THE City Council’s Committee on Budget and Finance approved a reduced version of the city’s first supplemental budget for 2026, cutting P163.65 million from the original proposal after reviewing department requests.
The executive branch initially sought more than P964 million. However, the committee, chaired by Councilor Dave Tumulak, reduced the proposed budget to P800,541,721.40, citing fiscal discipline and the need to align spending with actual operational requirements.
The Department of Public Services sustained the largest reduction.
A proposed P500 million allocation tied to the closure of the Binaliw landfill was cut by P100 million. The committee said intensified waste segregation efforts in several barangays had helped reduce hauling requirements.
The proposed P50 million budget for repairs to the legislative building was also reduced by half to P25 million. The committee said priority should be given to urgent structural repairs, including roofing and painting, rather than broader renovation work.
RELATED STORIES
Cebu City Council probes proposed P981M supplemental budget
Cebu City mayor seeks P982M supplemental budget
Trimming personnel and traffic costs
Other departments also saw their requests reduced.
The Peace and Order Program was cut by P18.6 million, with the committee saying additional personnel requests were premature while 240 security personnel are already being procured under existing funds.
The Transportation Office’s request was reduced by P10.05 million, with the committee directing the office to prioritize accident-prone areas rather than broad spending on signs and related supplies.
A proposed P10 million greenhouse project under the Agriculture Office was also cut by P5 million, with officials recommending greater focus on trucks and irrigation support.
Despite the reductions, the committee retained several programs aimed at direct public assistance.
A P29 million Teachers Upgrading Program was retained to support 572 public school teachers pursuing graduate studies.
A P35 million Driver’s Subsidy Program was also retained for nearly 15,000 transport workers, although council members called for stricter validation measures to ensure proper beneficiary targeting.
City finance officials said the supplemental budget would be funded through savings dating back to 2010, along with unused balances from old projects.
While the City Treasurer said funds were available, some council members raised questions about the legality of using older appropriations for new expenditures.
The committee said the revisions were driven not only by cost controls but also by transparency concerns. Several proposed items were reduced because they lacked supporting documents, including program of works requirements.
“The revisions were necessary to ensure transparency, accountability, and prudent use of public funds,” the committee said.
The revised budget now moves to the full City Council for a final vote.