Wednesday, September 05, 2007 Carvajal: What widening? By Orlando P. Carvajal Break Point
MAYOR Tomas Osmeña accused the Cebu City Council of succumbing to the pressure of the business group opposing the Ban-Tal flyover. He’d rather they succumb to his pressure which he exerted in no uncertain terms by threatening to cancel the Council’s other projects.
The business group’s pressure is a good one to bow to, at least. The pressure is from concerned parties who stand to lose a lot from a wrong decision on the issue. Moreover, the pressure is reasonable, asking not for a definitive stop to the project but rather for a more detailed study of its fit to the problem in the area.
On the other hand, the mayor’s pressure is ambiguous for the simple reason that we do not know to what or to whose pressure the mayor and Rep. Raul del Mar in turn are yielding to. We know why the business group is pressuring the Council to study the project. But we still cannot understand, because we do not know, and maybe never know, the real reason why del Mar and Mayor Osmeña must insist on a project that the community is opposed to. The two reasons that the project is cheaper and the budget is available are just not compelling enough.
Meanwhile, another project that could possibly be ridden with anomaly and graft and yet could slip by unnoticed is the supposed widening of the remaining portion of Escario St. I understand from Vice Mayor Michael Rama that this project was also rushed without the City Council being consulted. I hope that after the Council makes its stand on the Ban-Tal issue that it would address the Escario widening issue.
The questions that beg to be asked are many. Why was it implemented without the City Council’s nod? Maybe it had the Council’s nod but the Council gave the go signal for what it understood to be a widening project. The next question, therefore, is what widening? As far as anybody can see there is no widening because if we talk about Escario St., widening of any portion of it should only mean adding more lanes to equal the number of lanes of the rest of Escario.
If the project is not real widening, then it is temporary. If temporary, why the concrete? What is the concrete for? Why such an expensive temporary solution to the problem of the narrow portion of Escario St.?
Which brings us to the last question: Who is the sponsor of this supposedly widening project? It does not look a politician is because a politician would always put up a sign bragging about the project and there is no such sign.
In any case, the bottom line question is, why is the Escario widening, which is no widening at all, being rushed and finished before anybody could even notice it and ask questions about it? This columnist hopes the City Council will look into the un-widening of Escario St.
