Dads debate on final list of BRT-affected lots, claimants

Cebu City Councilors decided to postpone passage of an ordinance that would identify owners and properties that will be affected by the implementation of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project because of the need to update the said list.

Team Rama Councilor Joel Garganera, former head of the city’s transportation committee, said several property owners visited his office to complain why they were not included in the city’s master list for road right-of-way acquisition.

“We should address this first,” he told colleagues in the City Council during the final deliberation of the ordinance that seeks to come up with a master list of persons and properties that will be affected by the BRT project implementation during their Tuesday afternoon session.

The need to update the city’s list prompted councilors to defer action on the measure which Garganera authored.

Garganera submitted the measure before he was replaced by new transportation committee chairman Nedell Abella during the reorganization of council committees of the Bando Osmeña-Pundok Kauswagan (BO-PK) early this month.

Councilor Margarita Osmeña said Garganera’s move was meant to delay the BRT project implementation.

“If that’s the issue, that should have been brought up (during the consultations). Why only now? He himself is the proponent and he withdraws it? He shouldn’t have put it in the agenda for final deliberation,” Osmeña said in an interview after the session.

Approval of the ordinance is an essential part in the project implementation because this will make the city comply with requirements provided for in Republic Act No. 10752 or the Right of Way Act, said Rafael Yap, BRT project implementation unit (PIU) head.

Yap said the ordinance will prevent other property owners from taking advantage of the land acquisition and resettlement activities provided for by the national law.

He said that the city’s land acquisition offer will be based on the names listed in the city ordinance.

The draft ordinance also seeks to impose a development moratorium within the 23-kilometer BRT route.

“It’s a disappointment (that the ordinance was not yet approved), but we remain ready to address the concerns,” Yap said.

Yap said he will make representations with Garganera and will ask him to forward to their office concerns and other BRT-related concerns brought before the councilor’s office.

He said that the BRT-PIU and their consultants already conducted surveys on the affected properties from May to December 2016 and that these were already included in the parcellary plan that is part of the proposed ordinance.