According to a report of the Auditor General of the City of Buenos Aires (AGCBA, for its acronym in Spanish), the company Punta Carrasco SA, which operates the campus Costanera Norte since 1990, committed "serious breaches of contractual provisions," and cannot see that the various efforts of the city government have applied any sanction to the company. Instead, on August 21st of this year it was announced in the Official Gazette the extension of the contract with the same establishment.

The inspection body indicates that the dealership did not initiate the plan of mandatory works established by the contract, although it made an "unauthorized" filling the coast which meant a breakthrough on the Rio de la Plata of 54 thousand square meters and the doubling of its operating area. In that ground gained, the company installed premises, despite the Urban Planning Code zoned the land for public use i.e. that it does not support other functions than that of a green space. Therefore, the AGCBA considered that the object of the concession was distorted because, well, it "contradicted the fate it deserves as a public walkway."

"The weaknesses found are the primary responsibility of the Directorate General of Concessions and Privatizations" the city government, said the Audit, adding that the dependence "has no power to authorize commercial uses in an area located as district public use." The report adds that the gastronomic and dance clubs do not have the corresponding authorization.

On September 4, 1987, the then Buenos Aires Municipality opened the tender for the solarium "engineer Benito Carrasco." It would be a concession for a period of 19 and a half years, with a monthly fee of 7,500 australes, the currency that circulated at the time. First, the property was managed by a group of companies, Francisco Natino and children SA, Parenti Mai SA and Riva SA, and in 1990 it changed to Punta Carrasco SA. The contract expired on January 26th of this year and the extension includes an update in August that raised the fee to $ 35 thousand per month for the remainder of 2008 and 50000 per month for the next year.

The AGCBA noted that the amount of the initial fee, 7,500 australes, had set a monthly adjustment for the change in the consumer price index (CPI), and should be taken as an indication of the adjustment formula, the month preceding the opening of the tender, i.e. August 1987. However, the period used as a reference was November '87. This "wrong situation" caused a distortion in the calculation of the fee. It is that the enactment of the Convertibility Law annulled the upgrade fee for the CPI in May 1991 and, in November '87 as a base; the last equation resulted that the company should pay $ 2,340.35 per month. That was the amount paid until April 2007, although the audit noted that the fee should be $ 3,445.86 per month. "The concessionaire has a debt corresponding to the difference between what they paid and what they should have been paying the city, amounting to $270,397 ", the report concludes:" There is no evidence of any claim by the Government of the City.