BF Homes Holdup, Break-in

About two weeks ago, there was another daylight holdup in BF Homes. Carlo Reyes, a hair saloon beside Union Bank, near Bacolod Chicken House (where the brother’s mayor was earlier held up) along President’s Avenue, BF Homes, was held up by 2 men on a motor cycle. They stuffed in a sack the hand bags and goodies of the ladies and took off in one motor cycle. How about that!

The present dispensation has destroyed the residential character of our neighborhood, forcibly opened our gates to horrendous outsider traffic and exposed residents to criminal elements, and illegally constructed government facilities using government funds on a private property (Aguirre Park), including a covered tennis court.

The commercialization of the subdivision, we are told, is progress, and instead of tossing the blame to the local government for the destruction of the residential character of the subdivision, residents should be grateful.

And why not, considering that even within BF Homes, residents cannot seem to put their acts together on the subject of keeping the subdivision safe for their families whose welfare has been shoved aside by a persistent minority.

Let me put it this way: When a storm is coming, you close all your windows. After the storm and you see the mess, you don’t ask why. You ask who opened windows.

The following is a slightly edited email, with a request for dissemination to residents and visitors of BF Homes Subdivision in Parañaque:

At around 9pm last night, we (well, our car) were the victims of “glass breakers”.

We were parked along the main street of BF Homes (President’s Avenue) -- a parking lot in front of a closed luxury car shop right beside the entrance to Tahanan Village. A lamp post illuminated the area and it was only a few steps to the guard house. And at 9pm, it was still a very busy street. So without giving it another thought, we locked the car and crossed the street to where we were having dinner.

We came back an hour later to find our left rear window open—at least, that’s what I thought. At closer inspection we found that the window had actually been smashed. And they did a pretty good job of it—the whole glass lay inside the car unbroken, with only shattered bits around it. Maybe that’s why they didn’t trip the alarm. They knew what they were doing, as we were later told by the police that it wasn’t the first time this happened in the area.

Anyway, we realized that a bag in the back seat caught their attention. It wasn’t a flashy one, and we thought our car was darkly tinted enough to hide what was inside. Apparently we were wrong. The bag contained some cash, credit cards, atm cards, a phone, and house keys. So we immediately got on the phone to have the cards and phone line cut, and all that. We put a makeshift window made of dark plastic so that we could at least drive home without inhaling the polluted air of South Super Highway.

And we thanked God that it was just a bag that was stolen, not our entire car...that it was just a window that was smashed, and not us. We’ve all heard these stories before and have been warned, especially about leaving your laptops in cars, or when going to particularly dangerous areas. But when it happens to you, inside a busy, well-lit area inside a private subdivision, with only a simple bag as the trigger, you can’t help but think, what’s the world coming to? Hay.”

Bottom line—please, please be extra careful, guys. No matter where you go, or what you have, these people will always find a way to get what they want (or need—I keep telling myself that I hope whoever did it was really in dire need na lang). Otherwise, sana kainin sila ng mga malalaking pulang langgam. Don’t give them the opportunity.

Priestly Vestments

The Archdiocese of Manila reminded the faithful that there is a proper dress code for attending Mass. Wearing the proper attire when attending Mass, said the archdiocese’s Ministry of Liturgical Affairs, is an important part of showing respect to the sanctity of the house of God.

Well and good. However, if there is a dress code for the faithful for attending Mass, there are also priestly vestments for celebrating Mass.

Priests in our parish do not follow the General Instructions of the Roman Missal (“GIRM”) with regards to the proper vestment that all the priests should wear at Mass. Most of the time, the priest celebrant wears an oversized stole over what appears to be a plain white “chasu-alb.” The chasuble is supposed to be a robe of color suitable to the liturgy of the day and worn on top of the alb and stole. It’s usually green (for ordinary times), although it could be white, violet, red, rose or black depending on the occasion. What does the 1975 edition of the GIRM say?

