OPINION
The settlement of the 2025 budget demonstrates that Xàbia's problem is not a lack of resources, but the ability to transform them into better services and infrastructure for the citizens.
Nearly 60 million euros waiting to be turned into improvements for the town
Each year, when the municipal budget statement is presented, attention typically focuses on two figures: the surplus and the treasury balance. If both are high, the immediate conclusion is usually that the accounts of the Town Hall They are in good health. And, indeed, the 2025 settlement confirms that Javea Town Hall It maintains a solid financial position, with the capacity to meet its obligations and with economic resources that many municipalities would like to have.
However, that's only part of the story. Why a good financial situation doesn't mean
necessarily good management?
Public accounts should not be analyzed solely from a financial perspective. A city council is not a private company whose objective is to maximize profits or accumulate resources. Its purpose is very different: to convert residents' taxes into public services quality, maintaining public spaces, making investments, improving infrastructure and responding to the needs of citizens.
Therefore, a large surplus can be interpreted as good news from the perspective of financial stability, but not necessarily from the perspective of municipal management. The question we must ask ourselves is not only how much money has gone unspent, but why it has gone unspent and what planned actions were not carried out.
What the data says
The most significant figure appears in the investment section. The final budget allocated to investments exceeded €18,5 million, while the actual amount spent during the year barely surpassed €3,5 million, representing an execution rate of 19,2%. In other words, four out of every five euros earmarked for investments were never spent.
This fact alone is cause for reflection. Moreover, it's a trend that repeats itself year after year. When the party leading the City Council launches a government program, it makes a democratic commitment to the municipality. When the mayor signs a commitment to transparency and quality regarding public accounts, she is putting her reputation and responsibility on the line for managing those accounts (which, after all, are our money).
What are the consequences of failing to comply with that program or the mayor's signed commitment to the citizens?
When the City Council approves a budget, it is not simply creating an accounting document. It is defining the direction the municipality wants to take and making a commitment to its citizens. Each planned investment responds to an identified need: improving a street, renovating a sports facility, expanding a service, rehabilitating a building, constructing new infrastructure, or, sorely lacking, allocating a substantial sum for public housing. If these investments are not carried out, the problem ceases to be merely financial and becomes a management issue, resulting in a decline in quality of life and the deterioration of the municipality; it also represents a loss of opportunity and a loss of public trust in those who manage public affairs.
Comparison between 2024 and 2025
The following table shows (in some very significant aspects) that the pernicious trend in the
Budget execution is becoming established as an immutable fact:
| Concept | 2024 | 2025 | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial budget | 39,3 M€ | 46,9 M€ | 7,6 million more to improve the municipality. |
| Surplus | 3,0 M€ | 5,4 M€ | They continue to save money instead of managing it. |
| Investments (%) | 29,5% | 19,2% | It worsens by more than 10 percentage points. |
| Uninvested loans | 16,45 M€ | 14,98 M€ | Year after year, no investment is made in improving the financial situation. |
| Outstanding payment | 4,45 M€ | 4,9 M€ | Slight increase. |
| Doubtful debts | 8,8 M€ | 9,7 M€ | It increases by almost one million euros; the level maintained is worrying. |
| Surplus funds for general expenses | 53,6 M€ | 59,3 M€ | It continues to grow: financial capacity is accumulating without being translated into investments. |
| Budget execution (%) | 61,45% | 63,5% | Significant differences persist between what was budgeted and what was actually executed. |
| Revenue (%) | 60,9% | 64,55% | It improves slightly. |
These indicators show that the trends are holding (and have continued in that direction more or less since 2014); that is, the inability to manage the credits available to transform them into quality services and improve municipal assets.
Having money doesn't mean providing better services.
It is reasonable for a local council to have reserves to cope with unforeseen events or guarantee its financial stability. The worrying thing is that when significant surpluses are recorded year after year, while investment execution remains low, the explanation can no longer be solely attributed to financial prudence. It is legitimate to ask whether there are planning, contracting, or administrative capacity problems hindering the execution of planned projects, or, more seriously, whether there is a lack of management capacity.
Why does it occur?
The causes can be diverse: delays in drafting projects, difficulties in contracting procedures, lack of technical resources or an excessively ambitious planning for the actual management capacity of the City Council; but it can also be due to the inability of the authorities to lead the management that our municipality needs.
We really don't know, that's why the transparency that the mayor promised before the elections is necessary.
Whatever the explanation, the result is the same: a significant part of the budget approved by the Plenary does not end up being converted into actions that improve the daily lives of the residents or the municipal heritage.
It's not about spending for the sake of spending. It's about implementing what the City Council itself considers a priority when it approves its budgets.
What should be done?
The solution doesn't lie in increasing taxes or the budget. The resources already exist. What seems necessary is to improve execution capacity through more realistic planning, multi-year investment programming, strengthening technical and procurement services when needed, regular monitoring of budget execution, and more rigorous prioritization of those actions that can realistically be carried out during the fiscal year. And all of this must be accompanied by information and transparency regarding what is being done, the management problems that arise, and the necessary rescheduling of planned actions.
Podemos proposed (before the last municipal elections) a pact between the governing parties of the municipality to:
- Schedule only investments with drafted projects.
- Strengthen recruitment and technical management services.
- Define performance indicators (not just financial ones).
- Publish periodically the degree of execution of each project or action.
- Prioritize feasible investments over announcements that are difficult to materialize.
- Publicly evaluate the causes of each unexecuted investment.
- Replan the actions.
This commitment was signed by our current mayor, and she has already failed to uphold it for over three years. How can we believe her when she presents her new electoral program in a few months? Are the residents of Xàbia receiving all the services, investments, and improvements they could enjoy with the resources their Town Hall already has?
What would any resident prefer: that the City Council end the year with millions of euros unspent, or that those millions be used to create better streets, sports facilities, parks, etc. cropCleaning or housing?
Conclusion
The 2025 budget settlement leads to a clear conclusion. Xàbia has sufficient resources to continue improving the municipality. That doesn't seem to be the problem. The real challenge lies in transforming that financial strength into visible results for the citizens: better streets, better facilities, more affordable housing, better services, and projects completed on time and within budget—a happy citizenry.
Because the success of a City Council is not measured by the money it keeps in its bank accounts, but by the well-being it is able to generate with the resources it manages on behalf of everyone.
I completely agree. It's worth noting that this type of slow/sluggish management has been in place for many years (more than 30, with surpluses every year) and affects almost every council department.
Clearly, the solution cannot be to increase taxes. What's the point of collecting more if it's not spent on improving the town? (Although it is a step forward compared to the national trend, which is the exact opposite, with money being spent on frivolous projects). But perhaps, instead of increasing taxes—which must be a mistake by the author or a blunder—they could be reduced. This way, the money wouldn't be collected only to be hoarded, and the taxpayers' money in Jávea (locals, visitors, and tourists, all paying the same regardless of language—there are no complaints there, which is curious) would stay in the taxpayers' pockets and not in the account of a town hall that doesn't know how to manage money.
I'm sure people will know what better to do with their money.
A man collecting most of the taxes from the housing developments and providing zero services: we don't even have streetlights. It's easy to have a surplus, but so is having the nerve.
We have to stop charging property tax, at least at this insane percentage, which stems from the illegal cadastral tax hike that was declared illegal and which Chulvi forced to be implemented so that the improperly collected amounts weren't even refunded. Then we should dedicate that money to what people need, not absurd things. But property tax is killing us ALL.