Madrid’s regional government has admitted that Isabel Díaz Ayuso or someone from her team visited the €6.3 million penthouse before Planifica Madrid, a public company of the Community of Madrid, bought it. Miguel Ángel García Martín, the region’s Presidency Councillor and government spokesperson, confirmed the visit with a blunt “obviously.” His remark added fuel to the debate over public funds being used for a luxury property.
Planifica Madrid bought the penthouse at 35 General Martínez Campos in April. Unlike most government purchases, this one isn’t intended for office use. The government has refused to clarify whether Ayuso toured the property herself or sent someone else, raising further questions about the decision and its transparency.
Information from official reports, the penthouse was purchased on April 14, 2026. Its documented area is approximately 481 to 485 m², with an additional terrace of about 200 m². Opposition parties Más Madrid and PSOE have formally appealed to the Tribunal de Cuentas, demanding an investigation into whether the acquisition caused any loss to public funds.
After the purchase became public, the regional government put the penthouse up for sale for approximately €6.69 million. It will accept offers until September 7, 2026.
When pressed by reporters, García Martín dismissed the criticism as a political attack and accused left-wing parties of inventing a scandal. He said the opposition was “chasing a ghost” and trying to distract from national issues, including corruption and healthcare management in Ceuta and Melilla. The government’s refusal to say who visited the penthouse has left the public with unanswered questions.
Sources close to Ayuso insisted, “No one buys blind,” but avoided confirming her direct involvement. Such a lack of clarity is unusual in government property deals, which rarely involve high-end residential real estate. Critics say public money shouldn’t go toward luxury assets without a clear reason or oversight.
Officials call the backlash partisan, but a luxury penthouse was bought with taxpayer money and the process remains unclear. The issue has overshadowed other regional matters, much like the previous investigation into high-profile personal affairs that drew public attention.
Madrid’s real estate market has seen more high-value deals lately, but public-sector involvement in such purchases is rare and usually reserved for properties with a clear administrative or social purpose. The absence of a transparent explanation for this deal has damaged public trust and left the administration open to accusations of impropriety. When officials answer legitimate questions with dismissive remarks instead of facts, they invite greater skepticism. The government’s handling of the situation raises concerns about accountability and whether political loyalty now outweighs responsible management of public resources.
