| |
|
| |
|
 |
|
|||||
BUSINESS FRIENDLY
|
 |
| Plagata |
While others view the ordinance's approval as positive for the city's business climate others view it as a manifestation of the weak stance of the city officials.
In last Wednesday's session 11 city councilors voted for the granting of a 60-day extension on the temporary franchise of terminal operators in the city's boundaries for them to comply with the requirements set by the Perimeter Boundary Ordinance (PBO).
Councilors Perla Zulueta, Erwin Plagata and Ramon Cua-Locsin posed objections to the extension of the temporary franchise.
The extension gives time to terminal operators to abide by the requirements set in Section 9 of the PBO which mandates the construction of the a flood-free terminal and supported by a proper drainage, septic tanks for comfort rooms, roofing facility from departure area to the main road and vice versa, a water closet urinal, a lavatory for disabled and elderly passengers and telephone lines for public use.
However, the immediate passage of the ordinance sponsored by Councilor Jose Espinosa III, chairman of the committee on transportation and public utilities, was deemed by some members of the city council as a disastrous act as they bowed down to the whims and caprices of terminal operators.
To recall, the terminal operators were granted 180 days within which to comply with the requirements contained in the ordinance. The special permit issued to terminal operators expired on September 17, 2005.
However, after the said period only the Aleosan terminal and the Don Benito Acap Southern Iloilo Perimeter Boundary Terminal have complied with the requirements.
Plagata said the 180 days grace period was already enough for the terminal operators to comply with the requirements.
He said there is no question that the city should be “business friendly” but terminal operators must have complied with the requirements given the long period of time.
It would appear that the city is afraid of the terminal operators, said Plagata.
Plagata added, it seems the immediate passage of the ordinance was deliberately designed.
Espinosa for his part defended the granting of 60-day extension period saying the city should be “business friendly.”
“We should not be too rigid with our policies in order to attract more investors,” he added.
 |
| Espinosa |
Espinosa said if terminal operators were no longer allowed to operate there could be chaos in the streets particularly in the boundary areas.
He added, the approval of the extension will also deter terminal operators from filing legal action against the city government. “We want to avoid legal battle with the terminal operators,” he said.
Councilor Jed Mabilog, on the other hand, said he voted for the passage of the ordinance due to “economic reasons.” The continuing operation of the terminals means business to the people, he said.
He, however, stressed that the 60 days extension is already enough for the terminal operators to comply with the requirements.
“They have to correct their shortcomings during the extension period given to them,” Mabilog said.
At the executive branch, Mayor Jerry Treñas stressed the city should give considerations to the terminal operators. It's a private investment which could greatly help the city in terms of economy.
Treñas said they should be more reasonable enough when it comes to investment and in addressing the traffic problems in the city. The terminal operators also poured in their investment for the construction of the terminal.
Treñas said, the city did not become a hostage of the businessmen because of the decision of the city council to grant them another 60 days temporary franchise. Oppositors did not offer alternatives if the city will not grant the extension.
“It should be a give and take between the city and the investors,” said Treñas.
