“Global warming is already a reality, and sea levels along our coasts will rise by more than half a meter this century.” This view came from the Ministry of the Environment, which incorporated it into the document the administrative mechanism it had launched to replace the General Coastal Regulation, a fundamental rule for the management of Spain’s coasts, which the Government is currently trying to implement. Change in 2022 without much luck.

With this background, a complicated question has emerged in the last few days, especially for those who have buildings by the beach: Can the government expropriate such constructions? And most importantly, what can we expect from the new changes that the ministry is preparing?

Here are the keys.

Lubrication of machines. This is what the Ministry of Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge (Miteco) is doing: launching the administrative mechanism to fine-tune the existing General Coastal Regulation, approved in 2014 under Mariano Rajoy. More precisely, the office headed by Minister Teresa Ribera has just submitted to public consultation the draft Royal Decree by which it wants to change this coastal regulation.

It’s a small procedure, a pure bureaucratic routine, but in this case it’s interesting. And that’s because of context. Miteco activated public participation just a few weeks after the Supreme Court overturned its first attempt to amend the 2014 Coastal Regulation. This first attempt was made by the 2022 decree, which the Supreme Court decided to annul in February due to processing error. precisely because public exhibition was abandoned when the standard was being prepared.

Because does it matter? For the reform itself. The Costs Regulation is not just any document. And the first attempt of the Pedro Sánchez Government to change this law in 2022 has already shown that it wishes to implement the relevant regulations. As the Ministry itself admits, its intention is to amend the 2014 regulation and adapt it to the “new climate reality”. Among its objectives, it is stated that regulations should be made to “limit the periods and ensure an impartial procedure” regarding, for example, concessions and expansions on the coast.

The legislative change implemented by the government in 2022 affected important issues such as sea-land delimitation procedures or the characteristics of beach bars, causing the rejection of at least some of the businessmen who were dedicated to this business at the time. its exploitation. The Andalusian federation even went so far as to call the rule “disproportionate”.

border dispute. One of the most relevant points of the regulation is the demarcation of the maritime-land public domain, which Miteco defines as the operation of clearly defining lands that can be considered “public domain state assets”, such as beaches, dunes or embankments. and the boundaries that separate them from private property.

This figure is already included in the 1988 Coastal Law and the 2014 decree, but the change promoted by the Sánchez Government in 2022 included some important issues. For example, it “unequivocally” clarified that the maximum duration of concessions on sea-land public space cannot exceed 75 years and set this period as 30 for some facilities. The text received harsh criticism from the Xunta de Galicia; it even warned that it was endangering nearly 4,000 buildings, including companies, fish markets and markets.

What does the government aim for? These changes to the regulations were valid at that time, but were ultimately rejected by the Supreme Court and canceled due to an official issue. Currently Miteco is promoting a new reform, but at the moment a draft developing its content has not been published, and the fact is that there are basically three texts on the table, all of which are known: the 1988 Coastal Law, the 2014 regulation and the 2014 regulation text. disappointing 2022 reform Economist will determine the direction of the new decree.

In this context, days ago, the economy newspaper published an article stating that the Government could expropriate buildings such as apartments, hotels or beach bars on the beach and transfer their use to their owners for 30 million years. The decree that the ministry is currently working on has not been announced, but it has been stated that after the setback of the Supreme Court, it has already accepted that the penalty “does not fall within the essence of the regulation” and therefore the cases can be heard again by amending the regulation “with the same content” as in 2022.

Can it be nationalized? Yes, but this will not be new in terms of coastal legislation. The Coastal Law of 1988 or the Regulation of 2014 already recognizes the authority of the State to assume responsibility for the properties remaining within the sea-land public area at a certain time after the examination of the borders. Of course, always giving the owners a fairly long period of time so that they can continue to enjoy the property without paying any fees.

The two regulations state, “After the limitation is examined, the owners of the lands falling within the sea-land public area will have the right to occupy and use, and the Administration will grant ex officio privileges for this purpose.” The state currently in force clarifies that permission to continue to enjoy the property will be granted for a period of 75 years “with due regard to existing uses and exploitations” and free of charge.

Traces of 2022. What we have is the frustrated 2022 decree that the Supreme Court overturned a few months ago and the exact guidelines that that decision gave regarding restrictions and expropriations. The norm insists in its article 135 that the duration of privileges, including their extension, cannot exceed 75 years; This period is reduced to 50 for “public service facilities” and to 30 for other activities and facilities. In the 2014 Coastal Regulation.

The Ministry of Ribera goes a little further on its official website and explains how it operates with public sea-land area (DPMT) limitations.

He explains: “The Coastal Law reveals that the demarcation of some lands, such as the DPMT, prevails even over registration records that may be in favor of individuals.” “This may mean that properties that were previously ‘private’ (or at least thought to be so by their owners) may be declared DPMT, so individuals may lose their property rights”.

Is it illegal? Miteco explains that this change does not mean that the owners are in an illegal situation. “Most of the houses currently located on the waterfront were built several decades ago, when there were other laws that were not as stringent as the current law. These factors explain why there are a lot of buildings and infrastructure on the waterfront that were completely legal in origin, we perceive that they are no longer in a good position ” says.

Click on the image to go to the tweet.

Should they be demolished then? No. Miteco emphasizes this, stating that houses and other properties within the restrictions “can continue to be maintained under the same conditions”, but yes “they are not covered by a property regime”. Administrative privilege then arises to compensate for the loss of property rights.

The government plans to grant this recognition to owners of buildings whose properties are recognized and located in environments not previously recognized as public domain, for a period of 30 years, extendable for a further 30 years. Miteco also refuses to talk about expropriation because it ensures that it is limited to declaring areas that meet DPMT conditions. Therefore, in any case, he is open to talking about what he calls “constitutional expropriation”.

Image | Claudia Mateos Garcia (Flickr)

in Xataka | Goodbye Albufera, goodbye El Prat: map simulating sea level rise off the coast of Spain