The judge who presided over the case considered that the collection of circumstantial evidence was not enough to defeat the presumption of innocence. He considered that only the ‘merest hint’ of evidence was against the ex-mayor. Yet this was the case that Benavides feared most, but here he is again, acquitted.

The Public Prosecutor had recommended 2.5 years in prison for the each of the four accused: Juan Carlos Benavides, his wife, his right-hand man, Rafael Contreras and his wife – this second couple filed their divorces on the exact same day.

The judge stated that proof did exist that the maintenance allowance set aside by the Mayor and Rafael Contreras for their respective offspring was ‘fictitious,’ but it did not constitute a crime.

The judge also said that he was ‘surprised’ that as soon as both couples had settled on the said child maintenance – bear in mind that the ‘children’ in question are all adults with their own jobs and homes – the estranged wives had immediately demanded that the maintenance be paid in through the court, even though there was no real necessity for this: Rosario Benavides said that her “husband had a bad memor” as justification, whilst Rafael Contreras wife said that “there were things about her spouse that she did not like.”

The accusation held that the two couples connived to reduce their estates via these fictitious allowances to the detriment of their creditors. The defence, on the other hand, claims that the allowances were agreed merely to guarantee the well being of their offspring.

Finally, the judge clarified that as finally the four had been acquitted of the Tropical Fruits charge, where these men and twelve others faced a judicial consequence that would see them paying 1.5m euros… no creditors existed, therefore, they could not have been attempting to shield their estates from them.

Our readers are invited to make of this what they may, because there will be many and varied opinions.

(News: Almunecar, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

There is a precedent for this kind of motion: in Santa Fe the minority parties banded together and forced the Mayor of that town to take a pay cut. However, it is unlikely to prosper here as the minor parties do not count on enough council votes against the major parties who will vote against.

The proposal, which will be presented as a motion at the next plenary meeting of the Town Council on the 13ths of December, calls for the Mayoress to take a five-percent cut, so as to ‘set an example.’

The motion will also call for the Mayoress to do something about ex-Mayor, Juan Carlos Benavides’s salary as he has a salary that is almost 20% greater than hers, even though he is a mere councillor. They Mayoress earns 56,000 and Sr. Benavides earns, according to his tax declarations, 66,447.97 euros annually.

The reason for this anomaly is that councillor’s wages are calculated on the salary that they had to give up to become one. Sr. Benavides, whose profession is medicine; he is a G.P., even though he has been a mayor most of his medical career, would be entitled to this 66,000-euro salary as a doctor. However, according to the IU councillor, only if he occupied a department head position and worked shifts etc. This sum is based on a report that said he could earn that much if he were to dedicate his time to his medical profession – what it didn’t say is that he would earn it.

But the fact of the matter is that in these times of austerity, such salaries are completely out of step with what our politicians are asking – no, ‘telling’ – the average person what he must accept.

According to information supplied by Fermin Tejero, every councillor that receives a salary for being such earns 41,000 euros per annum, which coupled with the corresponding Social Security payments that the Town Hall must pay, ascends to 53,000 euros. At present the previous mayor’s party has three salary-earning councillors (amongst them Sr. Benavides with his controversial salary), the PSOE has one, the governing PP has six, and their allies, the PA has two.

The above arrangement was the agreement struck at the beginning of the 4-year mandate, points out PSOE leader, Francisco Prados, who claims that the IU motion is pure demagoguery. He says that any changes must be made through consensus.

Editorial Analysis: There are not enough doctors or teachers but an abundance of politicians, yet politicians instead of cutting back on their own numbers and salaries, prefer to make cuts in health and education.

This is painfully obvious to the man on the street, so it would not be unreasonable to draw the conclusion that most would not consider the call for cuts to politicians salaries as Demagoguery and that the only time their has been consensus amongst our politicians over wages has been when one of their number has proposed a pay increase.

Firstly, the fraudulent bankruptcy case has finally reached the courtroom, after months of deep investigation. This is the most difficult accusation that he has had to face and without doubt the most unlikely to see an acquittal due to the large body of circumstantial evidence, as the Public Prosecutor sees it.

Shortly after being found guilty over the Tropical Fruits Case, which condemned him and several others – amongst them his right-hand man, Rafael Contreras – to a staggering fine (over a million euros), both Juan Carlos and his wife, and Rafael Contreras and his wife, turned up before a judge to register a divorce. Both couples registered their divorces on the 22nd of July 2005.

