Lito Atienza's Blog
lito atienza
MANILA WAS NOT IN A STATE OF BANKRUPTCY WHEN I STEPPED DOWN AS MAYOR
Leave a Comment
The following articles were taken from various newspaper columns disputing some statements being made by incumbent officials of the City of Manila that I left the city in a negative financial position:
AUGUST 5, 2009 THE PHILIPPINE STAR
MANILA, Philippines – Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Secretary Lito Atienza yesterday denounced repeated allegations reportedly made by his successor, Mayor Alfredo Lim, that the Manila city government was bankrupt after his third term as mayor.
In a statement, Atienza said if the Manila government claims bankruptcy, nobody must be blamed but themselves.
“They (current local officials of Manila) must be responsible enough to manage the premier city properly,” he said.
Atienza said if the current local officials of Manila are failing, they are answerable to the people.
“Inheriting a poor annual revenue collection of only P2 billion from my predecessor in 1998, my administration, through innovative reforms, overwhelmingly raised it up to P8 billion. Our income-generating efforts were evidenced by topping the ranks in a center spread published in the 2006 financial report of no less than the Commission on Audit (COA) and the Department of Finance (DOF),” Atienza said.
Atienza said he remains to be the only mayor of Manila elected for three consecutive terms.
He said during his nine-year administration as Manila mayor, the city enjoyed a “very healthy economy” when taxes were effectively collected and efficiently delivered back to Manilans under his highly commended successful “Buhayin ang Maynila” urban renewal and development program.
During Atienza’s term, he said city hall services were not only felt but experienced. Among others, he said, health centers and hospitals had adequate equipment, facilities and medicines as nutrition programs were also in place.
Young Manilans, especially the poor, were given quality education with competitive standards.
Garbage was regularly collected also and roads were well maintained. “The city had a clean and healthy environment to live in,” he said.
Businesses were thriving as jobs and livelihood opportunities were generated, said Atienza.
“We had a vision and it was pursued and delivered. My performance as Manila’s father is sufficient proof of genuine public service, but lies being peddled about my administration must be corrected. Lies repeated often enough might be perceived as the gospel truth,” he said. – Sandy Araneta
JULY 31, 2009 ABANTE TONITE
Niliwanag din kahapon ni Sec. Atienza ang isyung ibinabato sa kanya na kesyo nabangkarote umano ang lungsod ng Maynila dahil sa kanya.
Ayaw sana niya itong sagutin pero kailangan dahil baka paniwalaan ito ng mga tao.
Nang bumaba siya sa puwesto bilang alkalde ng Maynila nu’ng Hunyo 29, 2007, ang pera sa banko ng City of Manila ay P2.6B. Definitely ay hindi raw bankrupt ang siyudad.
Pinakita niya sa amin ang printed record (Consolidated Daily Cash Position Report mula sa Office of the City Treasurer) na magpapatunay na hindi niya nilaspag ang pera ng Maynila at sangkatutak ang salapi ng lungsod pagkatapos ng kanyang full 3-term as mayor.
Bukod doon ay naglabas ng finding ang COA at Dept. of Finance (nu’ng early 2008) ng ratings ng lahat ng local government units sa buong bansa at #1 ang Maynila sa revenue collection. ‘Yun aniya ang distinction ng kanyang administrasyon.
Ngayon, after 2 years ng bagong nanunungkulan ay tila naubos na ang iniwan niyang bilyones dahil nangutang umano ang pamahalaang Maynila ng P750M (dahil kapos ito sa koleksyon).
“Kung bangkarote ngayon ang Maynila, problema ni Mayor Alfredo Lim ‘yon. Siya dapat ang magpaliwanag. That’s his problem. He has to solve that.
“What I’m saying is, don’t look at me and don’t blame me. Don’t use me as your scapegoat for your failure. If you are failing, you’re answerable to the people.
“I have to correct the lies being peddled because I don’t want people to be misled. Sabi nga, ‘A lie repeated often enough becomes the gospel truth to many!’” ALLAN DIONES
JULY 31, 2009 ABANTE
Naglambing din si Sec. Atienza na tulungan siya ng entertainment press na iparating sa publiko ang reaksyon niya tungkol sa isyu na bankrupt ang kaban ng Maynila at isinisisi ito sa kanya ng administrasyon ni Mayor Alfredo Lim.
Ibinigay ni Sec. Atienza sa mga reporter ang dokumento na magpapatunay na malaking halaga ng pera ang iniwan niya sa Maynila nang bumaba siya sa puwesto.
“Ako’y binabato ng kasinungalingan na hindi tama. Na ang problema ng Maynila ay bankruptcy that was caused by me.
