SP rejects Ex-BM Mendoza’s proposed ordinance

By December 5, 2022Top Stories


THE authority and designation of former Second District Board Member Von Mark Mendoza was questioned during the regular session of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP) last week when the former sought action on a proposed ordinance invoking “for and by the authority of the Governor.”

Mendoza’s authority was questioned by Second District Board Member Haydee Pacheco who subsequently appealed for the withdrawal of the ruling made by Vice Governor Mark Lambino endorsing Mendoza’s proposal to committees concerned.

Lambino endorsed the proposed Ordinance No. 16-2022 entitled an “Ordinance enacting the Provincial Government of Pangasinan Joint Venture Agreement Code”, submitted through a cover letter dated November 7, 2022 signed “for and in behalf of the Governor”  by Mendoza without indicating his official designation in the provincial government.

In appealing the ruling of the chair, Pacheco, a lawyer, read the cover letter signed by Mendoza of the proposed ordinance with the statement “Considering the urgency of the matter, may we request the passage of the above stated ordinance in your next regular or special session…Respectfully,  For and by authority of the Governor…Hon. Von Mark Mendoza”.

According to Pacheco, the governor is clothed with authority to certify an ordinance as urgent and may be duly represented in official transaction or communication by his alter ego or his duly authorized official, the provincial administrator (Melecio Patague II).

She asserted that Mendoza is not the provincial chief executive’s alter ego and failed to indicate his official designation in the provincial government.

Mendoza lost when he run for a third and last term as board member of the second district of Pangasinan, one whom Pacheco defeated in the May 9, 2022 elections. The one-year ban to his appointment to a public office has not yet expired.

“So, since there is no indicated official designation of (Mendoza), Mr, Chair, I don’t believe we can ascertain the authority of the signatory to really certify the urgency of the proposed matter (ordinance),” Pacheco said.

She added, “That being said, this august body could not really act on this communication properly because we are not fully informed of the nature of urgency relating to the signatory, Mr. Presiding Officer.”

Vice Governor Lambino later agreed with Pacheco’s premise that the measure, authored by Third District Board Member Vici Ventanilla, and enacted based on the opinion of the provincial legal officer (Baby Ruth Torres), that it is not the governor who has officially requested for the passage of the ordinance.

Subsequently Pacheco filed a motion seeking to remand the communication as well as the proposed ordinance attached to it back to its source, a motion which no one, even the author, Board Member Ventanilla, objected to. (Leonardo Micua)

Share your Comments or Reactions


Powered by Facebook Comments