Both men declared generous allowances for the ‘ex-wives’ and children, even though the said offspring were fully emancipated, having their own homes and jobs: Sr Contreras declared an allowance of 1,000 euros (500 euros for each of his children) and Sr. Benavides declared 1,150 for each of his two offspring. This effectively left both men ‘broke’ and unable to pay the huge fine that was facing them, and pending  an appeal before the Supreme Court.

To make matters worse, photos of a seemingly colourful ceremony in Morocco hit the press, which the Ideal newspaper gleefully published, showing Sr Benavides and his ‘ex’ being carried around on high, in full traditional costumes, like a “couple of newly weds” – hardly the picture of a broken marriage.

So, Rafael Contreras and Juan Carlos Benavides – or better said, their lawyers, have attempted to prove that the coincidence of both men filing for divorce on the same day, both claiming improbable maintenance allowance had nothing whatsoever to do with the men facing a devastating fine for a previous case, and that Benny’s Moroccan ‘reconciliation’ was proof of a mock divorce.

The hearing is over and the judges are deliberating…

Meanwhile, the provincial Public Prosecutor has raised another charge against Sr. Benavides, a well known lawyer and the ex municipal architect of Almuñécar for an apparent traffic of influence, or more accurately, allowing a private school to illegally erect a classroom.

However, as the classroom is a prefab and not a permanent fixture, there is very little chance of this charge prospering, however the said Public Prosecutor appears bent upon ‘firing as many rounds as possible in Benny’s direction’ in the hope that one of them will bring him down.

The hearing was set for nine in the morning but was over in minutes because the accused refused to testify. The defence had also cited five witnesses to declare in their clients defence, but only one of them had turned up, according to the Ideal newspaper.

The trial will continue tomorrow with the appearance of prosecution witnesses.

(News: Almunecar, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

The affair in question is covered in our precious article, Carambolo Controversy.

The Mayor, Trinidad Herrera, said that it was absolutely untrue and that her administration is adhering completely to the law, and on the reports provided by the municipal inspectors. The case against the campsite is still ongoing, as the defendants submitted an appeal.

She said that she laments the ‘twisted’ comments of Sr. Benavides, claiming that the Town Hall had notice of the TSJA findings back in January, whereas the said legal notice was registered as having been received on the 1st of September.

“It is a pity that Mr Benavides, who knows well the workings of legal proceedings, given his numerous and varied dealings with them, should dedicate his time to launching smoke screens and making insidious comments,” she commented with heavy irony.

(News: Almuñécar, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

CITCOM, which was supposed to open its doors next year, but in reality never got off the drawing board, was proudly announced by then Mayor, Juan Carlos Benavides, together with the Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce in Granada and the Delegado de Innovacion for the Junta.

The installations for this project, whose aim was to promote subtropical fruit grown in the area, were to be built in La Galera – this is the area above the Carabajio beach (which used to be known as the Eucaliptis Beach by long-time residents.)

The arrangement was for the Chamber of Commerce and the Junta to put up the 1m-euro budget and for the Town Hall to cede the 1,800 sq/m building plot. What the centre was actually supposed to do was to transform Chirimoya and mango fruit into derivative products; foodstuffs, cosmetics, etc.

The idea is an old one and a sensible one because the value of the area’s crop would increase manyfold. Furthermore, the centre was to provide advice to fruit farmers to make their products more competitive by designing sales strategies.

The Chamber of Commerce was going to provide 70% of the funds, which they in return received through the European Funds for Regional Development, and the other 30% was going to be provided by the Junta, as previously mentioned.

When the Central Government brought out a decree canceling obligatory payments to the Chambers of Commerce across the land  – those pesky little bills that all autonomos and companies used to receive, the C.o.C’s funds dried up. In the case of the Granada one, they suddenly saw their annual 2.5m euros disappear.

Faced with this sort of setback, the Chamber of Commerce understandably pulled out of their side of the arrangement, after laying off 40% of its staff and closing down many branches over the province.

(News: Almuñécar, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

Back in June, after the May local elections, all the opposition parties in Almuñécar, with the local PSOE amongst them, banded together to oust Juan Carlos Benavides from office. To be more accurate, as Sr. Benavides was had withdrawn his candidacy for the CA prior to the elections, he had already, technically left office as mayor, regardless of the elections results – Eva Gaitan headed the party’s list.

