Tanauan, Leyte

Sarah Songalia April 27th, 2008

Join the forum discussion on this post

I just facilitated a budgeting and forecasting workshop in Entrepreneurs Accounting Academy and one participant caught my attention regarding his reason for attending the workshop. To cut the story short, he was the General Manager of an agro firm based in Mindoro and the main reason why he attended the workshop was because they saw the rice crisis as an opportunity for the company to earn more and would like to align resources for this. During the lunch break he came to my office and asked if he could discuss something with me. During our discussion, I could not help but think of Tanauan, Leyte.

Tanauan, Leyte is such a “landed” town. To prove this, aren’t most of us who were able to graduate from college were one way or the other funded through the produce of our family’s farmland? I, for one, know that my great grandparents do have a lot of farmland in Tanauan, Leyte though I am not sure if these still exist. When I was a kid, I would see sacks and sacks of rice being delivered to my great grandparents place. Over the years though, that has considerably dwindled. I would not know the reason, as I am not privy to these things. However, the truth remains that rice is not such a problem for us in Tanauan, Leyte, then. Whatever the is situation now, I would not know, as I am also guilty of leaving my hometown in search for a better life.

In this context, I am just curious as to the economic program of our town with regards to agriculture. The last time I was home, I had a chat with our Hon. Mayor Roque Tiu and if I remember right he did tell me something about schools in some of the barangays who were teaching modern farming. This is a good start. I, however, am apprehensive if an economic program that would help the graduates start something on their own supports this action.

I was in Dagupan City, Pangasinan a few weeks ago to visit clients and a client of mine was talking about a certain ordinance entitled the Investment Code of Dagupan. When I saw the write-up, I was not surprised knowing the economic landscape of Dagupan City. But come to think of it, Dagupan is such a small place. It is in between municipalities that if you could go to all the places in Singapore in just a day, in Dagupan you can see all the places in just half of a day. It is a wonder that for such a small place, you can see branches of all the major banks in Manila there which only points out the fact that there is a lot of money circulating in the market. To make comparisons more glaring, Dagupan, City is composed of only 31 barangays, 22 barangays short than what we have. But, hey, don’t get me wrong. I am only making the comparisons to say that economically, it is not a question of whether we have a chance because it has been seen that everyone has but a question of whether we have the plan to make our town a viable economic zone.

Going back to the rice crisis, had we given attention to our agricultural industry, we could have stood a chance in creating an opportunity for our town in this situation. I am not saying that we could take advantage of the situation to make profits of our own (though I am not sure also if the rice cartel they are saying in Leyte is really existent as I have no first hand knowledge) but we could have helped our fellow Tanauanons rise beyond what they normally experience in terms of income and make them part of a national cause. But you know that was just a thought that crossed my mind.

An economic plan is somewhat like a plan for your life. What you want to be, where you would get the resources, how you are going to get where you want to be and all the other things to be considered. Just like what Arch. Hector Gomez was saying in the construction of the public market. We cannot just go on constructing here and there and planting here and everywhere without any plan that will integrate all our actions together. I guess, all these things that we are experiencing is just a consequence of what the macroeconomic landscape also is. Yet, at the back of my mind, a question so insistently wants to be said out loud: “How come nobody in Tanauan, Leyte has so wholeheartedly stayed to develop the potential of the town? Are we so poor and unattractive and lacking in resources as not to get the attention of anyone wanting to invest in the Philippines? And how come over the years, the economic infrastructure of our town has not been so touched with changes that will make a difference in the lives of the Tanauanenos that will in turn make them stay instead of leaving their hometown in search for a better life? Are we really the “bungto han kamagaraman”?

This rice crisis is not a joke. Two weeks ago, my family purchased rice and the price per kilo was 36.50 pesos. A month before that, the price per kilo of the rice was only 26.50 pesos. This morning we had to buy rice again and you know how much the price per kilo was? It was 40.50 per kilo. In a span of less than two months, the price of rice increased by 53%. You can just imagine the impact this has on the low-income families. I pray that this will not affect our hometown for if this problem will cascade to Tanauan, Leyte (if it hasn’t, yet), it would really be ironic. These are just my thoughts on the matter. I am looking forward to visiting my hometown again and see what can be done. Probably, all those enjoying a better life in other places would like to be part of a big cause all for our beloved hometown. As our Hon. Mayor aptly puts it in his reply to the blog of Hector Gomez: “Hope others who have nothing to do will follow your pagmamalasakit han aton bungto” referring to the many ideas HG said on his open letter. Let’s all try to discuss these ideas in this website. It’s been a while since my last blog, which talked about economies of scale, but I have been reading some of the posts. Thank you all for making tanauanleyte.com a part of your routine. Best regards to everyone!!!

• Economy
• Comments(14)

Arch. Hector Gomez April 3rd, 2008

Greetings!
I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed modernization of the Tanauan Public Market.