“Siguro, nababalitaan ninyo ‘yon na bankrupt ang Maynila. Na kagagawan ni Atienza kaya wala kaming ganito, sira ang mga kalsada, walang gamot sa ospital dahil bangkarote ang Maynila.
“Ayoko sanang sagutin dahil hindi pa naman panahon ng pulitika pero baka lumalim nang lumalim, paniwalaan ng mga tao.
“Kawawa naman ako. Hindi totoo eh. Noong iniwanan ko ang Maynila noong June 29, 2007, ang pera na nasa bangko ay P2.6 billion. Hindi bangkarote ‘yon dahil ‘yon eh money in the bank. Money in the vault.
“Narito ang record na kinuha ko before I stepped out of my office. I made sure that I have the documents that will defend my administration. Parang alam ko na eh, na siguradong magkakaroon ng kasinungalingan.
“Na sasabihin, nilaspag ko. Mismanaged ang Maynila, bangkarote ang Maynila. This is the daily cash position report of the City Treasurer of Manila. Hinugot ko ito sa libro ng City Treasury dahil alam ko na ito ang tanging ebidensya. Ito ang pera ng Maynila when I step down,” ang napapailing na pahayag ni Sec. Atienza. JOJO GABINETE
JULY 31, 2009 PILIPINO STAR NGAYON
Ipinakita nga pala ni Papa Lito sa entertainment press ang mga papeles na magpapatunay na hindi totoo na walang datung ang Maynila nang mag-goodbye siya sa puwesto noong June 2007.
Take note, bumaba si Papa Lito sa puwesto dahil tapos na ang kanyang termino at hindi dahil natalo siya sa eleksyon.
May-I-show ni Papa Lito sa mga reporter ang papel na ebidensiya na P2.6 billion ang kadatungan na iniwan niya sa City of Manila at pirmado ito ng City Treasurer.
Hindi alam kung kaninong kamay napapunta ang datung dahil sinasabi ngayon ng mga nakaupo sa puwesto na bankrupt ang Maynila nang iwanan ito ni Papa Lito.
Paano naging bankrupt ang isang siyudad na may kayamanan na P2.6 billion? May mga pinanghahawakan na ebidensiya si Papa Lito. Saan napunta ang bilyung-bilyong piso na nawala sa kaban ng yaman ng Maynila? Sino ang nakinabang?
Sinabi ni Papa Lito na ayaw sana nito na patulan ang pang-iintriga ng kanyang mga kalaban sa pulitika pero kailangan niyang ipagtanggol ang sarili. Hindi tama na manahimik siya dahil baka maniwala ang mga tao na tinangay niya ang datung ng Maynila.
Naniniwala ako na inosente si Papa Lito sa kasalanan na ibinibintang sa kanya. Ang ganda-ganda ng puwesto niya sa DENR. Puwede niyang dedmahin ang mga nangyayari ngayon sa Maynila pero dahil hindi nga totoo ang mga bintang sa kanya, nagsalita na siya.
LOLIT SOLIS
JULY 31, 2009 PILIPINO STAR NGAYON
Anyway, hindi lang pala ako ang nagre-reklamo sa panget na kalsada sa Maynila. Ayon sa dating mayor ng Maynila, nire-reklamo rin sa kanya ng mga kapit-bahay niya. Ang sabi raw kasi ng local government ng Manila, wala na silang pondo na ikinatataka niya (Atienza) dahil P2.6 billion ang iniwan niyang pera noong matapos ang kanyang termino bilang mayor.
Isa pang nakakaalarmang kuwento ni Sec. Atienza ay ang nakakatakot na oil depot sa Pandacan. Imagine, oras na magkaroon pala ng aksidente sa nasabing oil depot, makakarating hanggang Malacañang ang pagsabog. Nauna na raw sinabi ng Presidential Security Group (na ‘wag naman sana), na kung may masamang mangyayari, hindi nila alam kung paano ililigtas ang pangulo.
Ka-afraid.
Isa si Iskho Moreno sa pumirma ng ordinance na pumapayag na manatili sa Pandacan ang nasabing oil depot kaya nega ang dating niya sa showbiz.
Oh my, ipagdasal na lang natin na walang masamang mangyari sa oil depot dahil apektado ang buong Maynila bukod pa sa masamang epekto nito sa kalusugan ng mga mamamayan ng Maynila. SALVE ASIS
ECOLOGICAL FUTURE by Alex Magno
Leave a Comment
THE PHILIPPINE STAR, JULY 28, 2009
For the first time, in any significant way, an electoral battle will be fought almost entirely on an ecological question.
That battle will be fought in the City of Manila where the sitting mayor, Alfredo Lim, supported an ordinance that opens the way for highly polluting industries to set up along the banks of the Pasig River. Manila City Ordinance 8187, passed earlier this year, reversed a prior ordinance that bans polluting industries on the river bank.