The end result was that the CA, even as the most voted party, lost control of the mayoralty, thanks to the opposition parties voting in favour of the PP candidate, Trinidad Herrera, as Mayoress of Almunecar. The PSOE, after having received strict instructions not to vote for the PP candidate, literally drew lots amongst their five councillors to decide which one of their number would secretly vote, for Sra. Herrera, as only one vote was needed to tip the balance in her favour.

Well, it is now clear why the provincial office of the PSOE was against the Almunecar PSOE councillors voting against the ex mayor’s party – there were succulent ‘second prizes’ to be had, one of which was getting control of the Mancomunidad, which had been firmly in the grasp of the PP, with the Motril Mayor, Carlos Rojas, as Chairman.

The New Mayor of Salobrena (PSOE), Gonzalo Fernandez Pulido, has just announced that he has reached an agreement with the CA to wrestle control away from the PP.

“The PSOE,” he explained, “in its legitimate right to make pacts with other political formations, has reached an accord with the CA which guarantees an absolute majority and [thus] stable government for the Mancomunidad during the next four years.”

Subsequently, the Mayor of Salobreña could possible take on the office as Chairman of the Mancomunidad (with the extra salary attached, naturally) For this, he needs the votes in favour of the CA councillors in Almunecar, which the pact guarantees.

So, whereas, the PSOE in Almunecar voted against the CA candidate, the CA councillors in Almunecar will vote in favour of the PSOE candidate for the Mancomunidad.

What’s in this for the Almunecar CA? There’s every chance that the pact contains the condition that Juan Carlos Benavides will occupy the Vice-Chairman’s seat on the Mancomunidad.

The Mayor of Salobrena argues that such a move is above municipal level politics and responds to the collective need of the 19 municipalities represented within the Mancomunidad; the collective need being a stable administration.

Armed with this new pact, the Mayor of Salobrena is demanding of the Mayor of Motril the convocation of a full board meeting of the Mancomunidad to elect a new chairman. He backs this demand, quoting the statutes of the body, which stipulated that a new board should be elected within 30 days of the new councillors taking office, fruit of the municipal elections (held on the 25th of May).

It is PP-controlled Almunecar that is holding things up, as they still haven’t decided which party members will be put forward to occupy their quota of posts in the Mancomunidad, which, according to the Mayor of Salobrena, is because they are still hoping that their party (the PP) will lead the Mancomunidad, as has been the case up til now.

In the last plenary meeting of the Almunecar councillor, the PP Mayoress refused to treat the Mancomunidad question as ‘urgent,’ as requested by the local PSOE councillors, lead by Francisco Prados, backed by Councillor Benavides for the CA. The Mayoress explained that her negative on the issue was because other municipalities (Salobrena/Albunol) had councillor quota issues pending, which would affect the voting within the Mancomunidad.

Whatever happens with the Mancomunidad and whoever rules over it, it does not change the fact that it is an expensive luxury that does little to improve things on the coast – most of its budget goes on salaries for its component members, in an organisation that has more department heads than departments; in other words, more bosses than workers.

Crisis, what Crisis, anybody?

(News: Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

The provincial court of appeal considered that when the ex-Mayor and other members of the municipal council stated that they didn’t know that the ground on which they had given the go ahead for the facilities was ‘not appropriate,’ it cannot be proved that they were lying. It pointed out that certain members of the Council did not occupy posts where they would have known such details, however one can be forgiven for thinking that the councillor in charge of urban development and the Mayor should have known this.

Furthermore, the judge at the court of appeal said that it cannot be proved that somebody was lying, unless there was a witness that would confirm that the accused had stated that they had known that it was illegal to build there.

It all started in 2004 when the Town Council signed an accord with a local land owner who ceded land for public use to be used for a sports facility. In that same plenary meeting it was agreed to draw up an agreement between the township and the Junta to build a sports hall ‘within the municipality;’ i.e., without mentioning a specific location.

Finally, an agreement was signed and the location stipulated, yet almost two years later, in 2006 the Junta denounced the Town Hall for approving the project. According to the Town Hall nobody said ‘boo’ in the Junta from 2003 when a modification to the PGOU was made, until 2007 when the Junta lodged the lawsuit.

The appeals court judge underlined the fact that the land on which the sports facility was built in 2005 was categorized as ‘sectorized building land’ and was not classified as ‘protected cultivation land’ as the Junta claimed.

So, the question that we ask ourselves, contemplating the above details, is: was the land suitable in a legal sense or not, and if it was not, being unable to prove that somebody was lying or not is hardly grounds for acquittal, surely?

