Independent citizen review · Puebla, Mexico · version 2 · data cut-off 25 October 2026

The outstanding account.

Puebla is building a 6,752.9 million-peso urban cable car. Its published official documents do not compare it with alternatives using figures (time, cost, congestion or emissions), and the cost-benefit study meant to justify it is undated and unsigned: it was declared reserved in January 2026, published in September 2026, and its amount matches that of the contract already awarded (if the contract amount includes VAT).

Seven findings

1. The justification was sealed, then published undated. On 30 January 2026 the state finance ministry wrote that the cost-benefit analysis “cannot be published” because the Transparency Committee of the Infrastructure Ministry had classified the file as reserved. Mexican law requires that analysis before contracting. The contract began on 2 December 2025. The version that has since been published is undated and unsigned; its PDF was created on 21 September 2026. We did not find the “harm test” behind the reservation published; the national transparency platform, where it could be, could not be checked.
2. The published study looks like the contract. It names the winner's “D-Line” product and its works-and-equipment subtotal matches the awarded contract to within 0.01%, if the contract figure includes VAT. That does not prove wrongdoing; a later update could explain it. An analysis written before a tender would not normally name the winner's product line, though the review also allows other explanations, such as earlier feasibility work.
3. Profitability rests on two fragile assumptions: the value of time and the demand. 77% of the benefits are travel time, valued at 87.89 pesos per hour. The study's own survey measured 24.6 to 37.2 pesos per hour. Below 67.6, the project's net present value turns negative. Using the low-demand scenario in the government's own mobility plan (7,500 trips a day instead of 18,930), it falls to −3,607.5 million.
4. The project's own study says traffic will not improve. The Mobility Impact Study concludes that road service levels “remain unchanged with respect to the no-project scenario” (p. 560). The cable car would carry about 1.3% of the 1.5 million daily public-transport trips.
5. The speed used to justify the project does not appear in any published measurement. The Declaration of Need cites 10–13 km/h in peak hours. The project's technical study measured 16.8 (p. 143 of the draft version); the cost-benefit analysis, 15.9–16.6. At the 25 October 2026 cut-off, the government's project website described the problem with “17 km/h”. Other official claims do not survive arithmetic: a “300% reduction” in CO₂ (impossible by definition; its own slide implies 80%) and “no tree will be felled” (the six environmental resolutions cover 44 trees at four stations, or 36 if Parque Juárez has 6).
6. A 6,752.9 million-peso contract, six working days and one hour scheduled to evaluate. The tender allowed the legal minimum of six working days; proposals were scheduled for 10:00 on 26 November 2025 and the technical result and financial opening for 11:00 the same day. The minimum capital requirement was 2,000 million pesos. According to the press, six firms bought the terms, one was disqualified, and the remaining five were the firms of the winning consortium, which the review reads as a single joint bid (an inference). The written justification for the shortened period has not been published. The engineering drawings date from July and August 2025, before the Declaration of Need, and carry the note “Capacity requested 1,000 pph / 2,500 pph by client”; the “client” field on the drawing is blank. These are file dates, and there may be legitimate explanations, such as earlier feasibility work; who the “client” was has not been published.
7. The urban plan changed after the public consultation. The consultation received 1,190 observations; 995 (84%) were rejected. The Municipal Development Council gave its opinion on 8 September 2026, on the 31 August version. The text published on 28 September contains seven changes to its rules that were not in that version, and no published document says who made them. The first three station permits were issued between July and September under the 2016 plan, before the City Council approved the amendment on 23 September. By 25 October, six of nine stations had permits; the three new ones apply the amendment in their 30 September feasibility opinions, but no published document shows it was registered, which is when it takes effect. Mayorazgo, CIS and Xonaca had no documents of their own.

What changed in version 2

Between 12 and 25 October 2026 the official site went from 49 to 88 documents. Three more stations (Parque Juárez, Parque Ecológico and Cerro Amalucan) now have permits and studies; 39 documents are new and 17 records changed. The site removed the full civil-protection programmes for the first three stations, replaced three waste-management applications with resolutions, and switched its viewer to watermarked page images only. The original file URL returned 404 in tests on 25 October, and an incomplete search found no other official copy of 41 of the 56 new or modified documents.

• Six of nine stations now have permits and environmental studies; Mayorazgo, CIS and Xonaca still have none (searching by title).
• 44 trees are covered by six environmental resolutions (36 if Parque Juárez has 6), up from 28 at two stations. The studies give conflicting counts, and no felling authorisation has been published.
• The new studies do not cover towers, cable, cabins or operation. Four of the ten environmental studies remain unpublished, including the regional one. The six resolutions say “Operation: not contemplated for this study”.
• No new study compares the cable car with alternatives in time, cost, congestion or emissions. Four urban-impact studies say current buses use 58% of their capacity, then conclude that capacity is insufficient.
• Correction: the 43.76-minute figure matches, within 0.01 minute, the manufacturer's 12.44 + 16.62 + 14.71 = 43.77. The homepage figures were not replaced; they rotate in an eight-card carousel.

The numbers

Contract: 6,752.9 million pesos. Official net present value: 1,541.5 million (12.27% internal rate of return). Value of time: 87.89 pesos/hour versus 24.6–37.2 in the study's own survey; break-even at 67.6. Demand: 18,930 trips/day versus 7,500 in the low scenario. Share of daily public-transport trips: 1.3%. Time scheduled to evaluate the technical bid: one hour. Reservation of the cost-benefit file: term and harm test not found published (the national transparency platform could not be checked).

Comparisons

With the same operating assumptions, an electric BRT on the same 13.6 km corridor would emit about 700 tonnes of CO₂ a year at the cable car's capacity — or about 535 if sized to forecast demand — against about 3,100 for the cable car. This is an example, not a design: the cable car's figures come from other systems, because the project does not publish its power use. The official slide's 48.2 tonnes is not comparable: it would be 0.5% of the installed motor power. Per daily rider, the 6,752.95 million pesos work out to 356,733 pesos, 5.3 times CDMX Cablebús Line 1 and 1.9 times Uruapan's cable car (forecast demand for Puebla, observed demand for the others). Per kilometre, the three cable cars are close: 374 to 463 million pesos/km. The Spanish site has the interactive version and the reproducible scripts in the public audit package.

What would settle it

A dated cost-benefit analysis preceding the contract, with its entry in the state investment portfolio; the Transparency Committee's resolution and harm test; the full tender file (terms, clarification meeting, technical opinion, award, contract and amendments); the calculation spreadsheet and transport models; the tree-felling and INAH authorisations; and the documents that explain who the “client” was in 2025. For the October update: the original files and replacement log for the documents added or changed between 12 and 25 October, the record of when and why they were replaced, and any document that ordered or authorised the image-only viewer.

Verify it

The Spanish-language site includes an interactive recalculation of the official cost-benefit model: move the value of time or the demand and watch the net present value turn negative. The full report, the 10-page changes document, the 557-entry evidence register and the audit package are available without registration, cookies or tracking. All downloads are the version 2 files.

This brief is a translation and summary. In case of any discrepancy, the Spanish report and the cited documents prevail.