Page 1

Update on a second opinion for comparison with the Senior Architect’s Technical Report Dear owners, I would like to provide you with a clear and objective update on the current situation regarding the infrastructure program, the proposal to obtain a second independent opinion, and the recent communications circulating among some owners. General approach and current process I am fully aware of the concerns that many owners have regarding both the scope of the work and its potential economic implications. As an owner, I share these concerns. As President, my responsibility is to ensure that any decision made by the Owners’ Association is based on:

• verified technical evidence;
• competitive and transparent prices;
• adequate financial and legal supervision. The process we are following continues to be structured and deliberate:
• Technical assessment of the current state — completed.
• Independent validation through a second opinion — in progress.
• Market analysis of contractors and prices — pending.
• Development of a realistic phase-by-phase planning and calendar.
• Presentation of financing options for the owners’ decision. No definitive commitment has been made. The goal is to ensure that when decisions are made, they are based on reliable and complete information. Certainty for all owners remains a fundamental objective. Current situation – Second opinion Recently, there has been a communication outside official channels suggesting that the second opinion has already been “secured” and is pending only formal approval. To clarify: this is not the current situation. While the Working Group has indicated that a budget has been obtained, the formal proposal and contract have not been shared with the President, our Industrial Engineer, or Adenjo. At the same time, authorization has been requested to proceed with payment before providing such documentation. This poses a clear control problem. The President and Administrator are responsible for ensuring that any expenditure of community funds is properly documented and contractually defined before payment is authorized.

Page 2

Without having access to the proposal and contract, it is not possible to:

• verify the scope of work and deliverables;
• confirm the level of detail of the cost breakdown — measurement or detailed budget;
• understand the contractual conditions and overall cost structure;
• assess what is included within the indicated budget and what might be excluded;
• identify the contracting entity and ensure corresponding responsibility. For this reason, the request to authorize a payment of 38,000 €, which is likely to exceed 40,000 €, cannot be approved at this stage. A simple and immediate solution has already been proposed:
• that the proposal and contract be shared confidentially with the President and the Industrial Engineer;
• that a review be conducted within 24 to 48 hours;
• that, subsequently, authorization be granted in an agile manner. This allows the second opinion to proceed without delay, while maintaining proper governance. Clarification on urgency and safety In recent communications outside official channels, it has also been suggested that it should be determined whether the work is “urgent” before taking any action. It is essential to clarify that a second opinion is not a prerequisite for acting on safety issues. Based on existing technical reports and communications with our Technical Architect, risks related to façade elements — including Doñana and Triana — and the condition of the Giralda garage have already been identified. As President, I have not accepted that all actions should be postponed until a second opinion is obtained. When there are potential safety issues, the Owners’ Association has a duty to act with due prudence and, when necessary, take timely measures. The purpose of the second opinion is to reinforce and refine the decision-making process, not to delay actions when safety may be a factor. Role of the second opinion The independent second opinion is a useful and completely normal step in projects of this nature. However, it is essential to understand its function correctly. The original technical reports were prepared by a Senior Technical Architect with experience, formally contracted by the Owners’ Association, and shared with all owners. These reports constitute the current technical basis.

Page 3

The second opinion will provide an additional and independent perspective. It may confirm, nuance, or question aspects of the existing assessment. Therefore, it should be understood as a complementary element, not as a substitution or invalidation of the initial work. It is not a matter of “trust” versus “verification.” The Owners’ Association’s process is based on:

• professional technical criteria;
• transparency in information;
• collective decision-making by the owners. No single report determines the final outcome. Ultimately, it will be the owners who decide based on all available information. Integrity of communications and information sources Recently, various messages have circulated on social networks and other informal channels. Of course, owners have the right to express their opinions. However, part of the information being shared:
• is based on partial or unverified interpretations;
• presents conclusions that have not been agreed upon within the formal process;
• in some cases, appears to be based on information initially shared confidentially within the “working group” and, therefore, subject to the Terms of Reference established by the President for the proper functioning of the group. Currently, there are no official social media groups for Señorío, and any Facebook or WhatsApp channel using the name of the Owners’ Association is informal and unauthorized. Given the complexity and importance of the decisions to be made, I strongly recommend that all owners, when forming an opinion, rely on complete, verified, and formally communicated information. We remind you that there is a professional and practical team of experts representing your interests:
• Adenjo: Owners’ Association Administrator, with over 20 years of extensive experience.
• Víctor Javier Porras Santamaría: Senior Industrial Engineer.
• Francisco Manuel López Chacón: Senior Technical Architect.
• Belén Villena: Lawyer and Urban Planning expert. Ensuring the progress of the process Finally, I want to make it clear that the Owners’ Association’s progress will not be paralyzed. The Working Group has been requested to share the formal proposal and contract related to the second opinion, so they can be reviewed and authorized according to adequate control and supervision. This remains the preferred and simplest route.

Page 4

However, if such documentation is not provided this week, the Administration will proceed to present alternative proposals from two independent and prestigious technical companies capable of issuing the same second opinion. These proposals will be shared with owners in a transparent manner and evaluated following the same structured procedure, ensuring that the Owners’ Association can move forward without unnecessary delays. The objective is not who issues the second opinion, but that it is carried out:

• independently;
• professionally;
• and under adequate contractual and economic supervision. Conclusion and next steps There is no disagreement regarding the objective:
• to fully understand the state of the buildings;
• to identify the correct technical solutions, including damage control and causes of origin;
• to ensure that costs are justified and controlled;
• to allow owners to make informed decisions, especially regarding financing options that enable owners to pay their corresponding part under reasonable conditions, and do not transfer the burden of responsibility to other owners. There is also no intention to delay or hinder progress towards obtaining a second opinion. As soon as the proposal related to the second opinion is shared, it will be reviewed with priority so that the process can proceed without unnecessary delays. If you have any questions or wish for any clarification, you can contact me directly, the Vice President, or Adenjo. Sincerely John Riley – President of Conjunto Señorío de Aloha