As a fellow Tanauananon, I fully support the move of the Tanauan LGU, thru our mayor’s leadership and initiative, in proposing this timely project that would truly benefit our local folks, as well as local and foreign visitors to our town. Recently, I’ve read about the news article on the web regarding the LGU’s effort to conduct a feasibility study on the matter and truly this is a step in the right direction (one thing that was not clear though is the parameter of the whole “modernization” project). In view of this, conducting the feasibility study, particularly by integrating the design and concept of the whole site development, including the design of its individual or group of buildings and related engineering components like drainage systems and utilities, is a vital step to determine the viability of the project. I am aware that there are certain individuals who oppose such project (and some are incorporating the issue of the construction of the municipal hall which is a totally different subject), but despite the negative criticisms, I am still convinced of the necessity of such project to replace the existing, old and dilapidated structures of the public market and improve the overall (site) planning of its surroundings in order to promote and safeguard the health, welfare and safety of the general public. The existing structures could become unsafe (or probably they are already unsafe!) and could pose greater danger to life and property. Also worth noting is the fact that there are certain requirements of the current Building Code standards that needed to be addressed (e.g. lack of parking spaces, barrier-free facilities, etc. to name only a few).

In the interest of my architect colleagues and the architectural profession, and in promoting quality planning and design of public and private buildings, I am of particular concern on certain individuals or entities that may be involved in such undertaking, particularly those who are/is conducting the feasibility study. In addition, I will still even be more concerned on the professionals who will be tasked to do the physical planning and architectural design of individual or group of buildings, if these certainly are included in the development. The reason behind is the fact that Republic Act 9266, “An Act providing for a more responsive and comprehensive regulation for the registration, licensing and practice of Architecture, repealing for the purpose Republic Act No. 545, “An Act regulating the practice of Architecture in the Philippines” was passed and became fully effective in the year 2004. This is a valid and subsisting law that prohibits individuals who are not registered and licensed architects to practice architecture in any part of the country.

As of this date, per the Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture, there is “no temporary restraining order (TRO), no writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) and no pending question on the constitutionality on any of its provisions.” All national and local government officials are therefore mandated under law to implement and enforce it. For the past years and decades, we’ve witnessed the poor planning and design of many of our public buildings and facilities around the country, apparently because they were designed by individuals who illegally practiced and offered architectural services — and are not architects registered and
licensed by the state. The fact is, they have done considerable injustice to the Filipino architects and the Architectural profession, and to the general public as a whole. We can notice things such as multiple violations of the National Building Code (lack of parking spaces required, openings on firewalls, improper setbacks, etc.), incorrect building orientations, poorly designed and uncomfortable living spaces, violations of the Accessibility Law on the requirements of barrier-free facilities, and the list goes on and on – and these all contributes to the degenerative quality of the natural and built environment. Besides, these are issues that relate to public interest, safety and welfare — and are clearly attributed to non-architect’s lack of academic training and professional experience in the design and physical planning of buildings and their environs.

I have been following closely the development of this proposed project, even though I’m far away from home, and hope that this becomes a reality in the near future. I trust that the LGU have done and will do the right thing at the get go and pray for the success of this project.

Lastly, I ask the LGU of Tanauan to support the full implementation of Republic Act 9266 as part of the progress of our beloved town.

Together, let’s support all Filipino architects!

All the best,

Hector L.I. Gomez II, UAP
Registered Architect

• Economy
• Comments(26)

Cool VER November 13th, 2007

ARE YOU IN FAVOR FOR THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT (LGU) OF TANAUAN TO RESORT TO BORROWINGS FROM THE BANKS IN THE AMOUNT OF P40M FOR THE TOTAL REHABILITATION OF THE PUBLIC MARKET?

FACTS:

The Tanauan Public Market is patronized not only by Tanauananons but by those from neighboring towns like Tolosa, Tabon, Dagami, Palo, Burauen and even Tacloban. Buildings at the public market are dilapidated and need immediate repair or replacement. The amount needed is estimated at P40M to replace the old buildings with new structures and elevation of the area. The income of the LGU is not enough to finance the whole cost at one time.

If ever, it will take not less than 5 years to finish it using the funds of the LGU. This would mean 5 years or more of dislocation and disturbance to our market vendors and market goers. The cost may also increase as the materials is increasing every year. Actually, this is what had happened to our Municipal Hall construction.

On the other hand, per the feasibility study made, the present financial condition of the LGU would allow us to borrow from banks up to P70M but only the amount of P40M will be sourced as it will be enough already and the LGU can well afford to pay it in 7 years time. Basic services will not be affected even if the LGU will resort to borrowings. Local income is sufficient to pay the amortization. Construction period will last for 6 months only.

The LGU does not have any loan obtained ever since and does not have any liability to anybody. Should the LGU decide to resort to borrowings, it will make sure that a public hearing will first be conducted and the Sangguniang Bayan give its Legislative authority.

SOURCE: http://tanauan-leyte.gov.ph/news/Z018_facts_market.html

Let your VOICE be heard.. START BLOGGING NOW!

• Economy
• Comments(31)

admin October 23rd, 2007

For most people the world has indeed started to take drastic turn towards many changes – online shopping, internet, online games, computers, cellular phones, videoke, website designs, business process outsourcing, etc. - those that you don’t basically see everyday before are now one of the most dominant things that people indulge in these days.

However the world change, to whatever direction, to whatever extent, still, some things don’t just go away and fade with the onslaught of change. Our past dictates histories and traditions. Traditions that will forever live on the hearts of the people, lodge like bedrock of our own sense of identity and will continue to thrive despite changes and time’s dynamism. One of which is that classic tradition of molding and shaping using our own bare hands! The one true measure of craftsmanship that even time won’t wash away – pottery!

Continue Reading »

• Economy
• Comments(0)