POCA
The late councilor Gervasio Lavilles authored Municipal Resolution 138 in Aug. 31, 1931 calling on Congress to enact a law converting the municipality of Cebu into a city.
Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmeña said the city is giving special honors to Lavilles for “doing all the work” to institute Cebu City’s Charter.
While we are happy to honor the man just like what my grandfather Don Vicente Rama did when he acknowledged Lavilles’ contribution in his book, we are not trying to grab credit for the founding of Cebu City.
I hope Mayor Osmeña understood what he was saying because Don Vicente Rama acted on Lavilles’ resolution during his tenure in Congress and Rama even fought against other Cebuano lawmakers in Congress who opposed the bill creating Cebu City.
I am saddened that Tomas Osmeña maliciously tried to bully his way into rewriting Cebuano history, but what can you expect from a person who is bankrupt of sensible ideas?
I hope with this explanation Osmeña may be enlightened and guided properly about Cebuano history.
* * *
Many are wondering why Mayor Osmeña is running after the big three investors of SM, Ayala and Filinvest at the South Road Properties (SRP).
What grievous sins have they committed against the Cebu City government that would warrant such hostility from the mayor?
Osmeña declared that he is going to reclaim the portion of lands bought by these investors and return them to the city because he believes that the disposal of the said properties were anomalous.
How could it be anomalous when it was disposed through public bidding and the Commission on Audit set the price? Let Osmeña prove his accusation instead of bullying and scaring the investors.
Osmeña’s bullying is not helping Cebu a bit and he is scaring prospective investors from pouring their money in the city.
If one cares enough to remember, he invited SM to invest in Cebu City and to buy a portion of the SRP where SM Seaside City now stands.
* * *
I am impressed by Environment Secretary Gina Lopez’s decision to close down big-time mining companies that have exploited our resources. Lopez’s advocacy is very simple and logical.
She prioritizes the welfare of the people living near the mining areas whose continued existence there is threatened by the damage wrought by antiquated, destructive mining processes.
It’s admirable that she has withstood the pressure from mining companies, and I salute the president for standing by her.
But never count out these mining companies who have so much money to buy and influence our policy makers into compromise.
These mining companies have destroyed many areas and drove communities away.
They should be ashamed for their wanton destruction of the environment for their own profit.