|
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Tomas veto confuses council
Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmeña vetoed a resolution allocating P215,000 for the celebration of October as Cooperative Month, something which he earlier recommended for approval.
In his veto message, Osmeña said he “strongly believes” that sports activities “do not enhance the spirit of the cooperative movement.”
“There is no urgent need during this critical time in our economy to hold such activities, which would unnecessarily entail the allocation of funds,” he said in his message.
“Our city is over-burdened with financial obligations...We cannot afford to spend money on things which are not necessary, essential and urgent,” he said.
Original proposal
The P215,000 that he vetoed was not the original proposal. Last month, Councilor Procopio Fernandez proposed for P300,000 but was forced to reduce it to P215,000 because the council turned down the inclusion of a lechon and per diem allocation for an educational tour.
But with the veto, the Cebu City Cooperative Development Council (CCCDC) will have to look elsewhere for money, not just for the lechon but also for the sports activities it has lined up.
Discussion in yesterday’s session, however, did not dwell on CCCDC’s loss but on the propriety of the veto message.
Confusion
Vice Mayor Michael Rama said they were in a “state of confusion,” and that the veto was inappropriate.
Yesterday, he relinquished his role as presiding officer to majority floor leader Jocelyn Pesquera. This was so he could raise a motion to tell the mayor that his action placed them “in a quandary.”
Rama said the appropriation resolution was simply made official by the council since it had prior approval from the executive department.
By procedure, requests for appropriations charged to the City’s share of Pagcor funds are approved first by the mayor before being presented to the council.
Rama said the council is now in a state of confusion because in the first place, the approval emanated from the executive department, not the council.
He said Osmeña shouldn’t have vetoed the resolution because the council approved it after learning it had his prior approval.
Also, the resolution should not even have reached the mayor in the first place because the mayor could only veto ordinances of appropriation, not resolutions.
Gray areas
But Councilor Edgardo Labella, chairman of the council committee on laws, reminded the body that the Local Government Code has gray areas, among them the provisions on a chief executive’s veto powers.
He said Section 55 of the same local code allows the mayor to veto council resolutions and ordinances, be they for appropriations, or investment and development plans, if they are “ultra vires and contrary to public interest.”
Councilor Hilario Davide III suggested the mayor might have had a “change of heart,” which explains his action.
The discussion ended with a resolution asking the mayor to clarify the veto in the light of his earlier approval of the request.
Rama also asked councilors that next time they ask the mayor to approve an appropriation charged to Pagcor funds, the documents should include a communication explicitly stating the mayor’s approval, and not merely his signature on the budget request. (RHM)
(September 22, 2005 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
|
