|
|
The opposition says the mayor went ahead with his trip despite storm warnings and had not formally delegated his mayoral duties, according to the explanation Míriam Rodríguez gave on Sunday at a police station meeting the mayor did not attend
The opposition says the mayor went ahead with his trip despite storm warnings and had not formally delegated his mayoral duties, according to the explanation Míriam Rodríguez gave on Sunday at a police station meeting the mayor did not attend
The mayor of Lloret de Mar, Adrià Lamelas, was out drinking in Ibiza while the town suffered flooding on Sunday. The images accompanying this report, which sources place during the emergency, show the mayor socialising with friends. His absence has drawn criticism from the opposition, which accuses him of going ahead with the trip despite weather alerts and failing to formally delegate his mayoral duties.
According to the sources consulted, Lamelas had travelled to the island to attend a stag party. The political criticism centres on his decision to leave despite a forecast storm and on how he fulfilled his responsibilities while municipal services worked to respond to incidents.
The council had already announced preventive measures on Saturday following the activation of the INUNCAT flood emergency plan. The municipal statement issued on 3 October set out restrictions from 8 pm that day until 2 pm on Sunday and urged people to limit travel to essential journeys. It also provided for the suspension of activities, inspections of watercourses and the preparation of barriers, signage and possible traffic diversions.
The forecast had therefore prompted municipal action before the heaviest rain arrived. Opposition sources say this makes the mayor’s decision to go ahead with a leisure trip outside Catalonia particularly questionable.
One of the incidents at the centre of the criticism took place at 6 pm on Sunday. Opposition representatives say they pushed for an in-person meeting with the mayor at the Local Police station. Lamelas did not attend, according to the participants consulted.
During the meeting, First Deputy Mayor Míriam Rodríguez Arjonilla reportedly stated that the mayor was not in town. Opposition representatives then asked whom he had delegated his mayoral duties to.
According to the same sources, Rodríguez replied that no formal delegation had been made because the mayor had been away for less than 24 hours. This explanation has intensified criticism of the planning of the trip and the organisation of the political response to the emergency.
The opposition argues that, if Lamelas had been away for less than 24 hours at 6 pm on Sunday, he must have left when the warnings were already known. Sources say the Catalan government’s measures were published at 4 pm on Saturday. However, the exact time of his departure still needs to be established to determine whether he left before or after the restrictions came into force.
The mayor’s responsibilities in a hazardous situation are set out on the council’s own website. They include leading the municipal government and services, heading the Municipal Police and personally adopting the necessary measures in the event of disasters, public calamities or serious risks.
Responsibility for the Department of Security, Mobility and Public Space is ordinarily delegated to Cristina Aymerich Anglada. However, this allocation of duties is separate from the arrangements for replacing the mayor during an absence and does not answer questions about how mayoral responsibilities were exercised during the storm.
Meanwhile, emergency teams dealt with flooding and access problems in various parts of Lloret. The Local Police, Civil Protection, municipal maintenance crews and medical services responded to calls and assisted those affected. According to Nova Ràdio Lloret, more than a hundred incidents were recorded on Sunday morning.
On Monday, Lamelas publicly assessed the consequences of the rainfall and said its impact had mostly been minor. Reported problems included water entering Pompeu Fabra school and flooding at the Hotel Amatista, where guests were moved to higher floors.
The damage assessment does not resolve the questions raised by the opposition about his absence. When he left, why he went ahead with the trip and who took political decisions while he was away remain the central issues in the controversy. No direct response from Lamelas is available regarding the failure to delegate his duties alleged by the sources consulted or his absence from Sunday’s meeting.