Government

Renovation costs go up

The rehabilitation of the Palacio de Las Garzas will cost millions more than first thought.

Opposition leaders have harshly criticized the project, which they say is a waste of public money.

David Mesa/la prensa

makeover: Panama’s opposition members have harshly criticized the money being spent to renovate the Palacio de Las Garzas, which was originally only supposed to cost taxpayers a little more than $1 million.1121947

The project to renovate the Palacio de Las Garzas, which is the president's official residence, is vastly over budget, and will end up costing taxpayers millions more than it was supposed to. According to the recently-approved 2009 budget, the government plans to spend $2.9 million on the project next year.

Although this amount is smaller than this year's allocation, which is $4.1, the budget line is large enough to draw the ire of Panama's opposition parties, which call the renovation project a prime example of the government waste that has been typical of the Torrijos administration.

According to National Assembly's minority report on the 2009 budget, spending on the remodeling project will total $13.6 million by the time the project is wrapped up next year. The costs include $7 million spent in 2008 and 2009, as well as an additional $6.6 million spent in the three prior years.

This is a far cry from the amount that Torrijos said the project would cost when he took office in 2004.

Calling the condition of the president's residence “deplorable,” Torrijos called for the renovation project, and said that it would cost $3.4 million.

Moreover, he said that 70 percent of that amount, or $2.38 million, would be raised through donations and other private sources, meaning that the cost to taxpayers would only be a little more than $1 million.

The minority report contends that the reality of the project is that everything has been paid for with government money.

As proof, they point to line 990 of the budget, which allocates funds for the project. That allocation has grown through the last several budget cycles. The opposition report states that it would not be surprising if the total cost of the project exceeds $15 million, or $14 million more than it was supposed to cost the public, and $11.4 million more than the original total cost of the project.