The overturned ordinance, enacted during the term as city mayor of Lito Atienza, was the basis for forcing the relocation of the oil depots owned by the three biggest oil players. After long litigation, the Supreme Court finally upheld the City of Manila’s position to regulate pollution and force the relocation of the oil depot at Pandacan.
Removing the oil depot from the banks of the Pasig has been the advocacy of Lito Atienza. Since it is now taken for granted that he will seek to return to as Mayor of Manila after a hiatus dictated by term limits, the controversial Lim-engineered Ordinance 8187 will almost certainly be the main point of contention.
In his advocacy to relocate the depot in order to safeguard the health of Manilans, Atienza enjoys the support of Manila archbishop Gaudencio Rosales. The senior clergyman had tried to apply his influence in dissuading Lim from supporting the controversial ordinance.
Lim had, in fact, promised to veto the ordinance when it came up to him. But in the end, the sitting mayor bowed to pressure from the oil giants and signed Ordinance 8187 — ostensibly because this was the will of the people.
Last week, in a speech before the Philippine Constitutional Association, Atienza indicated that Ordinance 8187 will be the issue on which the mayoral contest in Manila will turn. We all presume, of course, that despite his age Alfredo Lim will be the other major contender for the post.
In that speech, the present DENR Secretary charged that Ordinance 8187, by welcoming extremely hazardous industries to the banks of the Pasig, clearly violated Article 2, Sections 15 and 16 of the Constitution. Those sections mandate government to look after the collective health and well-being of its citizens as well as ensure a state of ecological balance. It is the duty of government to shelter the citizenry from a damaged environment.
The present and future generations of Filipinos, Atienza maintains, depend on prudence in managing the environment. It also depends on strict adherence to the new environmental ethics embodied in the modern laws of the land.
Atienza likewise charges that Mayor Lim’s behavior relating to the matter of the Pandacan oil depot reflects the destructive pattern of political accommodation. Not only does it put the city’s ecological future in peril, it also favors the biggest oil players to the disadvantage of the smaller industry players who observe environmental ethics by keeping their oil stocks away from densely populated communities.
From where Atienza stands, everything is wrong with Ordinance 8187. It is unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, unethical and even unwise as economic policy. By making Manila even less habitable than it already is, the Lim ordinance dooms the city’s economic future. Simply said, no city can be dirty and progressive at the same time.
The matter will be put at the feet of Manila’s voters in the next elections. Here we will see an electoral contest centered almost entirely on a policy issue.
The contest will be a measure of the political maturity the citizens of Manila are capable of.
* * *
ATIENZA TELLS PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION ASSOCIATION: DEFEND THE RULE OF LAW
Leave a Comment
During the July 21, 2009 general membership of the Philippine Constitution Association I urged members of the PHILCONSA to defend the rule of law in an effort to promote order in the country and protect our environment and natural wealth.
In the speech which I delivered, I touched on a very important provision of the 1987 Constitution which clearly defines how the law is closely associated with nature. In Section 16 of Article II, it states that “it is the duty of the State to protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.”
Based on this stipulation it can be said that anyone who destroys the environment violates the Constitution and therefore, should be meted with punishment according to law.
The approval of City Ordinance No. 8187 in Manila, allowing the continuous stay of the oil depots of the Big Three in Pandacan, violates the Constitution because their continued stay in the area is a threat to human life and the well being of the people.
Section 15 of the Constitution also provides that “the State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.”
These are the main reasons reason why I filed a case on June 5, 2009 at the Supreme Court against Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim, Vice Mayor Isko Moreno and majority councilors for approving the ordinance which allows highly pollutive and extremely hazardous industries, including the oil depots, to permanently stay in Manila. The case is still pending in court.
I also mentioned to the PHILCONSA members the ongoing streamlining of the DENR in its permitting procedures in order to simplify the issuance of environmental compliance certificates, including forestry and mining permits.
This will remove the unnecessary requirements and the restrictive rules that accompany the permitting system and block the flow of investments into the country.
These changes will not only reduce the processing time for the permits, but more importantly, will strengthen the accountability and efficiency of DENR personnel and remove opportunities for corruption.
Tags: DENR, environment, Lito Atienza, manila, mayor, Mayor Lito Atienza, Secretary Lito Atienza
Atienza supports Church call to petition Manila officials to revoke pro-oil depot ordinance
Leave a Comment
His Eminence Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, Archbishop of Manila, (left) warmly welcomes Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza (in tropical shirt) and officers of the Earth Day Network Philippines (EDNP), during a courtesy call at the Residencia de Arzobispo in Intramuros, Manila. Atienza briefed Cardinal Rosales on the Department’s upland development program that would boost the country’s reforestation efforts while providing alternative livelihood to upland families through tree planting and other related activities. Also in photo (to Atienza’s left) are officers of EDNP, namely, Odette Alcantara, Howard Belton and former DENR Secretary Elisea Gozun.