“The vestment common to ministers of every rank is the alb, tied at the waist with a cincture, unless it is made to fit without a cincture. An amice should be put on first if the alb does not completely cover the street clothing. A surplice may not be substituted for the alb when the chasuble or dalmatic is to be worn or when a stole is used instead of the chasuble or dalmatic.” [GIRM 298]

The priest who is celebrating Mass normally is to wear an alb and a chasuble:

“Unless otherwise indicated, the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the priest celebrant at Mass and other rites immediately connected with Mass.” [GIRM 299]

The Ceremonial of Bishops [CB] also describes the priest’s vestment in this way:

“Unless otherwise indicated, the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the priest celebrant at Mass and other rites immediately connected with Mass. [CB 66]

Wearing the alb and stole only when celebrating Mass has been permitted in limited circumstances (such as during concelebrations when there is a limited number of chasubles available), and when celebrated outside a church or oratory. It is clear from the above that the minimum vestments for celebrating Mass are the “chasuble, worn over the alb and stole.” These vestments are obligatory vestments envisaged in Canon 929, which states:

“In celebrating and administering the Eucharist, priests ad deacons are to wear the liturgical vestments prescribed by the rubrics.”

As already noted above, the rubrics are found in GIRM nos. 298-300, and in CB no. 66. As pointed out above, the exception to these requirements for Eucharistic celebrations are limited to concelebrations and celebrations outside a church. Nowhere does it allow the principal celebrant in any Mass held inside a church building to vest only with an oversized stole over a “chasu-alb.” What happened to the alb, the symbol of purity? Without it, the priest’s street clothes and bare arms can clearly be seen. Isn’t the alb worn precisely for the purpose of hiding the priest’s ordinary wear? How can the laity be expected to dress appropriately for Mass when the ordained minister himself is dressed inappropriately? I have also seen instances of priests wearing an alb but with a plain white or cream-colored “chasu-alb” over it, and an oversized stole over the “chasu-alb.” Both practices are not in accord with the established norms.

This casual mentality towards vesting diminishes the solemnity of the Mass. If people can afford to expend time to dress correctly to attend formal affairs hosted by mere mortals, surely, our Lord deserves no less.

Robbers struck in BF Homes Parañaque

Three armed men robbed the elder brother of Parañaque Mayor Florencio Bernabe at a restaurant in Parañaque City Wednesday afternoon.

Senior Superintendent Ronald Estilles said Dr. Renato “Boy” Bernabe and his wife Baby were among those who fell prey to the group of robbers who struck at the Bacolod Chicken House at President’s Avenue in Barangay BF Homes Parañaque.

Police said the robbers who were armed with handguns barged at the restaurant at around 1 p.m. and immediately announced the holdup.

Two of the suspects immediately went to the table occupied by the Bernabe family and divested them of their jewelry and cellular phones.

The suspects also took the valuables from about a dozen customers who were dining at the time. Taking advantage of the fact that there was no security guard posted at the restaurant, the heist took only about a few minutes to complete.

The suspects escaped without taking anything from the cash register of the restaurant, police said.

Surprisingly, members of the Parañaque police headquarters arrived at the crime scene ahead of the police personnel from a nearby police community precinct beside the Barangay BF Homes which is just a stone’s throw away from the restaurant.

Estilles said his men is now conducting follow up operation for the immediate capture of the suspects, who reportedly belongs to the FX Robbery Gang who are responsible for the series of robberies on public utility vehicles.

Police said they are now hunting down one of the alleged leaders of the gang identified as Bobby Baliber, whose picture, along with his other cohorts, are now posted in various business establishments BF Homes.

Baliber, a resident of Purok 5, Sampaloc, Site 2, Barangay BF Homes, had been arrested in November 26, 2006, along with two other accused Joel Lazarito and Cris Dadibas, on charges of robbery.

The subdivision residents had resented the move of Mayor Bernabe who ordered the force-opening of the gates of the BF Homes to public traffic, which has reportedly sparked a rash of crimes in the village, including pick-pockets, snatchers, car theft, and cellular phone robbers.

[Daily Tribune by Ben Gines, Jr.]

Face The Issue

1. Allegation: Romeo G. Roxas of Green Circle Properties and Resources, Inc. logged and cleared their area at Umiray-Dingalan wantonly.

The Facts: The 28,000 hectare Umiray-Dingalan area is a titled property bought from a former owner who have the area logged under an SPLTL (Special Private Land Timber License). The area as far back as the mid of the 18^th century was claimed and cleared by Inspeccion General de Montes and later, during the American Regime was titled under the Torrens System.

Since Roxas’ Green Circle is not a logging company but on realty and development, logging was stopped. The former operator applied for salvage and retrieval operations with the DENR and was the one responsible for logs coming out of the area.

Also, as the area is an alienable and disposable having been a titled property, Green Circle therefore has all the rights to develop their area subject to limitations and provisions of an Environmental Compliance Certificate issued by DENR re: development activities. Hence, for al intents and purposes and as deemed required, Green Circle can cut-down all trees without any violations as per P.D. 705 – the Forestry Reform Code.

2. Allegation: Romeo G. Roxas is not an heir of a Philippine Veteran.

The Facts: The father of Romeo Roxas is an employee of the Commonwealth and is directly providing services to the US Government as a Teacher/ Superintendent. Hence the father is a veteran and therefore the son is an heir.

3. Allegation: He (Romeo Roxas) burns money and cut down trees

The Facts: Romeo G. Roxas is a monetarist who is well-versed with the Keynesian Theory. He doesn’t burn money but instead creates wealth through his development efforts. He implements or wants to implement theories and practices learned and experienced.

The writers/hackers of the undocumented articles in the internet are “journalist” of the AC-DC genre. Romeo G. Roxas proved he can never kowtow with their “extortions” and hence, earned their ire.

Numbers

30% Proportion of Filipino couples unaware that babies result from having sex, according to a study by the Philippine government.

2.36% Net population growth in the Philippines, among the highest in the world, with 4,000 babies born every day. [Source: Time Magazine, 03/14/05]

Leaders of the Catholic Church, the religion of 81 percent of the Philippine population, condemn birth control.[Source: Pulse Asia]

Ayan!

***

Thousands of Americans were marching on the 4^th year anniversary of the Iraq war, calling the killing of 3,500 American soldiers since the start of the war as “immoral!”

By comparison, since the start of the Iraq war, more than 5,000,000 (five million!) American babies have died by abortion.

It seems to me that the protesters are marching for the wrong reason.

Wake-up Call

A friend telephoned to disagree to my characterization of BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision. The commercialization of the subdivision is progress, and instead of tossing the blame to the local government for the destruction of the residential character of the subdivision, residents should be grateful.

And why not, considering that even within BF Homes, residents cannot seem to put their acts together on the subject of keeping the subdivision safe for their families whose welfare has been shoved aside by a persistent minority. This is eloquently expressed in Mayor Jun Bernabe’s February 15, 2006, letter to Muntinlupa Mayor Jaime Fresnide:

This is just a follow-up to our conversation last Sunday via our cellphones in which we discussed… the increasing number of complaints that my office has been receiving regarding the use of Tirona gate as a two-way access route for residents living in both Parañaque and Alabang, Muntinlupa sides of BF Homes.

To raise revenues for the municipality to qualify for cityhood being pushed by (re-electionist) Congressman Roilo Golez, public opinion was ignored, public preferences were disregarded, and public meetings were rigged!

In water-starved BF Homes, the 1997 re-zoning of subdivision’s main streets converted properties one lot deep along Aquirre and a portion of El Grande Avenues to commercial zones, allowing the construction of multi-storey structures, restaurants, beer houses, super clubs, liquor stores, gasoline service stations, supermarkets, banks, colleges and universities, including funeral parlors, mortuaries and crematory services and memorial chapels. Homeowners are outraged by the prospect of having such establishments as their next door neighbors.

The letter continues: Sometime in August last year, we implemented City Ordinance No. 00-15, Series of 2000 and opened the major roads of BF Homes-Parañaque to the public. In doing so, we effectively took over from UBFHAI the function and responsibility of manning the gates of the subdivision’s major roads in the interest of order and public service…

The local government cannot simply take over private property [the road lots are privately titled] without due process, but [re-electionist] Mayor Jun Bernabe, using SWAT power, forcibly opened the gates of the subdivision. In doing so, as his letter aptly articulated, he effectively let loose a huge influx of outsider traffic that includes commuters, short-cutting motorists, commercial vehicles of all types, and legions of squatters, carjackers, carnappers and even prowlers, thieves, rapists, and all sorts of criminals.

Over the objections of homeowners, and despite the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes, the mayor appropriated yet another portion of Aguirre Park for a two-story Barangay Hall. For good measure, the park fronting the Resurrection Parish Church is also designated garbage segregation facility. [Follow your nose, you can’t miss it!]

