Saulačić: The damage was done to the family, not to the Municipality of Tivat

Andro Saulačić from Kotor reacted to the article "The building officially does not exist, the apartments have been sold", which was published on March 31, claiming that no damage was done to the Municipality of Tivat, but only to the Saulačić family.

"As the owner of a third of the plot, the responsible persons from the Municipality invited me for an interview in 2007 and asked if I would accept to manage the entire investment of the construction of the facility until the handover. They knew that after the 1979 earthquake, I worked at RO "Obnova" - Kotor on all investments for a full 10 years. and successfully completed everything 100 percent (from my scope of work). I led the engineering on the Port of Kotor, the development of the coast in Dobrota, the "Vrmac" tunnel, the Kotor winter swimming pool, the Kotor Cultural Center, the Cathedral of St. Tryphon and 4 other Romanesque churches in Kotor, the Church of the Virgin Mary on Prčanje, St. Matthias and St. Stasija, 24 churches in Grbalj, etc. I also led the complete engineering on the rehabilitation of all residential buildings in Kotor. That was the obvious reason why they asked me if I would accept this investment.

After my consent, the Municipal Assembly, by its Decision on the joint construction of a residential and commercial building in Seljanovo, dated 28 March 3.2007, transferred the tasks of preparing the project documentation and managing the entire investment until the final completion of the building construction to me as the authorized representative of the other co-owners. After that Decision, two contracts were concluded on the same day in the premises of the Municipality. The first was a contract between the three of us co-owners and the Municipality, and the second between us co-owners and the investor. Arsić Rada. The contract allowed me to “transfer the rights, obligations and responsibilities from the contract to an investor of my choice, but with the consent of the Municipality”. They agreed on the same investor. Both contracts were drawn up by the Municipality’s legal department. According to the contract, the Municipality was to receive 30% of the built-up area in proportion to its co-ownership share, and my family as co-owners 22.5%. The Municipality received a larger percentage because it waived the utilities. Utilities are 2,5%, so my family suffered 5%. Pressured by the fact that my three children had been tenants for a long time, I reluctantly agreed to a lower percentage. I therefore ask, by what mathematics does the correspondent calculate that the 22,5% we received from our share is more than the 30% the Municipality received from its share? Therefore, no problematic work was done.

Since 2007, the Municipality has changed the Urban Planning Conditions three times, so that in 2020, the Annex to the Agreement was concluded and with it the division of space in the future facility was made in agreement with the Municipality and the investor. The Annex to the Agreement allowed everyone to conclude preliminary contracts for the purchase and sale of housing units during construction. Therefore, it is untrue that the current management of the Municipality prevented the registration of the undivided building. It was divided in 2020 and the Municipality did not receive crumbs but 5% more area from the Saulačić family and did not suffer millions in damage. Next to Kotor is a small town of Muo where there is an old custom, as in the entire coast, when you go fishing, you know in advance that half of the catch goes to the patron-owner who owns the boat, nets and other things, and half is shared by other fishermen together with the patron. The residents of that fishing town have never sued for this or other things for 500 years. This is how the building was divided here before construction in 2020, because no one would have managed to divide it afterwards.

The new management initiated two lawsuits against the investors in 2022 and 2023 and lost both lawsuits. After that, it hired the Chamber of Appraisers and Court Experts and in their Report dated 15.11.2024. they determined that the Municipality did not suffer any damage during the division of space in the facility, nor did others obtain material benefits. It is untrue that we, as co-investors, received three spaces, and the apartments were also not only received by me, but also by my sister and nephew. The truth is that my family has been damaged in various ways by the Municipality for over 300.000 euros over the past 50 years, for which I have extensive documentation.

The investor completed the work 100% three years ago, received a positive supervision report on the quality of the completed facility with the environment, conducted a survey of the facility and floor plan on 31.5.23. and assigned the PD as such, and obtained a usage permit. Everything was submitted to the Tivat cadastre on 12.9.2023, for registration, but due to obstruction by the Municipality leaders, no one has registered to this day. Annex II of the contract was needed to determine whether, under the 2020 contract, everyone received in 2023 what they were entitled to. All the findings of various commissions have repeatedly confirmed this. The Municipality received a market of 613,30 m², business premises of 141,50 m² and 8 apartments. Due to obstruction of the signing of the contract, the budget of the Municipality of Tivat loses 30.000 euros every month (for 754,8 m² of business premises). "In the past two and a half years, the Municipality's budget has lost 900.000 euros. The investor's loss is certainly several million, and we as owners are also losing a lot of money every month. For this reason, the investor sued the Municipality. Eight apartments are empty, and many families would have a roof over their heads with a favorable loan. That's 100% true," Sauličić wrote in his response.

The journalist's answer in tomorrow's issue