Tuesday, August 28, 2007 City Council returns budget to barangay; chief surprised by ‘first-ever’ move
THE Cebu City Council last week returned Tinago’s supplemental budget, making Barangay Chief Joel Garganera wonder why since it was the first time that such happened.
He, however, said he was not ascribing any ill motive on the move, as he trusts City Councilor Jose Daluz III not to allow political color to interfere in his job.
Daluz heads the council committee on budget and finance, which recommended that the appropriation ordinance be sent back to the barangay.
Garganera, an opposition village chief, asked the court last March 26 to stop the Cebu City Government, the Cebu Investments Promotion Center (CIPC), the marketing arm of the South Road Properties (SRP) and the Register of Deeds from entering into any sale, marketing or lease agreement involving the SRP.
He believes that leasing a portion of the 290-hectare SRP to Bigfoot Entertainment Philippines Inc. was illegal because it did not have congressional authority and no public bidding was held prior to the lease.
“Probably, I’m special,” he said when told that while supplemental budgets of other barangays breezed through the council, that of Tinago was questioned when it was presented last Aug. 15.
Specifically, the council asked for a detailed breakdown of the appropriation, and the inclusion of the one percent allocation for the Barangay Council for the Protection of Children.
Under the Local Government Code, appropriation measures of the barangays must have the approval of the city or town councils concerned.
In a separate interview, Daluz said the council returned Tinago’s budget measure after some councilors questioned why there was no proper breakdown on where the amount will be used.
“There were questions on the breakdown because it was a lump sum appropriation. That’s why, we sent it back so the barangay council of Tinago could answer the questions,” Daluz said.
Garganera said their P960,000 supplemental budget includes an item for a port area drainage rehabilitation.
“We cannot go on with the bidding process because there was no budget. We cannot give the contractor authority to proceed,” he said, adding that the construction might be all the more delayed once the election ban on infrastructure projects takes effect.
He also said that the measure includes appropriation for the barangay’s electric and water bills.
“I have not yet received the returned budget. But we will (address) what deficiencies were pointed out,” Garganera said. (RHM)