I am supporting the call of the Catholic Church for the people to rally against the continued stay of the Pandacan Oil Depots.
I welcome the move of the Church in urging the people to start a signature campaign to petition the local officials of Manila to revoke City Ordinance 8187 to protect the environment and the health of the residents.
Cardinal Rosales’s call is not only moral but also legitimate as its intent is to protect the environment and the life of the people in the city. The Church’s vast influence over its parishioners on matters of general well-being of the people cannot be underestimated.
As environmental chief, I am reiterating my opposition to this ordinance as it allows highly pollutive and extremely hazardous industries to proliferate and operate in the most populated area in the city.
I, along with some Manila councilors, recently filed a case at the Supreme Court (SC) against Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim, Vice-Mayor Isko Moreno and majority councilors for approving City Ordinance 8177 which allows the continued stay of the oil depot in Pandacan.
The 51-page petition submitted to the SC questioned the validity and legality of the ordinance as it defies the Constitution which guarantees each and every Filipino the right to a clean and healthy environment, in harmony with nature.
Cardinal Rosales, in his latest pastoral statement on the issue, stressed that “the oil depot is a threat to human life and its integral growth.” The Cardinal also said that the continuous operation of the oil depot in the densely populated area of Sta. Ana and Pandacan poses as a grave threat to the well being of Manila residents.
PRO-OIL DEPOT ORDINANCE QUESTIONED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT
Leave a Comment
Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza (in tropical shirt) submits to the clerk of court of the Supreme Court (SC) in Manila documents pertaining to charges he filed against Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim, Vice-Mayor Isko Moreno and majority of the city’s councilors for approving Manila Ordinance No. 8187 which allows highly pollutive and extremely hazardous industries and the oil depot to permanently stay in Pandacan. Atienza also filed a petition to the Supreme Court for the issuance of a restraining order to prevent the implementation of the controversial ordinance. Accompanying Atienza are Manila 6th district councilors Joey Uy (center) and Bonjay Isip-Garcia
Being true to my commitment to protect the country’s environment and natural resources, I, as a resident and former Mayor of Manila, filed charges before the Supreme Court against Mayor Alfredo Lim, Vice Mayor Isko Moreno and majority councilors for a Manila ordinance allowing “highly pollutive and extremely hazardous” industries, including the oil depot to permanently stay in Pandacan.
The pro-oil depot ordinance which these local officials passed makes Manila the toxic capital of the country that will kill Manilans. Not only do I find this local legislation illogical and irresponsible, I believe it is illegal.
In a 51-page petition submitted to the Supreme Court on World Environment day, I questioned the validity and legality of Manila Ordinance 8187 (formerly draft ordinance 7177) for it certainly defies the Constitution which guarantees “each and every Filipino the right to a clean and healthy environment at all times.”
Especially now that climate change has become a global issue drawing more human awareness and concern, nowhere in the world can an ill-crafted piece of legislation, welcoming blatantly defined highly “pollutive and extremely hazardous industries” in a city be accepted.
It would be recalled that despite a final Supreme Court decision mandating the relocation of the oil depot and the strong opposition of the church led by no less than Archbishop Gaudencio Rosales, Manila majority councilors, headed by Vice Mayor Isko Moreno, still “railroaded” draft ordinance 7177, disregarding the obvious grave threat it poses on human lives and the environment.
Then, Mayor Alfredo Lim eventually signed the local measure, thus making it city ordinance 8187, contrary to what he publicly announced earlier to veto the draft legislation once it reaches his table.
City ordinance 8187 amended Manila ordinance 8027 passed during my term as Mayor of the capital city which ordered the transfer of the oil depot from Pandacan. Ordinance 8027 was upheld and supported by the Supreme Court, saying “the right to life enjoys precedence over the right to property.” The reason is obvious: life is irreplaceable, property is not.
Other petitioners included Manila 6th district Rep. Benny Abante, Councilors Bonjay Isip-Garcia, Joy Dawis-Asuncion and Che Borromeo.
The majority councilors charged were Arlene Koa, Moises Lim, Jesus Fajardo, Louisito Chua, Victoriano Melendez, John Marvin Nieto, Rolando Valeriano, Raymundo Yupangco, Edward Maceda, Roderick Valbuena, Josefina Siscar, Salvador Phillip Lacuna, Luciano Veloso, Ernesto Rivera, Danilo Victor Lacuna Jr., Ernsto Isip, Honey Lacuna-Pangan, Ernesto Dionisio Jr. and Erick Ian Nieva.
Manila’s Ordinance 7177 will reverse efforts to clean Pasig River, Manila Bay
Leave a Comment
Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza (left) hands to ABS-CBN Foundation/Bantay Kalikasan Managing Director Regina Paz L. Lopez a copy of the memorandum of understanding which they signed during the Forum on Philippine Rivers held at the DENR’s Social Hall in Quezon City. The DENR and Bantay Kalikasan have agreed to pursue the rehabilitation and development of the Metro Manila River Basin, which covers Manila Bay, Laguna Lake and Pasig River. Atienza, who keynoted the river forum held in celebration of the Philippine Water Week, lamented the degraded condition of 50 of the 421 principal rivers in the country as he called on all sectors of society to actively participate in the clean-up of all rivers, lakes, streams and other water bodies.
The approval of City Ordinance No. 7177 by the Manila City Council will totally reverse government’s efforts in cleaning up the Pasig River and the Manila Bay.
City Ordinance No.7177 would adversely affect efforts of the national government and other sectors concerned with saving Manila Bay and improving the waters of Pasig River because it does not only allow the permanent stay of the oil depots in Pandacan but also invites highly polluting and extremely hazardous industries to come in and stay within the Pasig River area and inside the city of Manila.
Kapag bumalik an mga industriya along the Pasig River, tapos na ang pagsisikap natin sa paglilinis ng Pasig River, at ang ating pagsisikap na linisin ang Manila Bay ay mawawalan na rin ng saysay.
If current Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim does not perform his duty, I will perform our task in protecting the good health and security of the city of Manila by exercising DENR’s authority over environmental matters.
No activity is exempt from the requirement of an environmental compliance certification. If we are forced, then we will be compelled to take a position because it is really against the environmental laws to have oil depots in thickly populated areas like Pandacan.
During my term as Mayor of Manila, I approved the passage of Ordinance No. 8027 mandating the Big Three oil companies to gradually cease operations of their oil depots in Pandacan. The recent ruling of the Supreme Court upholding the legality of the said ordinance is a partial victory for the City of Manila. The efforts of the current City Council to amend Ordinance No. 8027 with Ordinance No. 7177 has dampened the initial triumph of the people of Pandacan and has placed the safety of the entire Metropolis in jeopardy. In the SC decision it was clearly stated that: “Based on the hierarchy of constitutionally protected rights, the right to life enjoys precedence over the right to property.”
I enjoin our countrymen to support our consistent stand against the continued stay of the oil depots in Manila. Sustainable development can only be achieved if the safety of human beings and the proper care for our environment does not take a backseat to industrialism.
Below is Ordinance 7177 recently passed by the City Council of Manila:
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
CITY COUNCIL
MANILA
ORDINANCE NO. 7177
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8119 OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE MANILA COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE OF 2006” BY CREATING A MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL ZONE (1-2) AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONE (1-3) AND PROVIDING FOR ITS ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORED BY:
HON. ARLENE W. KOA
1st District, Manila
Be it ordained by the City Council of Manila, THAT:
SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 8119, otherwise known as the “Manila Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance of 2006” is hereby amended by creating a Medium Industrial Zone (1-2) and Heavy Industrial Zone (1-3) as follows:
1. Use Regulations in Medium Industrial Zone (1-2)
An 1-2 Zone shall be for Pollutive/Non-Hazardous and Pollutive/Hazardous manufacturing and processing establishments. Enumerated below are the allowable uses:
a. Pollutive/Hazardous Industries
1. Manufacture and canning of ham
2. Poultry processing and canning
3. Large-scale manufacture of ice cream
4. Corn/Rice Mill
5. Chocolate and Cocoa Factory
6. Candy Factory
7. Chewing Gum Factory
8. Peanut and other nuts factory
9. Other chocolate and confectionary products
10. Manufacture of flavoring extracts
11. Manufacture of food products n.e.c (vinegar,vetsin)
12. Manufacture of fish meal
13. Oyster shell grading
14. Manufacture of medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations
15. Manufacture of stationary, art goods, cut stone and marble products
16. Manufacture of abrasive products
17. Manufacture of miscellaneous non-metallic mineral products n.e.c
18. Manufacture of cutlery, except table flatware
19. Manufacture of hand tools
20. Manufacture of general hardware
21. Manufacture of miscellaneous cutlery hand tools and general hardware n.e.c
4. Manufacturing of unprepared animal feeds, other grain milling n.e.c
5. Production prepared feed for animals
6. Cigar and cigarette factory
7. Curing and redrying tobacco leaves
8. Miscellaneous processing tobacco leaves
9. Weaving hemp textile
10. Jute spinning and weaving
11. Miscellaneous spinning and weaving mills
12. Hosiery mill
13. Underwear and outwear knitting mills
14. Fabric knitting mills
15. Miscellaneous knitting mills n.e.c
16. Manufacture of mats and mattings
17. Manufacture of carpets and rugs
18. Manufacture of cordage, rope and twine
19. Manufacture of related products from abaca, hemp cotton, paper etc.
20. Manufacture of linoleum and other surfaced coverings
21. Manufacture of machines for leather and leather products
22. Manufacture of construction machinery
23. Manufacture of clay, stove and glass industries
24. Manufacture, assembly, repair, rebuilding of miscellaneous special industry machinery and equipment n.e.c
25. Manufacture of dry cells, storage battery and other batteries
26.Boat building and repairing
27. Ship repairing industry, dock yards, dry dock, shipways
28. Miscellaneous shipbuilding and repairing n.e.c
29. Manufacture of locomotives and parts
30. Manufacture of railroads and street cars
31. Manufacture or assembly of automobiles, cars, buses, trucks and trailers
32. Manufacture of wood furniture including upholstered
33. Manufacture of rattan furniture including upholstered
34. Manufacture of box beds and mattresses
2. Use Regulations in Heavy Industrial Zone (1-3)
An 1-3 Zone shall be for highly Pollutive/Non-Hazardous; Pollutive/Hazardous; highly Pollutive/Extremely Hazardous; Non-Pollutive/Extremely Hazardous; and Pollutive/Extremely Hazardous manufacturing and processing establishments. Enumerated below are the allowable uses:
a. Highly Pollutive/Non-Hazardous Industries
1. Meat processing, curing, preserving except processing of ham, bacon, sausage and chicharon
2. Milk processing plants (manufacturing filled, reconstituted, or recombined milk, condensed or evaporated)
3. Butter and cheese processing plants
4. Natural fluid milk processing (pasteurizing, homogenizing, vitaminizing, bottling of animal milk and cream related products)
5. Other dairy products n.e.c
6. Canning and preserving of fruits and fruit juices
7. Canning and preserving of vegetables and vegetable juices
8. Canning and preserving of vegetable sauces
9. Miscellaneous canning and preserving of fruits and vegetables, n.e.c
10. Fish canning
11. Patis factory
12. Bagoong factory
13. Processing, preserving and canning of fish and other seafoods n.e.c
14. Manufacture of dessicated coconut
15. Manufacture of starch and its products
16. Manufacture of wines from juices of local fruits
17. Manufacture of malt and malt liquors
18. Manufacture of softdrinks carbonated water
19. Manufacture of instant beverages and syrups
20. Other non-alcoholic beverages, n.e.c
21. Other slaughtering, preparing and preserving meat products, n.e.c
b. Highly Pollutive/Hazardous Industries
1. Vegetable oil mills, including coconut oil
2. Manufacture of refined cooking oil and margarine
3. Manufacture of fish, marine and other animal oils
4. Manufacture of vegetable and animal oils and fats n.e.c
5. Sugar cane milling (centrifugal and refined)
6. Sugar refining
7. Muscovado Sugar mill
8. Distilled, rectified and blended liquors, n.e.c
9. Cotton textile mill
10. Ramie textile mill
11. Rayon and other man made fiber textile mill
12. Bleaching and drying mills
13. Manufacture of narrow fabrics
14. Tanneries and leather finishing plants
15. Pulp mills
16. Paper and paperboard mills
17. Manufacture of fiberboard
18. Manufacture of inorganic salts and compounds
19. Manufacture of soap and cleaning preparations
20. Manufacture of hydraulic cement
21. Manufacture of lime
22. Manufacture of plaster
23. Products of blast furnace, steel works and rolling mills
24. Product of iron and steel foundries
25. Manufacture of smelled and refined non-ferrous metals
26. Manufacture of rolled, drawn or astruded non-ferrous metals
27. Manufacture of non-ferrous foundry products
c. Highly Pollutive/Extremely Hazardous Industries
1. Manufacture of industrial alcohols
2. Other basic industrial chemicals
3. Manufacture of fertilizers
4. Manufacture of pesticides
5. Manufacture of synthetic resins, plastic materials and man made fibers except glass
6. Petroleum refineries and oil depots
7. Manufacture of reclaimed, blended and compound petroleum products
8. Manufacture of miscellaneous products of petroleum and coal
d. Pollutive/Extremely Hazardous Industries
1. Manufacture of paints
2. Manufacture of varnishes, shellac and stains
3. Manufacture of paint removers
4. Manufacture of other paint products
5. Manufacture of matches
6. Manufacture of tires and inner tubes
7. Manufacture of processed natural rubber not in rubber plantation
8. Manufacture of miscellaneous rubber products, n.e.c
e. Non-Pollutive / Extremely Hazardous Industries
1. Manufacture of compressed and liquefied gases
2. Radio active substance and poison processing
SECTION 2. The land use where the existing industries are located, the operation of which are permitted under section 1 hereof, are hereby classified as Industrial Use.
The City Planning and Development Office (CPDO) shall prepare an amended Zoning Mao and Zoning Boundaries which shall be submitted to the City Council for review.
SECTION 3. The Zoning Fees shall be P 10/sq.m. of Total Floor Area for MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL ZONE (1-2) and P10/sq.m. of Total Floor Area for HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONE (1-3).
SECTION 4. All provision under existing ordinances which are inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed , amended, rescinded or modified accordingly.
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect 15 (fifteen) days after its publication in accordance with law.
THE REAL STORY BEHIND THE PANDACAN OIL DEPOT CONTROVERSY
1 Comment
Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza (left) points to Senators Loren Legarda and Pia Cayetano the colonies of illegal settlers living near the Pasig River. Atienza and Legarda both agreed that the illegal settlers be relocated to hasten the “rebirth” of the river which is now “slowly springing back to life” after being declared biologically dead 18 years ago. Atienza said that the improvement is palpable, with the color of water now green when it used to be black nut, and the smell more pleasant than before when it smelled like a canal. Atienza credited the efforts of former First Lady Amelita Ramos in making the change possible. The Pasig River is 27 km long and traverses the cities of Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong, Pasig, Taguig, and the municipalities of Taytay.
As Environment and Natural Resources Secretary, it is my duty and responsibility to block misguided efforts to allow the continued stay of the oil depots of the Big Three oil companies in Pandacan, Manila.
I cannot allow any pollutive and hazardous industries to rise in Manila. I have fought it before as Mayor of Manila, and I will fight it once more as Environment Chief in all fora to protect the people of Manila and prevent the further deterioration of Manila Bay and Pasig River.
My decision comes in the wake of a move from the City Government of Manila to allow the continued stay of the oil depots permanently through a city ordinance.
Records show that as Mayor of Manila, I fought for the relocation of the oil depots due to possible terrorist attacks that would undermine the safety of the residents in the areas, aside from the hazards it poses to public health and the environment.
Manila first district councilor Arlene Koa sponsored the proposed ordinance amending the city’s comprehensive zoning plan. Specifically, the draft ordinance seeks to revert to “industrial” the land-use classification of the depot.
It is a retrogressive piece of legislation and all right-thinking citizens, environmentalists, and activists should not allow this to happen. Allowing highly pollutive and extremely hazardous industries in the city proper would certainly endanger the health of the public and the degradation of the environment in the City of Manila.
In 2001, I forged an agreement with the Department of Energy for the systematic and orderly phase out of the oil depots within a period of six years. But instead of pushing for the complete relocation of the depots that should have happened in 2007, here comes a new ordinance that would allow for their continued stay in a densely populated area. 11 tanks containing highly combustible aviation gas and kerosene had already been dismantled and a green buffer zone separating the oil depots from the surrounding communities had been established during my term.
It was reported that the Manila minority council composed of Bonjay Isip-Garcia, Joy Dawis-Asuncion, Amy Tolentino, Letlet Zarcal, Joel Chua and Joey Uy have slammed the ordinance as irresponsible and vowed to bring the case up to the Supreme Court.
I have consulted with my technical people in both the Pasig River Rehabilitation Commission (PRRC) and the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) and they have this to say:
PASIG RIVER REHABILITATION COMMISSION
The Pasig River Rehabilitation Commission laments the recent moves of some Manila councilors to amend Ordinance 8119 or Manila’s comprehensive zoning plan. Such a move, according to PRRC, will practically render useless all efforts to rehabilitate the Pasig River.
“It is so unfortunate that whenever we get to start something good and worthwhile like cleaning up the Pasig River, something comes up to turn these efforts inutile,” said Architect Deogracias Tablan, executive director of the Pasig River Rehabilitation Commission.
Tablan refers to the proposed ordinance authored by Manila Councilor Arlene Koa to reclassify land zonings in Manila, which came into effect only in 2006, to accommodate again medium and heavy industries. Tablan shares the sentiments of some councilors and others who oppose the measure, saying it will give indefinite permit of operations for the Big 3 oil companies’ depot in Pandacan. Tablan also said it will also open the floodgate for other companies to set up their enterprises around the Pasig River system.
“And that is practically a direct invitation to pollute the river again. Any other future efforts to seriously rehabilitate Pasig River will be difficult if not altogether useless,” Tablan said.
Manila councilors Luciano Veloso and Arlene Koa both maintain that disallowing further operations of industries in Manila will mean loss revenues for the city government.
