Bacolod City had just approved its Revised Revenue Code which, unless stopped by higher authority will be implemented January next year. There was an earlier attempt to pass a new tax code but SM City filed a case claiming that there was no adequate public hearing. The measure was withdrawn so the city had to start all over again. This time the Sanggunian insured that there were public hearings. I got several feedbacks about the proposed code precisely because of these hearings.
The passage of this measure is not without controversies even before its approval. During one of the hearings, there was indication that SM will again challenge this code but on what grounds was not clear, but my informant knows of the plan of SM and in fact SM’s representative was challenged on this plan. Ironically, the city has been more than generous to SM and this is perhaps the best time to express public disappointment on the city’s favoritism for SM. When SM opened the city rerouted the traffic and forced vehicles, especially jeepneys to pass along and through SM. The intersection of Rizal and San Juan streets was closed forcing all vehicles coming from north of San Juan to turn right then to SM and then turn left and then left to return to San Juan. This diversion is almost a kilometer long and considering the cost of fuel these days (and rising) the city is playing favorites to the financial advantage of SM. The way to cut short or avoid this diversion is to get inside the compound of the Bishop’s House then turn right to Rizal to return to San Juan. This involves about 50 meters but that is fuel lost just the same. The city should remove the barricade it erected at San Juan-Rizal to divert traffic to SM and allow us who have no business with SM to proceed to our destination. This is crazy – force people to go another kilometer for what would take 10 meters. I think the city should explain this forcible traffic diversion that favors one business establishment that we now know is unwilling to help the city or is blocking progress to serve its financial objectives. This is not good business practice or governance. Another controversy is within the council. The code was passed at the time when the presiding officer was the number one councilor, El Cid Familiaran, because Vice Mayor Jude Thaddeus Sayson was acting City Mayor in the absence of Mayor Bing Leonardia who was abroad. Familiaran comes from the opposition because his Monopal party lost. During the voting, the proponents got only eight votes out of 14 members and although it had the majority, Familiaran declared the proposition lost. This created a controversy because the eight believed that the majority was enough while Familiaran insisted that 2/3 vote was necessary. The eight overruled Familiaran and declared the proposition passed. This should have ended normal legislative proceedings until the differences of opinion came out in the media. Familiaran insisted he was right with words that somehow riled the majority. Councilor Homer Bais came out insisting the majority was right under the provision of the Local Government Code and then hurled a challenge that in case Familiaran proves himself right, Bais is willing to resign on condition that if Familiaran was proven wrong Familiaran should also resign. Touché! The majority went on the rampage while Familiaran appears alone to fight the battle of the opposition. Where are the others who voted against the code? The battle spilled over to the political field. Due to the insinuation that he was still batting for the Monopal, Familiaran declared that he had resigned from the camp of Monico Puentevella and that he is now with the resurrected Liberal Party which is right. As the highest elected politician in the LP he has an influential post there. What is not clear is whether his opposition is a party stand or his alone considering that businessmen are active members and officials of the LP in Bacolod. Then Bacolod Rep. Anthony Golez jumped into the fray with a comment that the SP should have conducted more public hearings to which acting Mayor Sayson retorted that Golez must have been “misinformed.” Did Sayson mean “uninformed” or was the word “misinformed” a calculated term to indicate that the congressman was fed with wrong information to create a cleavage between the political allies? Was the term “misinformed” intended to telegraph a confirmation of the parting of ways? Was it necessary for Golez to say what he said or could he have said it in such a way as not to feed on the speculation of a break or undermine the claim of the majority that indeed there were public hearings? Indeed there were eight public hearings and various sectors submitted position papers which were collated and considered. There were five sessions on the second reading alone.* MODESTO P. SA-ONOY Visayan Daily Star
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
|