|
Thursday, March 04, 2004
Aznar’s contract shouldn’t have reached mayor
By Gingging A. Campaña
THE resolution to renew Jessie Aznar’s contract as consultant on legislative matters to opposition Councilor Carmelita Piramide should not have reached the mayor’s office.
It should have been dealt with by Vice Mayor Michael Rama’s office, said Councilor Jocelyn Pesquera.
Void
Pesquera brought up the matter during the discussion on Piramide’s new motion to
void Mayor Tomas Osmeña’s veto because “10 days have lapsed and he failed to justify it in writing.”
Section 54 of the Local Government Code mandates that the written explanation for any veto shall be communicated by the mayor within 10 days, otherwise it shall be deemed as approved as if he had signed it.
Pesquera, however, said there are certain items that need not reach the mayor, such as consultancy resolutions under the Office of the Vice Mayor.
Budget
Since the budget for consultants to councilors is taken from the office of Rama, the presiding officer and the immediate supervisor of the councilors, then the vice mayor should be the one to approve such resolutions, she said.
“Then who submitted my resolution to the Office of Mayor? I have been wondering why of all resolutions for consultants only mine was submitted to the mayor, Mr. Chairman,” Piramide said.
The council, upon Pesquera’s suggestion, ordered City Secretary Estrella de los Reyes, whose office is in charge of preparing the agenda, to explain.
De los Reyes said they attached the original resolution and Aznar’s contract to the voucher supporting his honorarium and submitted these to the City Accounting Office. When the vouchers reached the mayor for approval, it was then that he vetoed the resolution.
Procedure
Rama asked de los Reyes why she did not tell him about it. He then lectured her on the proper procedures, adding that he does “not want this to happen again.”
“It is also unfair on the part of the executive to have to participate in this. We can’t fault him (Osmeña) for exercising an executive prerogative,” he said.
Pesquera said the next time the accounting office asks for support to vouchers of consultancy services, copies of this portion of the approved annual budget should be attached, not the contract, unless more appropriation is needed.
Piramide wanted to substitute the present item with her original resolution, but Pesquera said this has to be re-filed and included in the next agenda.
Next session
It was then decided for parliamentary purposes to withdraw the existing item and to include the original resolution for the renewal of Aznar’s contract in the agenda next Wednesday. Piramide agreed but she asked whether the contract should be effective January or March. Rama said this will be known during the deliberation.
The matter left Rama, an Osmeña ally, to decide if he will approve Aznar’s contract contrary to the mayor’s decision.
Councilor Arsenio Pacaña threw this question to Rama, the presiding officer, who replied that he will not sign unless the initials of the city attorney appear on the document.
Asked by reporters during the recess, Rama said he will wait for the deliberation on the matter in the next session.
Osmeña had written the council that he vetoed Aznar’s contract because “he is contrary to public welfare.”
Also, he had told the media that he cannot let Piramide hire Aznar because he will eventually “campaign for her in the May 10 polls at the expense of the City.”
(March 4, 2004 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
