A widening political scandal in Alicante has triggered resignations and public outrage after it emerged that state-protected VPO homes were allocated to senior officials, politicians and their close relatives – despite internal warnings that some may not have met the income requirements.
Crucially, newly revealed documents show that Alicante City Council itself raised doubts about the legality of several allocations before the scandal became public.
The saga could have implications in other regions, including Andalucia, as such programmes are likely to come under increasing scrutiny.
Why are VPO homes such a big deal?
VPO (Vivienda de Proteccion Oficial) homes are designed for people who cannot afford market housing.
They come with strict income caps and rules that cover the entire household, not just the named buyer.
They must be granted with transparency, fairness and open competition.
In a city facing rising housing costs, any perception that protected homes were used to benefit insiders is politically explosive.
What is Les Naus and why is it controversial?
The controversy centres on Les Naus, a VPO development of 140 homes in La Condomina – the first protected housing promotion in Alicante in more than 20 years.
Investigations revealed that beneficiaries included then Urban Planning Councillor Rocio Gomez and two children and a nephew of senior civil servant Maria Perez-Hickman.
Other beneficiaries included a municipal urban planning architect and the partner (and mother of two children) of a senior tourism official.
The key turning point: An internal council warning
An internal report from the City Council’s Heritage Department (Patrimonio), dated late January, shows that officials formally warned the mayor’s office that several beneficiaries may not meet VPO income requirements set by the regional government.
The report stated it had ‘doubts’ about whether some awardees complied with eligibility rules.
These included income limits, which at the time were €46,800, not the higher €54,600 later introduced, plus the requirement that eligibility applies to the entire household, not just the individual named owner.
They also allegedly failed to assess partners and family members.
This directly contradicts arguments that allocations were purely technical or outside local oversight.
Conflicts of interest
The report outlines serious governance concerns, particularly regarding the Urban Planning architect:
- He attended internal meetings about the development
- He met with the housing cooperative
- He later became a member of that same cooperative
- He did not formally abstain, despite being a beneficiary
The report states he influenced decisions without his signature appearing on official documents, a point that has drawn intense criticism.
Three resignations and counting
So far, the fallout has included three resignations:
- Rocio Gomez – Urban Planning Councillor
- Maria Perez-Hickman – former Director General (still head of Contracting)
- Miguel Angel Sanchez – Chief of Staff at the regional Ministry of Tourism
Sanchez resigned after it emerged that a VPO home belonged to the mother of his two children, with whom he previously shared a registered residence.
He denies any legal or financial link to the property and says his resignation was to protect his family.
Did the council have responsibility?
Although the cooperative formally allocated the homes, the Patrimonio report stresses that the land was public and that the housing was publicly protected.
It said the City Council had a duty to ensure transparency and fair competition. .
Mayor facing calls to resign
Mayor Luis Barcala has apologised to residents and promised full cooperation with prosecutors.
He said that improperly obtained homes could be revoked.
However, he has refused to resign, despite calls from left-wing parties and hard-right Vox alike, arguing that processes began before his current mandate.
What happens next?
The public prosecutor is reviewing the case while the regional housing authorities are auditing income compliance.
Civil servants’ conduct is also under review, and homes could be withdrawn if eligibility rules were breached.
