Response to The Junta Board view on Cabrera History
14 February 2020
On the 12th February 2020, the Junta Board issued a letter to all owners in an email that contained the following attention-grabbing statement.
“We recommend that you urgently read all of the attachment to this email which explains the serious repercussions that will occur if the 1993 Cabrera funding agreement is rescinded with no alternatives immediately in place.”
Having read the three pages of English text very carefully, at no point in the document have we been able to find any explanation of serious repercussions that will occur if the 1993 Cabrera funding agreement is rescinded with no alternatives immediately in place.
So should we be concerned?
Under the Junta de Compensación statutes, the Junta Board are required to manage and maintain services to Cabrera. Moving from the null and voided 1993 agreement to the legal and above board Junta statutes does not change anything except the calculation base for billing costs on to landowners.
If all landowners meet their obligations, the money is available to the Junta and there should be no serious repercussions.
If we are incorrect in this assertion, we are sure the Junta board will be keen to correct us and we would welcome their comments.
Below is the full English text of the Junta letter which provides an interesting take on Cabrera history. In the first paragraph, it takes time to note that new owners may have been exposed to one sided opinions.
In the interest of ensuring that both sides of all arguments are always clearly heard, we have added our own notes to the text, addressing and where necessary, correcting the issues raised.
Dear owners,
This current unwanted unrest in Cabrera is repeated déjà vu for established owners and the following comments from the Junta is intended for the benefit of newer owners who may be unaware of the history of Cabrera and have only been fed a one sided opinion of the small group that are against the 1993 system that allows Cabrera to exist.
OPEN CABRERA: We should clarify that we have reported on these matters and also asked a lot of questions of the Junta Board that currently remain unanswered. We also note that the Junta correspondence and communications with the Home-owners is controlled by a very small group of people (with a lot of voting power). Essentially, the communication is controlled by Land Owners.
The junta recognises that it is not an ideal system but is has been a system that has worked, and by the use of volunteer, unpaid homeowner delegados, together with subsidised office and storage facilities, provides probably the lowest cost for service fees and water supply in the region.
OPEN CABRERA : The system that is claimed to have “worked” appears to have generated a significant level of concern and division in the Cabrera community. This would be evident if you carry out a review of the AGM minutes going all the way back to 1993.We would question, in light of recent events, the claim that Cabrera is the lowest cost supplier of services and water. We have seen no information to suggest this. Would the Junta Board be able to substantiate this claim?
To assume that the whole cost of running 200 Cabrera properties can be borne by a few landowners is both morally and more importantly, financially, untenable.
OPEN CABRERA : It has not been suggested that “the whole cost of running 200 Cabrera properties can be borne by a few Land-Owners.”. The cost is to be shared according to the Statutes between 200 Home Owners and the Land Owners.
The land owners under the Junta de Compensación statutes are required to bear the whole of the cost of running the 200 Cabrera properties. This cost is shared in relation to the area of land held by each landowner. We do not understand why the Junta claim that this approach is financially untenable. If all landowners pay their fair share of the costs, in accordance with the Junta statutes, then all costs will be covered. This means that the Junta could operate viably and successfully. It is therefore odd that the Junta would suggest that the reverse is the case.
We would also note that the law does not make moral judgements.
The law is the law.
We also suggest that working according to the Statutes has a number of advantages:
1. It encourages Landowners not to act as a ‘land bank’ and to speculate on the value of properties for decades.
2. It acts as a ‘natural brake’ on expenditure since everyone has to contribute.
Those applauding a totally inappropriate legal decision to the contrary, without any concept of the repercussions, would soon discover that theory and practice do not always align.
OPEN CABRERA: The legal decision, arrived at by the court, cannot and should not be deemed inappropriate. Simply put, the decision was taken after full consideration of the available facts and must therefore be respected. We would be interested in seeing a full explanation and statement of the noted repercussions, as anticipated by the Junta Board.
Instead of continually negatively knocking down the only system that has worked to maintain and service Cabrera for the past 27 years, we would welcome any positive plans together with detailed costings, on what alternative system could be put in place to ensure that Cabrera survives.
OPEN CABRERA: We would like to make it clear that we are actively seeking an improvement in the Cabrera Poligono 1 circumstances. We wish to see the Junta become legally compliant and we wish to see the strangle-hold on Cabrera progress removed.
