You do come across some strange snippets of suspect information. A recent example, in the form of a comment, said that a business owner with a large-scale apartment block (fully tourist) had told the person who left the comment that "responsibility for defining who can/cannot rent has been passed to the local mayor".
Firstly I wondered what this large-scale (fully tourist) apartment block could mean. One has to suppose that it is one of those buildings with a tourism ministry licence with an activity as tourist apartments - the AT designation. If so, then the rentals' legislation is irrelevant. But more importantly was the bit about the local mayor. Where does this stuff come from? A mayor, a town hall is in no position to make this definition. A mayor may be, will be consulted about provisions stemming from the holiday rentals' law, but it is the Council of Mallorca which defines where rentals will be (the zoning) and it is the tourism ministry which grants licences (or not).
If mayors really were in this position, then this week's meeting in Pollensa with Miquel Àngel March would have had a quite different outcome. The mayor and Tomeu Cifre Bennàsar (urban planning) met with the Puerto Pollensa and Cala San Vicente residents' associations, the Pollensa trade association, the Pollensa restaurants' association and the association for holiday villa businesses. The result of the meeting was a lemon. The mayor said that he believed that there will be few restrictions on holiday rentals in Pollensa, suggesting that Mercedes Garrido, the Council of Mallorca councillor with ultimate responsibility for zoning decisions, has intimated this. The mayor may be right, but he was making it clear - as if this were needed - that it isn't he who makes these decisions.
They got together presumably so they could lobby the mayor in making the strongest possible representations to the Council. The mayor, one assumes, is already fully aware that Pollensa's tourism economy has a high dependency on rentals. He would probably already have known, as the Cala San Vicente people pointed out, that this part of the municipality is particularly reliant. Rentals, the Cala San Vicente association said, are a question of "survival" for what is the "most depressed" area of Pollensa.
The mayor, it shouldn't be forgotten, is a former spokesperson for GOB, the environmentalists. They were the ones leading the "massification" demo in Palma last month. They are the ones who are agitating for limits. Rentals are intimately linked to the issues of massification and limits. But the mayor represents the whole of Pollensa, he is a guardian of municipal welfare, well-being and wealth. I wonder what he really thinks about rentals.
There won't be much zoning in Pollensa, said the mayor. Does he know this for certain? And the point with zoning is that even if there little of it, there is still the issue of the allocation of rentals' places. These have to be decided - almost 43,000 are available - for the whole of Mallorca: private accommodation and hotels. The amount is not great, if there is to be anything like some equality in distribution, while Pollensa - as we know - already has an exceptionally high number of legal rentals: the proportion is much greater than anywhere else.
It isn't just a fear that apartments won't be legalised in Pollensa. There is a further fear. It is raised by the following clause in the legislation: "It will not be possible to commercialise tourist stays in any dwelling for which a sanction has been imposed for a serious or very serious infraction of urban legality, so long as this legality remains unrestored." Has been imposed or could be imposed.
Pollensa, as well as being known for its high number or rental properties, is now just as well known for its urban planning infractions. The anti-corruption prosecution service demanded documentation from the town hall. It has been handed over. The Council of Mallorca's Agency for the Defence of Territory will be interested. We are talking here about villas, and it is a question not of holiday rental legality but of legality full stop. The tourism minister, Biel Barceló, when explaining that existing rentals will be unaffected by the legislation did provide a caveat: so long as the properties are themselves fully legal.
Showing posts with label Legality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Legality. Show all posts
Monday, October 16, 2017
Tuesday, April 04, 2017
The Defectors Of Pollensa
There was a good deal of talk about defection in Pollensa last week. There were two defectors. One was Martí Roca, the former councillor from El Pi who was ejected by the party but remains a councillor ("non-accredited"). A motion was raised, egged on by the El Pi apparatus which doesn't otherwise have a councillor and enthusiastically proposed by the ruling coalition of the Junts (Altogether Now, Altogether Now). Defection was to be officially abhorred. The motion failed. Of those against were the Tots, the creation of ex-mayor Tomeu Cifre. He defected from the PP when he fell out with Bauzá.
Yes, Cifre was a defector, but there again he was a fairly honourable one. He'd had enough of Bauzá (many others had but didn't take such action) and did what he did - form another party, indistinguishable from the PP, just with a different name. Roca, though, wasn't a defector as such. How could he have been? He was chucked out of the party. That isn't the same as defection.
The Alternativa, abstaining on the motion, took the view that El Pi were the last ones to be giving lectures on defection. They had, after all, been formed with the help of one-time Manacor mayor Antoni Pastor, a defector from the PP. Which was also wrong. Pastor was a much earlier objector to Bauzá than Cifre. He was thrown out of the PP. How could he have been a defector therefore?
