WHAT is so out of routine about the proposed ordinance to name the road leading from the junction of the National Highway to the Eco-Park in barangay San Felipe as Meriem Rodriguez Palacio Avenue is that it was approved jointly and collectively by the Sanggunian Panlungsod in its session, Tuesday (October 23, 2007). Seldom does the Sanggunian Panlungsod pass a proposed legislation immediately after its first reading, unless the proposed legislation is considered urgent or its urgency emanates from the Office of the City Mayor.

        Equally out of routine is that the Palacio Avenue ordinance was not given the “run-around” process, deemed standard, which includes consultation with the National Historical Institute any proposed legislation on naming streets or public places is subjected to. But the proposed ordinance changing the name of Plaza Quezon to Plaza Arejola was given the “run-around”. It had to undergo two committee hearings, a discussion of the proposed ordinance in the radio, a consultation with the National Historical Institute which said that plazas, named after Presidents of the Philippines, shall not be renamed and finally a public hearing which recommended to the Sanggunian Panlungsod that the proposed ordinance be archived. Evidently, the proposed Palacio Avenue ordinance was more fortunate than the proposed Plaza Arejola ordinance.

        While in the proposed Plaza Arejola ordinance the Sanggunian Panlungsod was so scrupulous about observing the standard “run-around” process, in the Palacio Avenue ordinance the Sanggunian Panlungsod cut a lot of corners in the process and showed its balls. It stated in Section 6 of this ordinance: “Naming the subject road after Meriem Rodriguez Palacio is an exercise by the City of Naga of its power to name city roads, avenues and the like as provided for in this Section (13 b) of Republic act 7160” or the Local Government Code. Likewise in Section 7 of this ordinance, it further said — hold your breath please: “. . . the power of giving names (to roads, streets, plazas) remains at the discretion of the local government unit, notwithstanding whatever policies there are in the National Historical Commission (now Institute) since this government agency may only be consulted and its policies cannot overrule the power of the local government unit to legislate in keeping with what is deemed proper and relevant to the needs and culture by the local government unit.”

        Perhaps the Sanggunian Panlungsod should have shown its balls a long time ago — whenever the matter for legislation is about local culture and history. The National Historical Institute is after all not the-know-it-all that it claims to be and its guidelines are as they are — guidelines — and not laws that must be followed to the letter by local government units. The documentary errors of the NHI on historical dates surfaced when local researchers established that the Aldaw nin Katalinkasan sa España in the City of Naga is September 19, not September 18 as contained in the historical marker made by the NHI for the old belfry of the San Francisco Church. Ordinance 2006-050, passed last year known as the Liberation Day of Naga which fixed it on September 18, was based obviously on this NHI marker.

        Now that the Sanggunian Panlungsod has shown that it has balls, will it still have the balls to recall the archived Plaza Arejola proposed ordinance and give it as fair a treatment as it did for the Palacio Avenue ordinance— following their signature cry of ubos kun ubos, gabos kun gabos? Have balls, SP, and legislate!