The fact is that these councillors are paid bloody good money to do a job properly, so it is no defence if somebody working in the urban development department ‘didn’t know’ if they could build there or not, because you can bet your bottom dollar that if it were a private owner that had built where he should not, the Town Hall would not accept, “Sorry, I didn’t know.”

(News: Herradura/Almunecar, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

Ex-Mayor, Juan Carlos Benavides, had announced the awarding of the building licence on the 18th of May and used the hotel project as the main thrust of his election campaign.

According to a report from the Junta de Andalucia, to which the IU has had access to, they contacted the Town Hall calling for the withdrawal of the hotel licence because it transgressed area development laws.

Fermin Tejero, who is the leader of the local branch of the IU, said that he hopes that the new administration does not try to go ahead with the project without sorting out the problems first.

“For Benavides, it was an election theme, but we cannot continue with how things have been done in the past,” he said, adding, “that otherwise the new administration would get its ‘fingers caught.’”

The report says that the project must have the approval of the Board of Tourism before the Town Hall can issue a building licence. Furthermore, Sr Tejero considers that the project contained many gaps and ambiguities that the Regional Board of Tourism was unable to approve this project for a 5-star hotel (Note: in no documentation submitted by either the building developer or the Town Hall does it mention ’7 stars, but only a 5-star category).

“It’s not even clear if the project fits in with the definition of a hotel; i.e., an establishment that occupies one or more buildings, having stairs, lifts and and an [main] entrance,” he observed.

Thus, he said, the Board of Tourism contacted the Town Hall on the 20th of May saying that until all the necessary paperwork was presented they could not give a favourable verdict.

Timeline;
18th May: May and hotel developer make a joint press announcement to communicate that the hotel now had its building licence.
20th May: Board of Tourism communicates that it requires more documents to issue a favourable report so that the Town Hall could go ahead and award a building licence.
22nd May: Local elections
11th June: New Mayoress takes office.
30th June: Junta orders the Town Hall to annul the building licence.

So far, neither Sr Benavides’ party, the CA, the hotel developer nor the present Mayoress have
commented.

(News: Almunecar, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

“Because of his incomprehensible words, we can only question whether the gentleman really did speak with the Ministry of the Environment – perhaps he spoke with the wrong ministry – because it does not make sense that he says something that is not true, which we can demonstrate with official documents; ones that we know he knows exist and has access to himself,” reads the press release.

The CA says that it will not go into why he should make these claims, but will instead limit itself with supplying documentation that proves that the project was officially approved by the ministry in November 2007.

On the other hand, Censi Ruiz, who is 2nd-in-command of the local PSOE branch, says that her party wants to set up a committee, comprising of representatives from all the political parties, business and resident associations to work on a project that will enjoy the maximum consensus, so that when the Ministry has available funds, the new paseo can go ahead without local discord.

Interestingly, she said that her party had decided upon this course of action after she attended the meeting between the Ministry and the Town Hall, which appears to indicate that despite the CA’s claim, such a meeting did take place. However, the PSOE has made no comments on the dispute between the PP and the CA over the paseo project.

(News: Herradura, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)

Sr Ruiz Joya said that he had attended a meeting with provincial authorities, concerning the project that the ex-mayor had presented in a plenary meeting in 2008 and the nine million euros that were supposedly lost when the the then opposition parties rejected the project because of its compulsory purchase conditions – the PP consider the disruption to 1st-line property was too great. Subsequently, the ex-Mayor’s part (CA) repeatedly accused the PP of wasting the funds and job opportunities.

In this meeting Sr Ruiz Joya says that he was very surprised to learn that no paseo project had ever been approved by higher authorities, even though Sr Benavides had presented it as sign and dusted at the said plenary meeting.

Therefore, Sr. Ruiz Joya feels that Sr Benavides might have seriously misled both opposition council members and the residents of La Herradura with this “negative campaign” against the PP.

When asked where this figure could have come from, he said that the provincial department of the Ministry of the Environment had a permanent fund for coastal projects for the whole the Spanish coastline but that no funds had ever been alloted for the said paseo project in La Herradura because the project had never their received seal of approval.

Sr Ruiz Joya says they will work towards presenting an acceptable project to the ministry and trusts that a change in both the regional and national governments, come the next elections, will bring about positive developments.

The Gazette asked what the situation was with the private underground car park under Plaza Nueva and Sr Joya answered that it was operating but that the Town Hall did not agree with its operating hours; i.e., closing at 9pm every evening. He considered that during the summer at least it should be operating 24 hours a day.

(News: La Herradura, Costa Tropical, Granada, Andalucia)