, all the works contemplated under Plan E, all those under Proteja, and many other very important points.  As this is reflected in the Minutes, I don´t think you can take it as a personal affront.

   As you can see, I have not made any personal accusations, I have only reflected real and contrasting data, I hope you will not take this on a personal level, I respect your 20-year administration and I hope that you will relate any queries to my 2-year administration, because if you want to go back 8 years when I was a mere councillor, then share your former success with those who were your councillors, today in our governing team, and above all with he who was your loyal vice-Mayor.

   I hope for the personal respect which you have promised, I know that you are a gentleman, that you will be elegant and will do so, and my apologies if we do not coincide again here. I now leave you with all those people with multiple personalities who are intent on tearing me apart, I am ready for it, it´s part of the job.

   Un saludo,
   Angel Garcia.