We would like to see a little more openness and transparency in the operation of the current system. This is why we have sought clarifications on the accounts for 2018, the forecast for 2020 and the circumstances around the current legal attempt by Junta lawyers to overturn the court ruling on the 1993 agreement. As yet, we have received no answers from the Junta Board. We are still waiting.
Cabrera is sited in the administration area of the village of Turre but has always of necessity had to function independently of any outside assistance.
The local town hall administration has never been in a position to offer any help as it has itself been in central government administration for most of its existence, with a current ongoing debt in excess of 10 Million euros.
OPEN CABRERA: Until the Cabrera development is deemed complete, with all standards and requirements of Turre Town Hall met, it is required to function independently of any outside assistance. Turre’s financial circumstances are therefore irrelevant. It is the responsibility of the Cabrera developers to complete the development to required standards, to satisfy the Plan Parcial and transfer the completed urbanisation to Turre Ayuntamiento who will then deal with issues in the Cabrera, going forwards, as they would with any other part of Turre.
The new owners taking on the CRA mantle are probably unaware that the Junta lawyers that they complain about, recently saved all homeowners from the threat of a town hall takeover that would have had an ongoing cost in excess of 30,000euros for each Cabrera villa. And that was a conservative estimate based upon out of date costings
OPEN CABRERA: We would clarify that we have made no complaint about the Junta lawyers, or made any inference that they are not performing their duties to the highest professional standards when dealing with instructions received from the Junta Board. We have ,however, issued a Notice of Concern 001 to the Junta Board, regarding the decision of the Junta Board to seek legal nullification of the recent court ruling and we have also raised questions and asked for clarifications on this course of action. We still do not understand why the Junta would use homeowners’ money to employ costly lawyers to overturn a decision that would financially benefit the home owners. We look forward to a full statement from the Junta on this specific issue in due course.
We also note the claimed legal success that allegedly saved home owners around 30,000€ per property. Our understanding currently is that this claim may be misleading. We would suggest owners re-familiarise themselves with the May 2016 letter to all Cabrera owners in which Martín Morales talks openly on how costs would have been treated. The reassurances given on potential future payments are also worth noting.
The charges were for the plan to complete the infrastructure on the Town hall owned land in Cabrera for the construction of affordable cheap housing.
That threat was instigated solely by the now current mayor of Turre against opposition from all the other councilors in power at the time, including members of his own United Left Communist party.
Those owners that could not afford it were told that their properties would be confiscated. This is the same mayor that was instrumental in forming the CRA with the sole objective of dissolving the Junta de Compensacion.
OPEN CABRERA: We have insufficient information to comment on the above statement, but we do recognise that Martín Morales is the only Turre Mayor to date, to have attempted to force a resolution to the many problems faced by Cabrera. His investigations into the possible illegal issuing of First Occupation Licences and Building Permits may be another reason for the strength of the campaign against him.
We would again refer to the Morales letter, some of which may lend clues as to why a slightly negative commentary on the Mayor is given above. The recent Court Judgement seems to vindicate what he said in his letter [Document 1]:
http://www.opencabrera.com/document-library.html
Regarding the 1993 funding agreement.
It has been stated that the 1993 agreement was instigated because the original developers were bankrupt. That was not the case, but it true that the original founder of Cabrera, Peter Grosscurth, was having financial difficulties in progressing with the project.
The agreement was implemented to protect the owners from having to contribute toward ALL future infrastructure and indeed to ensure that those parts of Cabrera that had been completed would be maintained independent of any developers financing.
It was recognised that Cabrera was never going to be a quickly finished undertaking and income from development could be very transient.
OPEN CABRERA: The 1993 agreement has been ruled null and void by the courts after taking all the facts of the case into consideration and so it is not currently relevant to our situation. We would be very interested to hear how the Junta intends to proceed in the absence of this agreement and in accordance with the Junta statutes.
We also fail to understand how it was recognised as early as 1993 that “Cabrera was never going to be a quickly finished undertaking and income from development could be very transient”. We have to balance this statement against how many other successful developments have taken place in the Turre and Mojacar area since 1993.
This has proved to be the case as Cabrera has survived many recessions including the current ongoing results of the 2007/8 financial crash.
The 1993 agreement ensured that the cost of the services and ongoing maintenance was paid for by the users of the essential services.
The amount each owner paid was structured fairly and was simply dependent on the size of their built property. i.e. The payments for a small property in the village area is minimal compared to the owner of a large villa.
OPEN CABRERA: The Junta de Compensación statutes ensure that the amount each owner pays is dependent on the land area held and so the same fair and simple rules, noted above, apply.
The landowners were users of all the Cabrera services for the construction of some 200 homes, from which they profited. The landowners, as significant users, did not pay for the maintenance of these services for 27 years so the 1993 agreement seems to have failed in this respect.
The owners of large areas of wild open mountain land clearly make no demands on the urbanisation services and it would be morally unfair to expect then to contribute.
OPEN CABRERA: It is perhaps necessary to remind all home owners that the large areas of wild open mountain land referred to above represent the developer’s land bank. This is land held in the expectation of making a profit, either from the sale of plots, or of buildings erected on those plots, or simply through the sale of the land as wild open mountain land.
Under the statutes of the Junta de Compensación, no distinction is made on the use of the buildable land area held by either homeowner or developer. But under the Junta arrangements everyone must contribute their fair share towards the costs until the development has been completed. We would add that there are no moral arguments to be made here. The developers are under no obligation to retain their land assets if maintenance of them is considered to be too costly. The choice on retention is solely theirs.
We would point out that there have been no active developers or development in Cabrera for many years. It is self-evident that without this activity there has been no developer income being generated to support further infrastructure, let alone the service and maintenance of 200 existing properties.
It is only the application of the 1993 agreement that has allowed Cabrera to survive.
The pre 1993 laws that are quoted were designed for standard developments that would be completed in a short timescale.
OPEN CABRERA: The lack of development is an issue for the developers to address and there are many options open to them. We understand that many of the issues faced by the Cabrera today are a natural result of bad practice at a different time. We are, however, where we are and we hope that the current Junta Board will soon seek to establish a fully open and transparent relationship with home owners to find an effective way of working that both satisfies the Junta statutes and allows the Cabrera development to progress to completion.
At all meetings of the Junta with the legal and urbanisation authorities in Almeria over the past years the Junta have been advised that the laws did not anticipate or cater for plan parcial completion situations with elongated and exponential timescales like that of Cabrera.
Clearly the court that has made the current invalid judgement were totally unaware of any previous discussions. Not surprising as they failed to advise the Junta of the proceedings.
OPEN CABRERA: We have seen no notification that the current judgment is invalid. We note that the Junta Board are claiming that court procedure was not followed and that this is enough to nullify the decision of the court, albeit to the detriment of all Cabrera home owners, as well as at their cost. We look forward to a clarification from the Junta on why they have instructed our lawyers as they have.
It seems that the use of the words “current invalid judgement’ may put our Junta in ‘Contempt of Court’.
The Open Cabrera and CRA persons are also unaware or in denial of the millions that have actually been put into Cabrera by various developers that have been operating over the past 35 years.
None of this substantial cost has been born by any individual homeowners which according to the pre 1993 agreement states that they should all have been made to contribute.
OPEN CABRERA: We are fully aware that the Cabrera development cost millions and we are also fully aware that the properties in the development were then sold for millions more. How finances were subsequently handled and why the infrastructure is incomplete remains a mystery. We are hoping that the Junta Board can shed some light on how finances are currently organised but to date all of our many questions remain unanswered.
To emphasize the Ground Hog like, regularly re-occurring, aspect of this latest situation, the Junta below includes the section of answers that were given to the same accusation 4 years ago!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Extract Examples Reply from 2016............................................................... Since the very beginning of Cortijo Cabrera, Pol 1 history, not one single owner has ever been requested to pay for any of the new infrastructure.
Who paid for the road from the village main car park area to the Jasmine and the Alcazaba developments? It wasn't the owners of Cabrera, it wasn't developer Jose Cervantes who built those 2 developments, and it wasn't the Junta, it was Jose Jerez!
Who paid for the two treatment plants installed for the benefit of ALL of Cabrera including the above mentioned areas.
They were exclusively paid for by Jose Jerez and Segundo Ramirez paying for the electrical installation, the owners paid zero!!
Telefonica buried cable infrastructure, for the benefit of the village area which was again paid for by Jose Jerez.
The entire area, to and past the ranch: Jose Jerez paid for the entire infrastructure and Segundo paid for the electrical installations.
End of Extract ............................................................................................
OPEN CABRERA: The Groundhog day extract given above is simply a statement that the developers have, in the past, met some specified obligations. We also recognise that, not only have there been differences of opinion with the Home-owners but, it seems, there have been differences of opinion between the Developers as well.
It should be noted that if the 1993 agreement method of maintaining Cabrera is ever cancelled, there must be an alternative scheme ready to take over immediately or the urbanisation will quickly decay if the services are not maintained.
OPEN CABRERA: The 1993 agreement has been ruled null and void and so the Junta Board should be focused fully on how services will be delivered going forwards. Currently services are provided to the Junta by the developers. We have no reason to believe that services cannot be maintained, and find it odd that the Junta Board, who have a responsibility to ensure services are maintained, would suggest that they might not be.
The budget for Cabrera covers the services that are required for the urbanisation to function. Services are:
1 Door to door rubbish collection, 3 times a week in summer when most needed.
2 Supplying electricity for and maintaining street lighting.
3 Servicing and electricity for 3 water reservoirs with many associated supply pumps for the collection of spring and well water, purifying and distribution.
4 Payment of regular legal environmental checks. Consumption records and leak checks.
5 Servicing, fueling and positioning of generator for summer well water pumping.
6 Servicing of mains water supply leaks at short notice.
7 Servicing and electricity of sewage works involving 4 large pumps and associated bi- annual legal environmental sampling checks.
8 Servicing of broken/blocked sewage piping at short notice.
9 Servicing of Junta Land Rover for transporting water well generator, works trailer. Etc. 10 Organising and assisting in emergency works after heavy rain flooding, involving earth movement, road clearance, embankment rebuilding etc.
11 Emergency co-ordination and repairs to services damaged by wild bush fires.
12 Regular road sweeping and cleaning.
13 Regular urbanisation vegetation/gardening maintenance.
14 Damaged and worn road repairs and refurbishment.
15 Pest control, e.g. regular poisonous caterpillar spraying and removal. Feral cat control. 16 Urbanisation insurances.
17 Office services for urbanisation supervision, control, funding and advice.
18 Storage facilities for Junta equipment including valuable water pump diesel generator. 19 Supervision, wage and social services tax administration of Junta workmen.
OPEN CABRERA: We are pleased to see the above list of expenditures, though we note that some of the items listed appear to relate to costs that should perhaps be borne by the developers.
It would be good to see the annual accounts of the Junta presented in a similarly meaningful fashion to show the costs associated with these different activities. The 2020 forecast from the Junta appears to only include a few of these detailed costs. As noted earlier, we have raised numerous queries with the Junta Board regarding the 2018 accounts and the 2020 forecast to obtain explanations on the numbers. Nothing has been received, by way of response.
We would also note that a full specification of all activities, engaged in by the current services providers, could be produced and used to test how cost efficiently Cabrera is being maintained. The specification could be put out to tender in total, or perhaps split into smaller packages of work that could be assigned to individual contractors, as and when required.
For all of the above we in fact pay less per property than is collected in IBI by the town hall.
The town hall that admits they find it hard to justify the large IBI costs that they collect from Cabrera for such little return. i.e absolutely zero of any of the above listed services.
OPEN CABRERA: We also doubt that IBI payments currently represent good value for money, but would note that the Junta could work to develop closer ties with the Town Hall and encourage more positive involvement from the Town Hall with the Junta. A good relationship would benefit everyone and could well lead to more IBI-generous outcomes when the Town Hall takes decisions in the future.
We end this information notice by stating that your delegados trust that the majority of owners appreciate and support maintaining the current tried and tested financial system. However, we would welcome any positive plans for an alternative system identifying the required personnel and their location, together with detailed costings, demonstrating what could be put in place to ensure that Cabrera survives.
OPEN CABRERA: We would genuinely very much like to try and test the Junta financial system. That first requires answers to the many queries that we have raised. We also note, with interest, the request for positive plans for an alternative system. We believe we could make some recommendations but the requested costings would only be achievable once we’d received the required answers to, yes, you guessed it... the many queries we have raised.
As for Cabrera survival, we would remind everyone that the Junta Board are there to ensure that the Cabrera continues to run smoothly. Even with the court ruling, there is no reason to expect any issues, as long as everyone pays their fair share into the community pot!
Junta de Compensación de Cortijo Cabrera Pol 1
14 February 2020
On the 12th February 2020, the Junta Board issued a letter to all owners in an email that contained the following attention-grabbing statement.
“We recommend that you urgently read all of the attachment to this email which explains the serious repercussions that will occur if the 1993 Cabrera funding agreement is rescinded with no alternatives immediately in place.”
Having read the three pages of English text very carefully, at no point in the document have we been able to find any explanation of serious repercussions that will occur if the 1993 Cabrera funding agreement is rescinded with no alternatives immediately in place.
So should we be concerned?
Under the Junta de Compensación statutes, the Junta Board are required to manage and maintain services to Cabrera. Moving from the null and voided 1993 agreement to the legal and above board Junta statutes does not change anything except the calculation base for billing costs on to landowners.
If all landowners meet their obligations, the money is available to the Junta and there should be no serious repercussions.
If we are incorrect in this assertion, we are sure the Junta board will be keen to correct us and we would welcome their comments.
Below is the full English text of the Junta letter which provides an interesting take on Cabrera history. In the first paragraph, it takes time to note that new owners may have been exposed to one sided opinions.
In the interest of ensuring that both sides of all arguments are always clearly heard, we have added our own notes to the text, addressing and where necessary, correcting the issues raised.
Dear owners,
This current unwanted unrest in Cabrera is repeated déjà vu for established owners and the following comments from the Junta is intended for the benefit of newer owners who may be unaware of the history of Cabrera and have only been fed a one sided opinion of the small group that are against the 1993 system that allows Cabrera to exist.
OPEN CABRERA: We should clarify that we have reported on these matters and also asked a lot of questions of the Junta Board that currently remain unanswered. We also note that the Junta correspondence and communications with the Home-owners is controlled by a very small group of people (with a lot of voting power). Essentially, the communication is controlled by Land Owners.
The junta recognises that it is not an ideal system but is has been a system that has worked, and by the use of volunteer, unpaid homeowner delegados, together with subsidised office and storage facilities, provides probably the lowest cost for service fees and water supply in the region.
OPEN CABRERA : The system that is claimed to have “worked” appears to have generated a significant level of concern and division in the Cabrera community. This would be evident if you carry out a review of the AGM minutes going all the way back to 1993.We would question, in light of recent events, the claim that Cabrera is the lowest cost supplier of services and water. We have seen no information to suggest this. Would the Junta Board be able to substantiate this claim?
To assume that the whole cost of running 200 Cabrera properties can be borne by a few landowners is both morally and more importantly, financially, untenable.
OPEN CABRERA : It has not been suggested that “the whole cost of running 200 Cabrera properties can be borne by a few Land-Owners.”. The cost is to be shared according to the Statutes between 200 Home Owners and the Land Owners.
The land owners under the Junta de Compensación statutes are required to bear the whole of the cost of running the 200 Cabrera properties. This cost is shared in relation to the area of land held by each landowner. We do not understand why the Junta claim that this approach is financially untenable. If all landowners pay their fair share of the costs, in accordance with the Junta statutes, then all costs will be covered. This means that the Junta could operate viably and successfully. It is therefore odd that the Junta would suggest that the reverse is the case.
We would also note that the law does not make moral judgements.
The law is the law.
We also suggest that working according to the Statutes has a number of advantages:
1. It encourages Landowners not to act as a ‘land bank’ and to speculate on the value of properties for decades.
2. It acts as a ‘natural brake’ on expenditure since everyone has to contribute.
Those applauding a totally inappropriate legal decision to the contrary, without any concept of the repercussions, would soon discover that theory and practice do not always align.
OPEN CABRERA: The legal decision, arrived at by the court, cannot and should not be deemed inappropriate. Simply put, the decision was taken after full consideration of the available facts and must therefore be respected. We would be interested in seeing a full explanation and statement of the noted repercussions, as anticipated by the Junta Board.
Instead of continually negatively knocking down the only system that has worked to maintain and service Cabrera for the past 27 years, we would welcome any positive plans together with detailed costings, on what alternative system could be put in place to ensure that Cabrera survives.
OPEN CABRERA: We would like to make it clear that we are actively seeking an improvement in the Cabrera Poligono 1 circumstances. We wish to see the Junta become legally compliant and we wish to see the strangle-hold on Cabrera progress removed.
We would like to see a little more openness and transparency in the operation of the current system. This is why we have sought clarifications on the accounts for 2018, the forecast for 2020 and the circumstances around the current legal attempt by Junta lawyers to overturn the court ruling on the 1993 agreement. As yet, we have received no answers from the Junta Board. We are still waiting.
Cabrera is sited in the administration area of the village of Turre but has always of necessity had to function independently of any outside assistance.
The local town hall administration has never been in a position to offer any help as it has itself been in central government administration for most of its existence, with a current ongoing debt in excess of 10 Million euros.
OPEN CABRERA: Until the Cabrera development is deemed complete, with all standards and requirements of Turre Town Hall met, it is required to function independently of any outside assistance. Turre’s financial circumstances are therefore irrelevant. It is the responsibility of the Cabrera developers to complete the development to required standards, to satisfy the Plan Parcial and transfer the completed urbanisation to Turre Ayuntamiento who will then deal with issues in the Cabrera, going forwards, as they would with any other part of Turre.
The new owners taking on the CRA mantle are probably unaware that the Junta lawyers that they complain about, recently saved all homeowners from the threat of a town hall takeover that would have had an ongoing cost in excess of 30,000euros for each Cabrera villa. And that was a conservative estimate based upon out of date costings
OPEN CABRERA: We would clarify that we have made no complaint about the Junta lawyers, or made any inference that they are not performing their duties to the highest professional standards when dealing with instructions received from the Junta Board. We have ,however, issued a Notice of Concern 001 to the Junta Board, regarding the decision of the Junta Board to seek legal nullification of the recent court ruling and we have also raised questions and asked for clarifications on this course of action. We still do not understand why the Junta would use homeowners’ money to employ costly lawyers to overturn a decision that would financially benefit the home owners. We look forward to a full statement from the Junta on this specific issue in due course.
We also note the claimed legal success that allegedly saved home owners around 30,000€ per property. Our understanding currently is that this claim may be misleading. We would suggest owners re-familiarise themselves with the May 2016 letter to all Cabrera owners in which Martín Morales talks openly on how costs would have been treated. The reassurances given on potential future payments are also worth noting.
The charges were for the plan to complete the infrastructure on the Town hall owned land in Cabrera for the construction of affordable cheap housing.
That threat was instigated solely by the now current mayor of Turre against opposition from all the other councilors in power at the time, including members of his own United Left Communist party.
Those owners that could not afford it were told that their properties would be confiscated. This is the same mayor that was instrumental in forming the CRA with the sole objective of dissolving the Junta de Compensacion.
OPEN CABRERA: We have insufficient information to comment on the above statement, but we do recognise that Martín Morales is the only Turre Mayor to date, to have attempted to force a resolution to the many problems faced by Cabrera. His investigations into the possible illegal issuing of First Occupation Licences and Building Permits may be another reason for the strength of the campaign against him.
We would again refer to the Morales letter, some of which may lend clues as to why a slightly negative commentary on the Mayor is given above. The recent Court Judgement seems to vindicate what he said in his letter [Document 1]:
http://www.opencabrera.com/document-library.html
Regarding the 1993 funding agreement.
It has been stated that the 1993 agreement was instigated because the original developers were bankrupt. That was not the case, but it true that the original founder of Cabrera, Peter Grosscurth, was having financial difficulties in progressing with the project.
The agreement was implemented to protect the owners from having to contribute toward ALL future infrastructure and indeed to ensure that those parts of Cabrera that had been completed would be maintained independent of any developers financing.
It was recognised that Cabrera was never going to be a quickly finished undertaking and income from development could be very transient.
OPEN CABRERA: The 1993 agreement has been ruled null and void by the courts after taking all the facts of the case into consideration and so it is not currently relevant to our situation. We would be very interested to hear how the Junta intends to proceed in the absence of this agreement and in accordance with the Junta statutes.
We also fail to understand how it was recognised as early as 1993 that “Cabrera was never going to be a quickly finished undertaking and income from development could be very transient”. We have to balance this statement against how many other successful developments have taken place in the Turre and Mojacar area since 1993.
This has proved to be the case as Cabrera has survived many recessions including the current ongoing results of the 2007/8 financial crash.
The 1993 agreement ensured that the cost of the services and ongoing maintenance was paid for by the users of the essential services.
The amount each owner paid was structured fairly and was simply dependent on the size of their built property. i.e. The payments for a small property in the village area is minimal compared to the owner of a large villa.
OPEN CABRERA: The Junta de Compensación statutes ensure that the amount each owner pays is dependent on the land area held and so the same fair and simple rules, noted above, apply.
The landowners were users of all the Cabrera services for the construction of some 200 homes, from which they profited. The landowners, as significant users, did not pay for the maintenance of these services for 27 years so the 1993 agreement seems to have failed in this respect.
The owners of large areas of wild open mountain land clearly make no demands on the urbanisation services and it would be morally unfair to expect then to contribute.
OPEN CABRERA: It is perhaps necessary to remind all home owners that the large areas of wild open mountain land referred to above represent the developer’s land bank. This is land held in the expectation of making a profit, either from the sale of plots, or of buildings erected on those plots, or simply through the sale of the land as wild open mountain land.
Under the statutes of the Junta de Compensación, no distinction is made on the use of the buildable land area held by either homeowner or developer. But under the Junta arrangements everyone must contribute their fair share towards the costs until the development has been completed. We would add that there are no moral arguments to be made here. The developers are under no obligation to retain their land assets if maintenance of them is considered to be too costly. The choice on retention is solely theirs.
We would point out that there have been no active developers or development in Cabrera for many years. It is self-evident that without this activity there has been no developer income being generated to support further infrastructure, let alone the service and maintenance of 200 existing properties.
It is only the application of the 1993 agreement that has allowed Cabrera to survive.
The pre 1993 laws that are quoted were designed for standard developments that would be completed in a short timescale.
OPEN CABRERA: The lack of development is an issue for the developers to address and there are many options open to them. We understand that many of the issues faced by the Cabrera today are a natural result of bad practice at a different time. We are, however, where we are and we hope that the current Junta Board will soon seek to establish a fully open and transparent relationship with home owners to find an effective way of working that both satisfies the Junta statutes and allows the Cabrera development to progress to completion.
At all meetings of the Junta with the legal and urbanisation authorities in Almeria over the past years the Junta have been advised that the laws did not anticipate or cater for plan parcial completion situations with elongated and exponential timescales like that of Cabrera.
Clearly the court that has made the current invalid judgement were totally unaware of any previous discussions. Not surprising as they failed to advise the Junta of the proceedings.
OPEN CABRERA: We have seen no notification that the current judgment is invalid. We note that the Junta Board are claiming that court procedure was not followed and that this is enough to nullify the decision of the court, albeit to the detriment of all Cabrera home owners, as well as at their cost. We look forward to a clarification from the Junta on why they have instructed our lawyers as they have.
It seems that the use of the words “current invalid judgement’ may put our Junta in ‘Contempt of Court’.
The Open Cabrera and CRA persons are also unaware or in denial of the millions that have actually been put into Cabrera by various developers that have been operating over the past 35 years.
None of this substantial cost has been born by any individual homeowners which according to the pre 1993 agreement states that they should all have been made to contribute.
OPEN CABRERA: We are fully aware that the Cabrera development cost millions and we are also fully aware that the properties in the development were then sold for millions more. How finances were subsequently handled and why the infrastructure is incomplete remains a mystery. We are hoping that the Junta Board can shed some light on how finances are currently organised but to date all of our many questions remain unanswered.
To emphasize the Ground Hog like, regularly re-occurring, aspect of this latest situation, the Junta below includes the section of answers that were given to the same accusation 4 years ago!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Extract Examples Reply from 2016............................................................... Since the very beginning of Cortijo Cabrera, Pol 1 history, not one single owner has ever been requested to pay for any of the new infrastructure.
Who paid for the road from the village main car park area to the Jasmine and the Alcazaba developments? It wasn't the owners of Cabrera, it wasn't developer Jose Cervantes who built those 2 developments, and it wasn't the Junta, it was Jose Jerez!
Who paid for the two treatment plants installed for the benefit of ALL of Cabrera including the above mentioned areas.
They were exclusively paid for by Jose Jerez and Segundo Ramirez paying for the electrical installation, the owners paid zero!!
Telefonica buried cable infrastructure, for the benefit of the village area which was again paid for by Jose Jerez.
The entire area, to and past the ranch: Jose Jerez paid for the entire infrastructure and Segundo paid for the electrical installations.
End of Extract ............................................................................................
OPEN CABRERA: The Groundhog day extract given above is simply a statement that the developers have, in the past, met some specified obligations. We also recognise that, not only have there been differences of opinion with the Home-owners but, it seems, there have been differences of opinion between the Developers as well.
It should be noted that if the 1993 agreement method of maintaining Cabrera is ever cancelled, there must be an alternative scheme ready to take over immediately or the urbanisation will quickly decay if the services are not maintained.
OPEN CABRERA: The 1993 agreement has been ruled null and void and so the Junta Board should be focused fully on how services will be delivered going forwards. Currently services are provided to the Junta by the developers. We have no reason to believe that services cannot be maintained, and find it odd that the Junta Board, who have a responsibility to ensure services are maintained, would suggest that they might not be.
The budget for Cabrera covers the services that are required for the urbanisation to function. Services are:
1 Door to door rubbish collection, 3 times a week in summer when most needed.
2 Supplying electricity for and maintaining street lighting.
3 Servicing and electricity for 3 water reservoirs with many associated supply pumps for the collection of spring and well water, purifying and distribution.
4 Payment of regular legal environmental checks. Consumption records and leak checks.
5 Servicing, fueling and positioning of generator for summer well water pumping.
6 Servicing of mains water supply leaks at short notice.
7 Servicing and electricity of sewage works involving 4 large pumps and associated bi- annual legal environmental sampling checks.
8 Servicing of broken/blocked sewage piping at short notice.
9 Servicing of Junta Land Rover for transporting water well generator, works trailer. Etc. 10 Organising and assisting in emergency works after heavy rain flooding, involving earth movement, road clearance, embankment rebuilding etc.
11 Emergency co-ordination and repairs to services damaged by wild bush fires.
12 Regular road sweeping and cleaning.
13 Regular urbanisation vegetation/gardening maintenance.
14 Damaged and worn road repairs and refurbishment.
15 Pest control, e.g. regular poisonous caterpillar spraying and removal. Feral cat control. 16 Urbanisation insurances.
17 Office services for urbanisation supervision, control, funding and advice.
18 Storage facilities for Junta equipment including valuable water pump diesel generator. 19 Supervision, wage and social services tax administration of Junta workmen.
OPEN CABRERA: We are pleased to see the above list of expenditures, though we note that some of the items listed appear to relate to costs that should perhaps be borne by the developers.
It would be good to see the annual accounts of the Junta presented in a similarly meaningful fashion to show the costs associated with these different activities. The 2020 forecast from the Junta appears to only include a few of these detailed costs. As noted earlier, we have raised numerous queries with the Junta Board regarding the 2018 accounts and the 2020 forecast to obtain explanations on the numbers. Nothing has been received, by way of response.
We would also note that a full specification of all activities, engaged in by the current services providers, could be produced and used to test how cost efficiently Cabrera is being maintained. The specification could be put out to tender in total, or perhaps split into smaller packages of work that could be assigned to individual contractors, as and when required.
For all of the above we in fact pay less per property than is collected in IBI by the town hall.
The town hall that admits they find it hard to justify the large IBI costs that they collect from Cabrera for such little return. i.e absolutely zero of any of the above listed services.
OPEN CABRERA: We also doubt that IBI payments currently represent good value for money, but would note that the Junta could work to develop closer ties with the Town Hall and encourage more positive involvement from the Town Hall with the Junta. A good relationship would benefit everyone and could well lead to more IBI-generous outcomes when the Town Hall takes decisions in the future.
We end this information notice by stating that your delegados trust that the majority of owners appreciate and support maintaining the current tried and tested financial system. However, we would welcome any positive plans for an alternative system identifying the required personnel and their location, together with detailed costings, demonstrating what could be put in place to ensure that Cabrera survives.
OPEN CABRERA: We would genuinely very much like to try and test the Junta financial system. That first requires answers to the many queries that we have raised. We also note, with interest, the request for positive plans for an alternative system. We believe we could make some recommendations but the requested costings would only be achievable once we’d received the required answers to, yes, you guessed it... the many queries we have raised.
As for Cabrera survival, we would remind everyone that the Junta Board are there to ensure that the Cabrera continues to run smoothly. Even with the court ruling, there is no reason to expect any issues, as long as everyone pays their fair share into the community pot!
Junta de Compensación de Cortijo Cabrera Pol 1