True lies
>> Thursday, March 15, 2012
LETTERS FROM THE AGNO
March L. Fianza
BAGUIO CITY -- After shedding off true colors of prioritizing profit that benefit only them over a green forest that benefits every living thing that breathes, they were recently found out to be spreading true lies. After all, what proponent SM had been saying about having “teamed up with the US Green Building Council” has been denied by Jennevine Kwan, USGBC Vice President for International Operations.
This was found out in reply to an inquiry by a concerned Baguio resident who asked the USGBC if LEED – certified buildings (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) have to “sacrifice living and naturally-grown trees and vegetation.” SM plans to push through with its seven-storey expansion building to be constructed on a mini forest between Gov. Pack Road and its present mall. Underneath its expansion project will be an additional underground parking space for around a thousand cars and a 2,190-square meter water reservoir at the lowest floor level.
In its press releases to “friendly” media outlets, SM Prime artificially garbs itself with clothing that makes it appear that it sticks to sustainable environment programs, just like its “green architecture” that is more artificial than natural. Thus, it said it has teamed up with the USGBC.
But the same reply letter from USGBC Vice President Kwan has denied SM’s claims, saying further that the SM project is: not yet LEED-Certified; USGBC does not have any information on the SM project; SM has not submitted any document to USGBC; and USGBC is NOT partnering with SM. Now, who is lying and who is telling the truth?
Granted that the SM green architecture layout shows that all the features needed to become LEED-certified are there, the problem would now be thrown to USGBC considering that in its basic rules it requires that green building participants in LEED must comply with all prerequisites, including “compliance with all environmental laws and regulations.” LEED as a rating system must evaluate the environmental performance of a building not only after it has been constructed, but also its being environmentally-friendly before and during its construction. SM intends to remove a forest to give way to its expansion. In this case, it is clear that even before the SM expansion project started, there was already a violation to the requirements in qualifying to becoming LEED-certified. Will USGBC consider this as environmentally-friendly?
***
In the latest public hearing, many “lies and truths” were revealed. The more the speakers lied, the more the truth came out. Their lies forced out the truths. For example, councilors asked the SM tree-cutting petitioners the question: “why only now?” Certain councilors deserve to be called “environmentalists” so that I throw the question back to them. If they are really concerned with maintaining the city’s forest cover, why do they have to wait for private citizens to petition SM not to kill trees in the course of expanding? I am certain the environmentalists in the city council knew as early as the last quarter of last year about SM’s plan but they were so quiet about it until the issue came out in January.
“Apo councilors, why only now?” I think they did not only lie to their people, they lied to their own selves. In the first public hearing conducted by the city council, City Legal Officer MelchorRabanes chided the petitioners by asking them why they have “singled out” SM in their fight for the trees and have not included other forest areas. I say, that question should be asked of him. “What is so special about SM that it is being excluded from the city’s fight against tree-cutting?”
City Councilor Richard Cariño filed last month a resolution that opposed the cutting, pruning and earth-balling of trees at the Luneta Hill by SM, and has requested in the same resolution the DENR and the City Government of Baguio to withdraw all permits issued relative to the project. Our councilors know the value of trees and what these contribute to the city of pines. But let us count how many councilors will approve of Carino’s resolution and how many will lie to satisfy themselves and SM. By the way, councilor Carino’s measure reflects Resolution 288 of 2008 that “opposed any plan of SM to cut trees or construct a building within the forest beside the Baguio Convention Center.” The city council even held a public hearing about it. The lot is also a “private” property owned by the GSIS. I do not know if the environmentalists in the city council have completely forgotten about this, but I will not be surprised if that is so because I know that they are not telling the truth.
Speaking of resolutions, in 2004 the city council passed Reso. 140 entitled “Directing SM-Baguio management to remove the illegally installed gates along Luneta Hill road and advising them not to direct traffic on the city roads.” For a long time, we had been discussing if the city has given up on the Luneta Hill Road and has relinquished, if not sold, it to SM. By the way, this is not the first time that a public road has been taken over by a private entity. The Lapu-Lapu Street at the former “burned area” along Magsaysay Avenue is now the middle walkway of the Baguio Center Mall. But that is another story. Back to Reso. 140, SM has not fully obeyed the resolution. Today, it continues to block the entrance of Luneta Hill Road with movable guard rails, continues to lord over the road by directing the traffic along the whole stretch and maintains it as its private parking, loading and unloading area.
