Tom vetoes ordinance merging traffic codes
Believing that the legislative measure is prejudicial to public welfare, Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmeña vetoed the ordinance establishing a Consolidated Traffic Code of the city.
In his two-page veto message, Osmeña cited several grounds why he is against the ordinance authored by Councilor Joel Garganera, a known critic of the mayor in the Council.
“In view of the confusion created in the legislative enactment, as well as its implementation and enforcement, this ordinance is prejudicial to public welfare,” the mayor said.
Osmeña also said in his veto message that there are other trafficrelated ordinances that were not incorporated in the Consolidated Traffic Code, adding that there are also some provisions in the ordinance that are redundant.
He added that there are newly-enacted ordinances that were not incorporated in the ordinance.
Further, the mayor said Garganera has not alphabetized the definition of words and phrases which created more confusion for people who will read the measure.
Garganera, for his part, said he initiated the consolidation of all traffic ordinances in the city since there are about 60 subsequent ordinances since the City Ordinance 801 or the Traffic Code of the city has been put in place.
“Og unsay sitwasyon sa atong traffic karon sa Cebu City, mao sad na ka-chaotic ang atong traffic ordinance. I challenge you, if you try to get a copy of our traffic ordinance (from) 1973 up to now, there are more than 60 amendatory ordinances. Ingon ana sad ka chaotic,” he told reporters.
Garganera admitted that the opposition cannot override the veto of the mayor because it needs twothirds vote to do so and they do not have the number.
However, he said there’s a need for the city to consolidate all the traffic laws so that it would be easy for the residents of the city to study these ordinances.
He said the issue on alphabetizing the words and phrases of the ordinance is not necessary because it can be easily understood as a reference with the Traffic Code, the mother ordinance.
Garganera said there is no redundancy in his ordinance, as claimed by Osmeña.
Garganera admitted that there are other trafficrelated ordinances that were not incorporated in this measure because he is only focusing on the amendatory ordinances in relation to the City Traffic Code 801.
However, he said the enactment of the consolidated ordinance may also lead the way for the incorporation of other traffic-related ordinances in the city.
“The consolidated traffic ordinance might not be perfect but it can be a stepping stone towards the codification and review of our traffic ordinances,” he said.
Garganera said the consolidation of traffic ordinances will not address the traffic problem of the city nowadays.
But he said he is just doing his job as a legislator to ensure that traffic laws are easily accessed and understood.