ILOILO City – Political adversaries of Mayor Jose Espinosa III in the Sangguniang Panlungsod (SP) won’t succeed in overriding his veto on certain items in the 2019 P2.318-billion budget of the city government, according to Councilor Eduardo Peñaredondo.
At least two-thirds – or 10 votes – of the SP are needed to override the veto.
The SP is made up of 14 councilors.
Peñaredondo said he and five other councilors support the veto – Candice Magdalane Tupas, R Leone Gerochi, Mandrie Malabor, Leizl Joy Zulueta Salazar, and Lyndon Acap.
The six are political allies of Espinosa.
There are two opposition factions in the SP made up of eight councilors – one faction is composed of councilors Plaridel Nava and Joshua Alim and the other were allies of Cong. Jerry Treñas – councilors Lady Julie Grace Baronda, Ely Estante, Irene Ong, Leila Luntao, Jay Treñas, and Armand Parcon.
Peñaredondo said his group may be outnumbered but the number in the other factions is short of the needed 10 votes to override the veto.
Espinosa’s partial budget veto covered items under Maintenance and Operating Expenses (MOOE) of the City Mayor’s Office except for Security Services and Project Dakip, and the salaries of casuals under several offices.
They were “deemed prejudicial to public welfare,” stated Espinosa in his veto message to the SP.
The SP approved the 2019 budget but split in two the MOOE and capital outlay of the chief executive as well as the city councilors’. Half of the budget for each office/account is appropriated from January to June 2019; the other half is from July to December 2019.
According to Espinosa, the split made the budget a “semi-budget” which was not allowed by law.
Nava, chairperson of the SP appropriations committee, said the splitting would ensure that incumbent elective officials seeking reelection this May won’t be able to “abuse and misuse public funds…to promote their self-serving political interests.”
Espinosa, however, said it had no legal basis and imposed unauthorized budgetary restrictions and limitations in addition to those already provided for by law.
The splitting of the budget could slow down if not cripple “the performance and efficiency of every office concerned as they will be limited by such appropriation for a period without other recourse in cases of emergency, contingency, lack of supplies, lack of personnel, and inadequate equipment,” stressed Espinosa.
Splitting the budget was “beyond our powers and duties, ultra vires act ina,” said Peñaredondo who used to be the chairperson of the appropriations committee until opposition councilors removed him from the post in October last year.
He agreed with Espinosa that the split could hamper the delivery of services or operation of certain offices, most especially during emergencies.
“Like ang capital outlay, kun mabakal ka salakyan nga kinahanglanon, indi magamit. Mahulat ka naman six months, kundi kulangon ka naman,” he said.
Peñaredondo also described as “unrealistic” the July-December placement of the budget for the summer jobs program employing students being carried out during the months of April and May./PN
The ruling of Supreme Court in the case of Tobias Javier and Vincent Piccio vs. Cadiao, GR. No. 185369, August 3,2016 is instructive, where 2/3 votes is equivalent to eight (8) votes out of 13 regular members of SP. Vice Governor is excluded as a voting member in determination of 2/3.