Raul wants City Dev’t. Council to endorse 2 flyover projects

A FORMER congressman is not giving up on the construction of two flyovers in Cebu City.

Four months after the Cebu City Development Council (CCDC) deleted the two flyover projects from the projects endorsed for implementation in 2013, former congressman Raul del Mar sought reconsideration.

But his motion for reconsideration, signed by 49 barangay captains, was not calendared in the agenda of yesterday’s CCDC full council meeting.

The motion for reconsideration was in a form of a resolution by the Association of Barangay Councils (ABC).

“To reconsider and withdraw the approval of resolution number 001-0815 series of 2012 (which did not approve the flyover projects) and to instead favorably endorse to the Regional Development Council Central Visayas region the proposed construction of the two flyovers,” the motion read.

The resolution was submitted to be calendared last Oct. 1 but it was not in yesterday’s agenda.

The basis of the resolution is the belief of the barangay captains that the flyovers are needed to improve the traffic situation in the City, particularly the areas where the flyovers were proposed: the junction of Pope John Paul II Ave. and M.J. Cuenco in Barangay Mabolo and the junction of Cardinal Rosales Ave. – F. Cabahug Street and Pope John Paul Ave. in Barangay Kasambagan.

This prompted former congressman Raul del Mar, representing his daughter Rep. Rachel Marguerite del Mar (Cebu City, north district), to stand up and question the non-inclusion of the resolution in the agenda.

But Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama, the presiding officer, said the council could not tackle what is not in the agenda at the start of the meeting. There is proper procedure to follow, according to the Roberto Rules of Order.

Rama asked for a recess and approached del Mar to settle the matter.

He wanted to explain why the council cannot act on the motion for reconsideration because it is not in the calendar of business.

But Rama ended with a remark, “Mura man ka’g dili congressman (It’s as if you’re not a congressman).”

“Ikaw, mura sad ka’g dili mayor (You’re not acting like a mayor either),” quipped del Mar.

Rama explained to reporters that even if a hundred barangay captains signed the resolution, it does not change the fact that it is not in the agenda.

Besides, a motion for reconsideration can only be covered on the same day a resolution has been approved.

Del Mar disagreed. Just like in Congress, a reconsideration can be done on a different day but limited to the next immediate meeting.

The resolution that excluded the two flyover projects for endorsement was passed last June 15, which was the last scheduled CCDC full council meeting.

Rama had the Robert Rules of procedure explained by his co-chairperson Cathy Ruiz and Councilor Jose Daluz III.

The mayor also said that those that can be considered under “other matters” in the agenda should be limited to cases of life and death and where it is gleaned a
primordial concern of the members.

Daluz also said that for other matters, only new issues should be raised.

Del Mar argued that proponents and CCDC members were not properly informed of the June 15 meeting and there was no agenda sent to their offices.

“There was no proper notice sent, just a phone call a day before and we were in Manila,” said del Mar. “I believe this is not a maneuver that should come from anyone.”

But Daluz explained that if the council changes its decision to delete the flyovers from its endorsement it would be tantamount to flip-flopping.

Ruiz also explained that on the average, the June 15 meeting had a 74 percent attendance from the barangays, non-government organizations and people’s organizations.

“We have heard enough. It would have been better if you were around because we were all here,” said Rama.

In the end, del Mar withdrew his motion for reconsideration with the assurance of Daluz that the matter will be calendared in the next CCDC meeting scheduled for December.

This was based on the Robert Rules that in a matter like a motion for reconsideration, the members present during the approval of a resolution should also be present when the reconsideration is tackled. This way, those who approved the resolution can continue to make their case.

“At least it was given due course,” said del Mar.