Wednesday, October 18, 2006 Malilong: Disagreeing without being disagreeable By Frank Malilong Jr. The Other Side
Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmeña says he favors amending the law that created the Metropolitan Cebu Waterworks District (MCWD), particularly the provision on who has authority to appoint members of the water district’s board of directors.
The problem, however, is that he insists that he, as mayor of Cebu City, continues to wield that authority even if the law has yet to be amended.
The Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973 is plain enough: if more than 75 percent of the total active water service connections of a water district are located within a city, the mayor of that city shall appoint the directors. Otherwise, that authority is vested in the governor of the province where the district is located.
The lady governor, as did her father during his term, asserts that the power to appoint belongs to her office because only 63.06 percent of, or twelve percent less than, the required number of MCWD users are located in Cebu City. It is obvious which side the law favors.
The mayor raises an interesting point in saying that the governor’s takeover of the power to name the water district’s directors would be unconstitutional in the light of the fact that Cebu City is not under the jurisdiction of the province.
I will refrain from commenting on the merits of the mayor’s claim because the question of the law’s constitutionality might be raised, if it hasn’t been yet, in a pending case. Still, I cannot help but wonder how an appointment to the policy-making body of an entity that is engaged in private (although impressed with public interest) business can impair the autonomy of a local government unit.
And isn’t it axiomatic that until a law is declared with finality as unconstitutional, it is considered valid and effective?
The mayor says he is willing to appoint non-residents of Cebu City in order to give the other areas serviced by MCWD sufficient representation in the board. I think that that is neither here nor there. The question is not where the intended appointee resides but rather who appoints him or her.
This is admittedly a sticky question, one that could strain the harmonious relations between the mayor and the governor. There are people who are hoping for, if not counting on, this to happen, especially those who have no love lost for Osmeña.
The governor is obviously aware of this and has taken extra effort not to offend the mayor even as she strongly staked her claim. She cannot skirt the issue and decline to exercise her mandate, she said, without being guilty of dereliction of her duty as governor.
“Tommy and I can agree to disagree on this, but we can disagree without being disagreeable.”
The lady in the Capitol has held out her hand in amity. It is up to the gentleman in City Hall to choose to respond in kind.
