THE Liga ng mga Barangay of Dagupan headed by Punong Barangay Marcelino Fernandez slammed the Pamana Water Corporation (PWC) anew in connection with its application for  franchise as well as for water rate increase and called for its denial.

This was gleaned from its expounded opposition on June 2, filed before the National Water Resources Board (NWRB) to reiterate the hand-written opposition of the Barangay Kapitans of Dagupan initially submitted by Fernandez and his lawyer Atty. Netu Tamayo during the hearing of the application of Pamana on May 24.

The Liga’s Resolution No. 1, series of 2022 dated May 20, 2022 restated its vigorous opposition to the grant of public convenience (franchise) to Pamana, including its petition for water rate increase.

The resolution cited city residents’ complaint about the poor quality of water coming out from their faucets, noting it to be yellowish in color, sandy and sometimes murky; the low water pressure, and the imposition of increased water rate without any authority from the NWRB.

The barangays that complained  about the poor quality of water as well and services of Pamana were the barangays in the Bonuan area, Lucao, Pogo Grande, Salisay, Caranglaan, Salapingao, Bacayao Norte, Lomboy, Lasip Grande, Herrero Perez, Pogo Chico, Carael, Calmay, Tambac, Barangay 1, Mamalingling, Bolosan, Pantal, Tebeng and Poblacion Oeste.

The Liga stressed that while PWC is operating a joint venture with Dagupan City Water District, PWC cannot be granted a franchise from NWRB because the sole holder of franchise for water system is the Dagupan City Water District, a distinct corporation to which a franchise was already issued  to serve the people of Dagupan.

Through lawyer Tamayo, the Liga said the prior operator rule applies under the present dispensation, which provides “that so long as the first licensee keeps and performs the terms and conditions of its license and complies with the reasonable rules and regulations of the Commission, and meets the reasonable demands of the public, it should have more or less a vested and preferential right over a person who seeks to acquire another and later license over  the same  route (second operator) otherwise, the first licensee would not have protection of his investment  and would be subject to ruinous competition.” (Batangas Transportation v. Orlanes).

Further, the Liga said since DCWD is the sole franchisee, the PWC cannot ask for any water (rate) increase since it is not a franchisee authorized to operate in Dagupan but the DCWD and they still maintain confidence on the DCWD, it being “a corporation that hails from Dagupan”.

Lastly, the submitted opposition stressed that any proposed increase of water charges, either from DCWD and /or Pamana is “illegal and unconscionable,” in the face of prevailing higher costs of living brought about by the shrinking world and local economy, and the unbearable  quality of services. (Leonardo Micua)

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments