In the heart of Puerto del Rosario, the political dynamics are heating up as opposition parties unite their voices against the Municipal Budget for 2026. This budget is set to undergo initial approval during the upcoming December plenary meeting. The Asambleas Municipales de Fuerteventura (AMF), the Partido Popular (PP), and Fuerteventura Avanza (FA) have all issued their press releases and amendments, converging on a critical point: the proposed budget does not adequately respond to the genuine needs of the municipality nor to the pressing structural challenges facing this bustling capital of Fuerteventura.
Leading the charge, AMF, spearheaded by María de los Ángeles Marichal, has submitted a comprehensive package of amendments totaling €2,020,535. The intention is to redirect the budget towards essential social policies and basic infrastructures. Marichal argues that the proposed document fails to address the current predicament of the capital, characterized by a housing emergency, deteriorating essential infrastructures, and a lack of medium- and long-term planning.
One of AMF’s flagship proposals emphasizes increasing rental assistance significantly—from an initial allocation of €200,000 to an ambitious €630,535. They suggest modifying the regulatory framework to extend affordability to a greater number of families in need. Additional focal points for the party include long-overdue infrastructural projects like the Puerto Lajas bridge, which they deem vital to prevent isolation during rainy episodes. Also high on their agenda are overdue investments in sports infrastructure and other commitments like the underground passage at the Reloj roundabout and repairs to the local wrestling arena’s ceiling.
The Partido Popular (PP) contributes its voice to the debate with a set of fourteen amendments targeting the proposed budget. A significant part of their critique revolves around the fiscal pressure being placed on local residents. PP spokesperson Ana Padilla has expressed grave concerns, describing the municipal accounts as reinforcing tax hikes, particularly via an increased waste collection fee, which she has branded a “sablazo”—essentially a blow to the pockets of the neighbors. The PP calls for a reduction of this fee by €1.5 million and urges the Cabildo of Fuerteventura to assist financially, especially since Puerto del Rosario solely handles the island’s waste management.
Furthermore, the PP highlights a stark contrast in spending, noting a disproportionate increase in funding for festivals and events juxtaposed with decreased allocations for social assistance, education, and housing. Padilla points out that while nearly €1 million is earmarked for patronal fiestas and Carnival celebrations, social aid barely exceeds €500,000. Coupled with concerns over insufficient infrastructure investments, especially in sports facilities, the PP strongly advocates for a shift in budgetary priorities.
Shifting to a more political note, Fuerteventura Avanza argues that the draft budget for 2026 signals the “end of an era” for the current governing body. Led by Peña Armas, the party criticizes the local Executive for lacking foresight, presenting a stopgap budget in a year that should ideally lay down the groundwork for Puerto del Rosario’s future.
FA has struck a chord with the community by addressing vital issues such as the absence of a comprehensive plan for road repairs across barrios and the insufficient attention toward housing needs and new sports facilities. They consider these shortcomings to be systemic. Their proposed amendments aim to address these very needs—supporting road resurfacing projects, increasing rental support, bolstering grassroots sports, and implementing long-requested developments across various municipality sectors.
Despite their differing perspectives, AMF, PP, and FA converge on a fundamental critique of the proposed budget: it lacks substantial reforms and maintains a continuity that overlooks pressing local challenges affecting the daily lives of Puerto del Rosario residents. The December plenary debate is poised to become a pivotal battleground where the governing party’s economic model will be contrasted with the constructive alternatives offered by the opposition.
