At an appeals hearing in Gozo on Friday, the legal representation of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority called for an investigation into how and why the Authority’s head office in Malta issued one fee for an appeal against the refusal of the Ulysses Lodge development at Ramla Bay, while Mepa’s Gozo office issued another, far smaller, fee.
The crux of the problem, it emerged at Friday’s hearing, is that Mepa has set a price tag in the region of e5,700 as a fee for the appeal to take place, but Mepa’s Gozo office had informed the developers that the fee would only amount to some e3,800.
The matter of exactly how and why Mepa had set two different fees would be at the centre of any such investigation, and many of those opposing the highly controversial project are accusing people within Mepa of intentionally confusing matters so as to prolong the appeal process for as long as possible, with the issue having already stalled the process for a whole year.
Xaghra mayor Joseph Cordina, a leading opponent against the proposed tourism development of 23 villas with pools perched above what is arguably the island’s most scenic beach, was irate.
He told this newspaper following the hearing, “This whole mix up has been done on purpose so as to postpone the appeal for as long as possible and until the controversy over the development subsides.
“The situation has been ongoing for over a year now, the appeal hearings have not even started, and every time fewer and fewer people come to the hearings.”
Effectively, appeal hearings on the controversial project have not even started since the fee for appeal has not yet been paid.
The fee is to represent five per cent of the fee paid for original outline and the full development application, which had amounted to close to e110,000. The formula appears simple enough and the Mepa appeals board was left scratching its head on Friday over the discrepancy.
In the end, the board, chaired by Ian Spiteri Bailey, ordered the would-be developers to pay the larger amount by the next hearing scheduled for 8 May, or else forfeit their right to appeal.
This latest state of affairs has been ongoing for over a year, since the developers’ appeal was lodged back in December 2007. Mepa had first approved the development in June 2007 only to dismiss the application in October 2007 after an appeal by a third party was upheld on account of an undeclared public road cutting through the middle of the property in question. But in the meantime, in September 2007, the government had notified the European Commission that no permit for the site would be granted, although at the time it had actually been approved.
Three petitions from Maltese residents against the project were also dismissed by the European Parliament’s Petitions Committee on the basis of the government’s untimely declaration and on the erroneous basis that the project had been dismissed by Mepa, as it had not been informed that an appeal process aimed at allowing the development was still pending.
One of the petitioners, Gozitan Victor Galea who is also Alternattiva Demokratika’s secretary general, has cried foul, claiming preferential treatment has been given to the developers and that by all rights the appeal should have been dismissed long ago on account of the appeal fees not having been paid.
“If you were a common citizen and you filed an appeal without paying all the necessary fees down to the last cent, the Appeals Board would have rejected your application there and then. But not in the case of the developers behind the proposed villas and swimming pools at Ramla l-Hamra.”