Once upon a time, there was a square in my town that was built in a sandy, central, and convenient space for everyone. Since what was originally there was a sandy area, we named it ARENA Square.
They put up a large wooden sign with raised letters that we kids would climb on, competing to see who was the most agile, and we did it so often and energetically that we ended up wearing down the letters and definitively detaching the "R", so it read "AENA Square".
With the work, year after year, of the neighbors and with the support of successive councils, the square was improved, paved, beautified, made more useful and attractive to celebrate parties, markets, the sale of products, and the exchange of various merchandise.
The interest in using AENA Square for commerce and communal use became such that it represented a not insignificant source of income for our local government. Every time the neighbors needed a space for a public event, that sandy area, now improved, provided a valuable service that adapted to the needs of the event by investing some of the income obtained from the fairs or markets held there. That was ours, and since it was well managed, it gave economic and all kinds of benefits.
But (I don't know why the buts appear) here it is that our neighbor Pepe, until then a good boy, came to the command of public affairs with new ideas and told us that it was no longer fashionable for the public to manage an activity like the square, that it was done better if 49% of the property was sold to private activity. He also said that AENA Square was still public, because we kept 51%. And so, no neighbor could gather enough to have part of our Square, and now we don't know who the owner is or why, to do what we need in the center of town, we have to argue with some lawyers who are unknown to us.
They say that's progress, but I don't see it.
Javier Morales, AHI-CC deputy in the Parliament of the Canary Islands
