Mayor goes ballistic after councilors return ‘disallowed’ calamity aid

RAMA RUES ‘DRAMA’

Too late the hero.”

This was how Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama described the city councilors who returned the P20,000 calamity assistance they received from City Hall in in 2013 after the Commission on Audit disallowed the allegedly “irregular” disbursement of public funds.

Rama criticized the move, saying he has already tasked Vice Mayor Edgardo Labella and the City Legal Office to appeal COA’s notice of disallowance.

“They shouldn’t have done that. They’re too late the hero. If they do that, they shouldn’t have received it in the first place. It’s a little bit of a drama, they should join showbiz,” Rama told reporters.

After attending yesterday’s regular session, Councilors Nida Cabrera, Sisinio Andales, Eugenio Gabuya Jr. and Nestor Archival returned the P20,000 to the City Treasurer’s Office.

State auditor Cymbelie Celia Chiong-Uy earlier issued a notice of disallowance addressed to Rama informing him of the COA ruling that the “the payment of P83.48 million [in calamity assistance] was considered irregular… hence disallowed in audit.”

The Notice of Disallowance was dated June 23, 2014,but was received by City Hall only last week. The Cebu City government was given six months to appeal the audit findings.

The calamity assistance was distributed by City Hall to its officials and employees in 2013 following the October earthquake and the onslaught of supertyphoon Yolanda a month after. Officials, including the elective city officials, were among the beneficiaries.

The COA ruling said there was no proof that the beneficiaries were calamity victims and should refund the amount.

Although she considers herself a victim since their ancestral house in Bogo City was damaged by Yolanda, Councilor Cabrera said she decided to return the money since the COA already gave an opinion.

For his part, Gabuya said he decided to return the money since COA is the one tasked to evaluate and monitor transactions of City Hall.

He clarified the councilors decided on their own to return the money.

Andales, a lawyer, said they were just waiting for the COA’s opinion on the calamity aid.

“It’s up to the mayor to file for an appeal and reconsideration. There’s no harm in returning because it was already declared by the COA as illegal and disallowed,” he said.

Despite returning the money, Andales said it should not be seen as a move that will weaken the case that the city officials are facing before the Office of the President which is still pending before the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) which was tasked to investigate the matter.

Andales said the city officials have maintained that the enactment and operation of the supplemental budget ordinance that covered the disbursement of the P83.48-million assistance is valid.

He added that they will be sending a manifestation to the DILG that they have already returned the money they received.

“It’s up to the DILG to appreciate everything,” Andales said.

Lawyer Reymelio Delute, a supporter of the Bando Osmeña-Pundok Kauswagan (BO-PK), had filed a complaint of grave misconduct and abuse of authority against Rama, Labella and 12 city councilors before the Office of the President in April last year. He said the officials “fabricated” themselves to be considered calamity victims and avail of the money.

The impleaded councilors are Mary Ann delos Santos, Dave Tumulak, Hanz Abella, Alvin Arcilla, Roberto Cabarrubias, Gerry Carillo, Alvin Dizon, Noel Wenceslao, Cabrera, Archival, Gabuya and Andales.

Councilors Margarita “Margot” Osmeña, Lea Japson, James Anthony Cuenco and Richard Osmeña weren’t included in the complaint since the two female councilors abstained from voting for the P140-million supplemental budget which included the calamity assistance.

Cuenco was out of the country when the resolution was passed in December 2013 while Richard Osmeña was absent during the session.

In July last year, Councilors Alvin Dizon and Roberto Cabarrubias already returned their P20,000 to the CTO.

On the other hand, Councilor Gerry Carillo said he’s not yet returning the money. He said he will still meet with the city government’s lawyers regarding the appropriate legal action.

“The opinion of COA in my understanding, is a collateral attack on a validly enacted ordinance. It is not allowed under Supreme Court rules which states that only the court can nullify an ordinance,” he said.

If there is a court decision on the matter, he said he will be willing to return the money.

City Treasurer Diwa Cuevas said she will respect the decision of the councilors to return the money which will revert to the city’s general fund.

“For City Hall employees, we will just wait for the mayor’s notice if they should return the money,” Cuevas told reporters.

If ever they need to, she assured that the money wouldn’t have to be paid in full at once. She said in previous cases of COA disallowance, refund of the money is usually done in a staggered basis through salary deduction although they still need to ask permission from the COA.

State Auditor Chiong-Uy directed Cuevas to collect the money from those who received the P20,000 within six months from receipt unless the COA’s decision is reversed.

Mayor Rama said the councilors’ act of returning the money won’t weaken the case currently faced by him, Labella and several city councilors before the Office of the President.

“I’ll fight for the employees. They don’t have to return the money,” he said.

Vice Mayor Labella said also said the councilors’ returning of the money will not have any effect on their pending case.

“I respect the decision of others who returned the money. I don’t think it will weaken the case since it has been consummated. When you say disallowance, it doesn’t necessarily mean there is a corresponding administrative or criminal liability,” Labella told reporters. He said there are still legal mechanisms for the city to appeal the notice.  Labella said they’re planning to appeal not to the issuing COA auditor but directly to the COA regional director. If the findings are sustained by the director, then they’ll elevate it to the COA central office in Quezon City.

If it is still upheld, then Labella said they’ll go to the Supreme Court in order to also enrich jurisprudence on this kind of matter.

“It would be futile to file a motion for reconsideration to the issuing official since she might not change her mind. She already has her views and opinions. It’s better to have a fresh and new perspective,” he said.

He added that employees need not worry since he thinks there’s no need for them to return the money. He cited as an example an act of Congress in 2009 during typhoon Ondoy that they gave an across-the-board calamity assistance to all its employees even if not all of them are from Metro Manila.