SOME lawmakers seem to make moves that negate the normal run to progress of a local government unit (LGU).
In a collegial body such as the Sangguniang Bayan or Panlungsod, lawmakers participate in the deliberations on the crafting of ordinances or resolutions where a votation takes place on whether an issue be passed or blocked.
So, if one signed willingly to approve the ordinance or resolution, he is estopped from claiming that the matters contained in these issuances are not legal or above board. He did sign, didn”t he? Then why cry “wolf” afterwards?
This type of lawmaker does not contribute to progress of a town or city. As a sour graper, he stands alone from the collegial body taking a negative stance on issues he himself approved prior.
Such is the sad story at the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Mabalacat City.
Reportedly, one solon filed a case with the Office of the Ombudsman claiming irregularities in contracting a loan with the LandBank for the construction of a new government center and other buildings.
As a way of a background, records show that City Ordinance No. 40. series of 2023 was approved in regular session of the Sangguniang Panlungsod on September 20, 2023 with 12 councilors present. The presiding officer, Vice Mayor Atty. Geld P. Aquino and City Councilor Elizabeth R. Pineda were absent. It was acting Vice Mayor/Presiding Officer Marcos Castro, Jr., who presided in the session.
The resulting Ordinance No. 40 was published in Sun Star Pampanga for its October 2-4, 2023 issues.
In the said ordinance, it was stated that the term loan contracted between the city government headed by City Mayor Crisostomo C. Garbo and the Land Bank represented by its Vice President/Head, Pampanga Lending Center Rolando G. Santos “shall be for the best interest and optimum benefit of the City and shall be subject to the standard terms and conditions provided by law, auditing and accounting rules and regulations”.
# # #
Councilor Jun Castro is estopped from questioning the appropriateness of Ordinance No. 40 for he is one of the signatories therein. How come he is very loud in questioning the propriety of the acts of his colleagues in the SP?