What other lies did the people find out in the course of the public hearing? On October 27, 2011; the DENR through RED Clarence Baguilat issued a permit to cut and earth-ball trees to SM Vice-Pres. for Operations Bien Mateo in the form of a letter that stipulated 11 conditions and in “compliance” to a memo from Sec. Ramon Paje. The first condition asked that SM “endeavor to conduct meetings or public consultations with LGUs, NGOs and other stakeholders… etc.” No public hearing has ever been conducted although the SM project was endorsed by the barangay chairman in that area. That however, is far from being considered as LGU consultation. I suspect it was a strange process that was resorted to considering that a wider public consultation would not ensure favorable endorsement.
On the last paragraph of the DENR letter-permit, it said: “Violation of any of the above conditions shall be sufficient ground for the cancellation and revocation of this permit without prejudice to the imposition of penalties in accordance with applicable laws, rules and regulations.” The conditions and the last paragraph are not complicated as these can easily be understood by a high school student. When the “Save 182” petitioners held talks with Mayor Domogan, he told them to give him any legal basis to cancel the permits that were issued to SM that he can support. The absence of public consultations was a clear violation of the permit. I wonder if SM, some councilors, Mayor Domogan and some DENR men can not understand the simple conditions that their boss Sec. Paje wrote, and the violation that was committed. True lies and true liars. – marchfianza777@yahoo.com
City Councilor Richard Cariño filed last month a resolution that opposed the cutting, pruning and earth-balling of trees at the Luneta Hill by SM, and has requested in the same resolution the DENR and the City Government of Baguio to withdraw all permits issued relative to the project. Our councilors know the value of trees and what these contribute to the city of pines. But let us count how many councilors will approve of Carino’s resolution and how many will lie to satisfy themselves and SM. By the way, councilor Carino’s measure reflects Resolution 288 of 2008 that “opposed any plan of SM to cut trees or construct a building within the forest beside the Baguio Convention Center.” The city council even held a public hearing about it. The lot is also a “private” property owned by the GSIS. I do not know if the environmentalists in the city council have completely forgotten about this, but I will not be surprised if that is so because I know that they are not telling the truth.
Speaking of resolutions, in 2004 the city council passed Reso. 140 entitled “Directing SM-Baguio management to remove the illegally installed gates along Luneta Hill road and advising them not to direct traffic on the city roads.” For a long time, we had been discussing if the city has given up on the Luneta Hill Road and has relinquished, if not sold, it to SM. By the way, this is not the first time that a public road has been taken over by a private entity. The Lapu-Lapu Street at the former “burned area” along Magsaysay Avenue is now the middle walkway of the Baguio Center Mall. But that is another story. Back to Reso. 140, SM has not fully obeyed the resolution. Today, it continues to block the entrance of Luneta Hill Road with movable guard rails, continues to lord over the road by directing the traffic along the whole stretch and maintains it as its private parking, loading and unloading area.
What other lies did the people find out in the course of the public hearing? On October 27, 2011; the DENR through RED Clarence Baguilat issued a permit to cut and earth-ball trees to SM Vice-Pres. for Operations Bien Mateo in the form of a letter that stipulated 11 conditions and in “compliance” to a memo from Sec. Ramon Paje. The first condition asked that SM “endeavor to conduct meetings or public consultations with LGUs, NGOs and other stakeholders… etc.” No public hearing has ever been conducted although the SM project was endorsed by the barangay chairman in that area. That however, is far from being considered as LGU consultation. I suspect it was a strange process that was resorted to considering that a wider public consultation would not ensure favorable endorsement.
On the last paragraph of the DENR letter-permit, it said: “Violation of any of the above conditions shall be sufficient ground for the cancellation and revocation of this permit without prejudice to the imposition of penalties in accordance with applicable laws, rules and regulations.” The conditions and the last paragraph are not complicated as these can easily be understood by a high school student. When the “Save 182” petitioners held talks with Mayor Domogan, he told them to give him any legal basis to cancel the permits that were issued to SM that he can support. The absence of public consultations was a clear violation of the permit. I wonder if SM, some councilors, Mayor Domogan and some DENR men can not understand the simple conditions that their boss Sec. Paje wrote, and the violation that was committed. True lies and true liars. – marchfianza777@yahoo.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment