“Since they have been cutting the municipal budget for almost a decade, we know that they do not understand the fact that for the first time Budva is buying and not selling, and investing in development and not in consumption and personal combinations of government actors in the way that those who spoke today did,” they state.
However, as they emphasize, for the sake of the Budva and Montenegrin public, and in accordance with the principle of transparency, they want to “clarify what was done only in the last few months”.
“A total of 7.1 million euros was spent on the purchase of the Yugoslav river shipping building, the most valuable location in the Municipality of Budva; 3.5 million euros to resolve the international arbitration with the WTE company, which reduced the risk of a potential loss of 50 million euros for the municipality of Budva; 500,000 euros to purchase a plot for a kindergarten; 1.3 million euros for plots in Dubovica for the construction of a garage; 1.5 million euros for sports as well as over 4 million euros on the basis of court rulings that have already been charged from the Municipality’s account,” the DPS pointed out.
In addition, as they say, the Municipality allocated over 300,000 euros for the Health Center.
“The municipality has also provided two specialized vehicles for the Health Center and one for the Emergency Service — although health and education are not the primary responsibilities of the local government, they are a responsibility towards the citizens,” the party said.
On the other hand, they further emphasize, the question arises – what did the previous government in Budva do?
“Their representatives came forward today, and in 10 years they spent over 360 million euros? What are the projects that the citizens remember and what was done on the development plan of the Municipality of Budva? The answer is clear – nothing. Those 360 million were eaten by unfed local officials, the same ones who came forward today and who cannot regret that today the money is invested in the development of the Municipality and not in their private pockets and family combinations”, they concluded.