The commercial area in Phase I has been converted into one big parking area with the “pito” boys, displaying the charms of modern Mafioso’s, licensed to collect “parking fees.” These “volunteers” are sporting “PNP-CVO” uniforms, cap and ID’s costing, I am told, something like PhP1,000. Not far behind are the security guards of the commercial establishments collecting “tips” for illegal parking.

Aguirre and President’s Avenues and Elizalde Street in the commercial district in Phase I are no on-street parking areas. Yet, despite repeated written appeals for enforcement from some 200 residents located at the end of President’s Avenue, the local authorities remain deaf. The commercial establishments continue with impunity to appropriate the roads and sidewalks at President’s corner Aguirre Avenues for parking, double parking and sometimes triple parking, making going and coming home difficult and hazardous for residents.

Obviously, our barangay captain, who is busy campaigning for a seat in the city council, is the problem, not the solution.

We are not against progress, but traffic, efficient garbage disposal and distribution of basic necessities are also primary considerations. Progress should be rational and for the good of the majority, otherwise, it is a brutalization of the quality of our lives.

The present dispensation has destroyed the residential character of our neighborhood, forcibly opened our gates to horrendous outsider traffic and exposed residents to criminal elements, illegally constructed government facilities on the park, including garbage segregation facility. Yet, many of those responsible are shamelessly seeking re-election, while some even have the gall and temerity to aspire for higher public offices.

We are saddled with officials who cannot grasp even the basic fundamentals of urban planning, who lack the creativity to increase the city’s coffers except to increase real estate taxes, and who exhibit total disregard for a healthy environment.

Clearly, our re-electionist congressman, mayor, councilors, and barangay officials are insensitive and unresponsive to the feelings of residents over the demands of outside speculators. THEY DO NOT DESERVE OUR VOTES!

Above The Law?

The United BF Homeowners’ Association has filed a petition in the Office of the Ombudsman, claiming that it was unconstitutional and unlawful for City Mayor of Parañaque to disburse public funds of the City of Parañaque for the clearing, repair and maintenance of the existing sidewalks of BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision. The sidewalks are private property of BF Homes, Inc. Hence, the city government could not use public resources on them. In undertaking the project, therefore, respondent allegedly violated the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes as well as Sections 335 and 336 of RA 7160 [Local Government Code of 1991] and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Undoubtedly, the respondent city mayor, through his legal adviser, is invoking the Supreme Court’s 1991 decision in justifying the project [including the construction of a two-story Barangay Hall at the Aguirre Park], as follows:

“When [a strip of land] was withdrawn from the commerce of man as the open space required by law to be devoted for the use of the general public, its ownership was automatically vested in the [LGU] and/or the Republic of the Philippines, without need of paying any compensation to [the developer], although it is still registered in the latter’s name. Its donation by the owner/developer is a mere formality.” [193 SCRA 765]

But the 1991 White Plains ruling was modified by the Supreme Court in 1998, holding that subdivision streets belonged to the owner until donated to the government or until expropriated upon payment of just compensation. [297 SCRA 547]

Under subdivision laws [PD-957, 1216], lots allotted by subdivision developers as road lots include roads, sidewalks, alleys and planting strips. Thus, what is true for subdivision roads or streets applies to subdivision sidewalks as well. Ownership of the sidewalks in a private subdivision belongs to the subdivision owner/developer until it is either transferred to the government by way of donation or acquired by the government through expropriation.

The Court has laid down the test of validity of a public expenditure: it is the essential character of the direct object of the expenditure which must determine its validity and not the magnitude of the interests to be affected nor the degree to which the general advantage of the community, and thus the public welfare, may be ultimately benefited by their promotion. Incidental advantage to the public or to the State resulting from the promotion of private interests and the prosperity of private enterprises or business does not justify their aid by the use of public money. [Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works, 110 Phil. 331 (1960)]

Section 335 of RA 7160 is clear and specific that no public money or property shall be appropriated or applied for private purposes. This is in consonance with the fundamental principle in local fiscal administration that local government funds and monies shall be spent solely for public purposes.

Therefore, the use of LGU funds for the improvement of privately-owned sidewalks [and the construction of the Barangay Hall] in BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision is unlawful as it directly contravenes Section 335 of RA 7160.

The case filed by the homeowners association is hardly moving, if at all, thanks to the mayor’s influential legal adviser. How can the validity of the challenged appropriation and expenditure be determined if the Ombudsman prosecutor sits on the case?