Councilor Uy walks out of session hall in disgust about proposed P600M loan

TACLOBAN CITY – “I don’t want to be part of this illegal proceedings,” this was the reason of Councilor Jerry Uy when asked why he left the session hall when the city council of Tacloban were still discussing the proposed loan agreement of the city government with the Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB). During their regular session last Wednesday, Mayor Alfred Romualdez has for the fourth time forwarded a letter to the city council asking them to authorize him to enter into a loan agreement with a banking institution. This time the name of the bank was mentioned in the letter unlike in previous letters. Under the proposed loan, the city government want to secure a loan of more than P622 million, bigger than the previous proposed loan of P400 million. In a voting, six councilors, namely, Edwin Chua, Eden Chua Pineda and Frederick Chua, Willy Domingo, Jeric Dane Granados and Bianco Mate, favor the loan agreement while Councilor Jerry Yaokasin opposed. Councilors Neil Glova and Robert Andrade did not cast their vote while Councilor Cristina Romualdez, wife of the city mayor, was absent in the session. “These documents should have been referred first to the proper committee for further study,” Uy said, adding that the documents were given to them about an hour before they started their session. “There is no way that we can study the documents that is why I left the session hall,” Uy explained, adding that the font used in the documents that were given to them were very small that he need a magnifying glass for him to read them. He added that based on their internal rules, items on the agenda should have been given to them a day before the session but for several sessions now especially when it comes to money matters and the proposed loan, the city government would always insert it on the day the session is to be held. Uy added that any Taclobanon can question this proposed loan as they are the ones most affected once this loan materialized. Yaokasin, when asked why he opposed the proposed loan, said that several documents that the city council have yet to be given to them by the office of Romualdez. Among these documents include the feasibility study of the projects to be implemented like the abattoir and the program of work of the infrastructure projects that are to be implemented. He added that the borrowing loan capacity of the city government that they presented was based on the Bureau of Local Government Finance as of July 2011 and not its present borrowing loan capacity. Yaokasin also noted that there was no mention as how much the city government would pay to the bank in terms of interest. Although he did object to the loan term agreement that the city government will enter into with the PVB, Yaokasin stressed that he is not opposing to it as the city government needs money to fund various projects they are to implement.However, the people should know where the city government will used it and how much will be used in funding each project, he added. “Barangay officials should be vigilant and asked what projects and how much are to be used in those projects and they must also ask if this will really answer the problems that they are experiencing in their barangays,” Yaokasin stressed. “It is not only them who will suffer but including the next administrations of the city,” he said. Moreover, Yaokasin added that now that the city government was awarded with the Seal of Good Housekeeping (SGH) award it, should not be used by the city government for their own interest of acquiring a loan. Based on the new circular of the Department of the Interior and Local Government, only those with SGH award are to be allowed to enter into loan agreement with any bank and other lending institutions. Under the new circular, aside from the SGH, the following documents were added to the original requirements: letter-request from the local chief executive; certification from the local legislative body that the proposed project to be financed by the loan is included in the approved annual investment plan for the current year; authenticated copy of the resolution authorizing the local chief executive to negotiate and contract a loan; proof of compliance with the full disclosure policy of the DILG, among others.