The PRRC chief said that such reasons are lame and myopic. “Environmental protection should not take the backseat for economic development. We should not be blackmailed by threats of economic losses to give up and stop efforts to clean and rehabilitate the Pasig River. In fact, clean rivers are landmarks of highly developed and progressive cities,” Tablan said.
“Kung babalik ang mga pabrika, e di magtatapon na naman yan ng mga lason at latak nila sa Ilog. Sayang naman ang mga paghihirap namin noon pa sa paglilinis ng Pasig river” (If the industries would be allowed back to operate, then they will surely dump their toxic effluents again. All our past efforts in cleaning the Pasig river will come to naught.”
“It is unfortunate that whenever we get to start something good and worthwhile like cleaning up the Pasig river, something comes up to turn these efforts inutile. Environmental protection should not take a backseat for economic development. We should not be blackmailed by threats of economic losses to give up efforts to clean and rehabilitate the Pasig river.” PRRC Executive Director Deogracias Tablan said.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUREAU
Cutting down to 50 percent by 2015 the present pollution load ending up in Manila Bay from land-based sources like factories and the Pandacan oil depots will grind to a halt if the proposed ordinance that would create zones for medium and heavy industries in Manila is passed and adopted by the city’s leadership.
“This objective will surely not be achieved if this ordinance will be adopted,” said Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) Director Julian Amador of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in a position paper submitted to my office. Amador stressed that the Operational Plan in Manila Bay Control Strategy (OPMCS) aims to reduce pollution from land-based activities by 50 percent by 2015.
Amador said Manila Bay is included in an area, which includes Pasig River and Laguna de Bay, being proposed by EMB to be declared as a “Non-Attainment Area” (NAA) by virtue of Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004 which provides that no new sources of pollution are to be built in NAAs unless there is corresponding reduction in discharges from existing sources and the total pollution load from all sources including the new sources will not exceed the targets in the plan to upgrade the water quality as required by law.
“Their (Pasig River, Manila Bay, and Laguna de bay) water quality have already exceeded the desired water quality criteria intended for their beneficial use,” Amador noted, saying that in Pasig river alone, the biological oxygen demand and dissolved oxygen concentrations have consistently failed to meet allowable criteria of 7 milligrams per liter (mg/l) and 5 mg/l, respectively for Class “C” waters used for the propagation and growth of fish and other aquatic resources.
Amador cited the deteriorating air quality of Metro Manila ,which has been designated as an airshed under section 9 of Republic Act 8749 or the Philippine Clean Air Act, would further worsen with the passage of the proposed ordinance which he called as “directly contrary to the intention” of the provision.
“Furthermore, the proposed ordinance will further degrade the water quality of our water bodies without counting the negative impact to the air quality in Metro Manila,” Amador noted.
He likewise cited the Supreme Court ruling that sent marching orders to the government to conduct a comprehensive rehabilitation program to revive Manila Bay saying, “it will be difficult for the DENR and other agencies to comply with the SC directive.”
Based on the document “Manila Oil Spill Contingency Plan (MOSCP),” 18 oil spills had occurred in Manila Bay from February 1998 to December 2004 which resulted into over 1.2 million liters of oil spilt into the bay. Out of the 18 spills, nine happened in the Province of Bataan, namely in the ports of Limay and Mariveles with a total volume of 789,751 L. The largest oil spill that occurred in Manila Bay happened in Mariveles, Bataan during the MT Mary Anne oil spill incident with a total volume of 747,991 L. The second largest spill occurred in South Harbor Manila during the MT Sea Brothers incident, with a total volume of 420,000 liters. The statistics does not include spillage in Pasig River and that most spills occurred where vessels traffic is heavy, such as ports and harbors.
The document states that Manila Bay averages around 30,000 vessels a year to unload and load cargoes and passengers, including barges and ships transporting oil products, on its ports.
“A majority of these vessels, which include tankers, passenger and cargo ships, either utilizes oil as fuel or carries it as their cargo. Ship-sourced pollution may result from either accidental or illegal operational discharge of these vessels,” it noted.
It cited that Pandacan oil depot as having “a significant threat to Manila Bay” despite the depots are located inside the Pasig River since “oil spills can also emanate” from the oil facilities during the loading and unloading of petroleum products and could reach the bay area .
I am reiterating our appeal to all sectors of society to support the DENR’s stand on this very sensitive matter. The proposed ordinance to allow the permanent stay of the oil depots in the Pandacan area runs contrary to all our environmental efforts to save the Pasig River and Manila Bay. On top of it all, it is highly detrimental and risky to the most important natural resource which we should all protect, and these are the people living in and around the City of Manila, and the rest of Metro Manila as well.