If you want an example of defection, then you can go back to the 2011 election in Alcudia. A PSM (Mallorcan socialist) councillor, Carme Garcia, was elected. She then threw her lot in with the PP and allowed it to run the town administration. Had she not, the PP would not have had a majority. Removed from the party, hers was a case of defection. You don't just let the enemy in as easily as that and secure yourself a post as one of the deputy mayors.
Back in Pollensa, the further defection involved the mayor. Miquel Àngel March was once the spokesperson for GOB. He's as enviro-conscious as it gets. Yet, there he was, seemingly backing a proposal which, although it didn't spell it out, was calling on the tourism ministry to exempt holiday rental villas that aren't strictly speaking legal. This is because, under the forthcoming legislation, such villas cannot be official if they a) have any pending infraction for planning violation hanging over them or b) do not have a certificate of habitability. This latter aspect means, for instance, being unable to show how - to put it bluntly - shit is dealt with.
As a committed GOB-ite, it might have been thought that March would be firmly opposed to any exemptions. However, there is of course the awkward situation in Pollensa that without holiday rentals the tourist economy would collapse. Even a GOB-ite can understand that.
The Alternativa were not satisfied. They accused the mayor of ideological defection, an allusion to the Roca motion, and one which apparently left councillors examining their shoes while the tourism councillor made a brave attempt at explaining things and March maintained an undignified silence.
The tourism ministry, responding to this, said that if properties don't comply, then they're going to have to, if they want to remain legally registered holiday rentals. The ministry's position is, one would suggest, perfectly reasonable.
Defection or not, March knows he faces a very awkward situation. Ideologically he would be opposed to liberal application of rentals' legislation, but as a defender of Pollensa interests he would be mad to be. The crunch is going to come with all the zoning that it is to be done. Tourism minister Barceló has intimated that currently registered rentals' properties could be de-registered. Villas which are fully legal might conceivably fall outside the zones. Then there are apartments, ones which may or may not become eligible for legal registration. If they do become eligible, then they will be part of the wider narrative of the devil's work of tourist saturation, a narrative to which GOB is an adherent.
What more defection might there yet be?
Yes, Cifre was a defector, but there again he was a fairly honourable one. He'd had enough of Bauzá (many others had but didn't take such action) and did what he did - form another party, indistinguishable from the PP, just with a different name. Roca, though, wasn't a defector as such. How could he have been? He was chucked out of the party. That isn't the same as defection.
The Alternativa, abstaining on the motion, took the view that El Pi were the last ones to be giving lectures on defection. They had, after all, been formed with the help of one-time Manacor mayor Antoni Pastor, a defector from the PP. Which was also wrong. Pastor was a much earlier objector to Bauzá than Cifre. He was thrown out of the PP. How could he have been a defector therefore?
If you want an example of defection, then you can go back to the 2011 election in Alcudia. A PSM (Mallorcan socialist) councillor, Carme Garcia, was elected. She then threw her lot in with the PP and allowed it to run the town administration. Had she not, the PP would not have had a majority. Removed from the party, hers was a case of defection. You don't just let the enemy in as easily as that and secure yourself a post as one of the deputy mayors.
Back in Pollensa, the further defection involved the mayor. Miquel Àngel March was once the spokesperson for GOB. He's as enviro-conscious as it gets. Yet, there he was, seemingly backing a proposal which, although it didn't spell it out, was calling on the tourism ministry to exempt holiday rental villas that aren't strictly speaking legal. This is because, under the forthcoming legislation, such villas cannot be official if they a) have any pending infraction for planning violation hanging over them or b) do not have a certificate of habitability. This latter aspect means, for instance, being unable to show how - to put it bluntly - shit is dealt with.
As a committed GOB-ite, it might have been thought that March would be firmly opposed to any exemptions. However, there is of course the awkward situation in Pollensa that without holiday rentals the tourist economy would collapse. Even a GOB-ite can understand that.
The Alternativa were not satisfied. They accused the mayor of ideological defection, an allusion to the Roca motion, and one which apparently left councillors examining their shoes while the tourism councillor made a brave attempt at explaining things and March maintained an undignified silence.
The tourism ministry, responding to this, said that if properties don't comply, then they're going to have to, if they want to remain legally registered holiday rentals. The ministry's position is, one would suggest, perfectly reasonable.
Defection or not, March knows he faces a very awkward situation. Ideologically he would be opposed to liberal application of rentals' legislation, but as a defender of Pollensa interests he would be mad to be. The crunch is going to come with all the zoning that it is to be done. Tourism minister Barceló has intimated that currently registered rentals' properties could be de-registered. Villas which are fully legal might conceivably fall outside the zones. Then there are apartments, ones which may or may not become eligible for legal registration. If they do become eligible, then they will be part of the wider narrative of the devil's work of tourist saturation, a narrative to which GOB is an adherent.
What more defection might there yet be?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
