TOURISM BROCHURE
Select messages from
# through # FAQ
[/[Print]\]
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  :| |:
USAP PAETE -> Usap Paete

#26: SEPMAR Enterprises Receipt Author: TonyB PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:48 am
    —
I got a copy of the receipt. Thanks to Ka Noel. It looks like SEPMAR paid the two writers rather than the munisipyo paying them. Okay, I got that one clear now. That makes sense since the bid is for the whole project.

I noticed something different though.



The receipt is saying SEPMAR billed the munispyo 125,000 not the 122,000 that Ka Noel wrote in the Paete ML.

Based on the receipt, the breakdown is as follows:
Quote:

5,000 pcs. Tourism Brochure
a) Managing/Editing – 30,000
b) Contributing Writers – 15,000
c) Photography – 15,000
d) Layout – 15,000
e) Printing (P10.00 each) – 50,000
------------------------------------
Total 125,000


Here is Ka Noel's full email for the benefit of those who are not members of the Paete ML where it's posted:

Quote:

Tito,

Yes this is the same 5,000 pcs tourism brochures where you made a lot of comments. There was a transparent open bidding.

The procedure is as follows:

1. Invitation to apply for eligibility and to bid posted in all Laguna municipal and capitol bulletin board) from October 14 – 23, 2005)

Name of Project- Printing of Book and Tourism Brochure

Location – Paete, Laguna

Brief Description – Book and Brochure

Approved Budget for the Contract - P385,000.00

A) 1,000 pcs 425th Foundation Book – P260,000

B) 5,000 pcs Tourism Brochure – P 125,000

Required Documents to be submitted by Bidders:

1. Registration with the Government Electronic Procurement System (G-EPS)
2. Bidder’s bond (P18,900)
3. Bank Credit line
4. Tax Clearance Certificate
5. Certification – compliance of existing labor laws and standards
6. Affidavit of no relation by consanguinity or affinity to the head of agency and BAC members
7. Audited Company Balance Sheet
8. Company Income statement
9. Mayor’s permit
10. DTI registration certificate
11. Certificate of Authenticity
12. Letter of authority to validate submitted documents
13. BIR certificate of registration
14. Taxpayer’s Identification Number or VAT registration ertificate
15. Duly signed statement of the bidder that it is not lacklisted 16. Article of Incorporation, Partnership or Corporation.

Members of the Bidds and Awards Committee (BAC):

1. Arcangel Tolentino (Municipal Administrator) Chairman

2. Efren Capco (General Services Officer) Vice Chairman

3. Engr. Noel Viray (Municipal Engineer) Member

4. Alfredo Dagsindal (Municipal Civil Registrar) Member

5. Maria Luisa Sena (Municipal Budget Officer) Member

Note: A COA representative is invited during the actual bidding.

Actual Bidding was conducted on October 26, 2005 with all BAC members present except Maria Luisa Sena.

A single bidder (SEPMAR ENTERPRISES, Sta. Cruz Laguna) attended the bidding with a price lower than the Approved Budget for the Contract (ABC)

1. Brochure –P122,000 (5,000 pcs)

Break down of price:

a)Managing/ Editing – 29,500

b)Contributing Writers – 14,500

c)Photography – 14,500

d)Layout – 14,500

e)Printing – 49,000


2. Foundation Book – P256,000 (1,000 pcs Hardbound w/ full color jacket, glossy paper, all photos in full colors)

Break down of price:

a)Managing and Editing – 99,000

b)Contributing Writers – 49,000

c)Photography - 59,000

d)Layout - 49,000
(Printing not included)

Project was awarded to SEPMAR ENTERPRISES on Oct. 28, 2005

The proof of the brochure was submitted to DOT prior to printing and it was approved by their accounting department.

“The P200,000 grant from DOT was intended for the following:

1. P125,000 for printing of 5,000 pcs of brouchures

2. P 25,000 for the 425 years celebration last September 2005.”

My previous message was erroneous. It should read P75,000 for the 425 years celebration. Sorry for the mistake. These were already liquidated last Dec. 22.

Sorry but the bidding documents are so voluminous, it is impossible to condense it here. However, you are most welcome to scrutinize the documents which are available at our Accounting office.

Thanks,

Ka Noel
P.S. The bidding procedure for the 3 cruz improvement is the same as the above.



Does this mean SEPMAR overbilled the munispyo? Very Happy
Or could it be that I got the wrong receipt? Sad

But if I got the right one, I think SEPMAR should light the proverbial candle? Who is behind SEPMAR BTW?


Tony

#27: Procedures, external funding, etc. Author: adediosLocation: Angel C. de Dios PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:20 am
    —
Back in July 2005 when I was in the Philippines, I accompanied Ka Noel and Councilor Cosico to meet with the Ayala Foundation. The municipal government was then seeking funds for the brochures and the foundation book. The Ayala Foundation did not provide funds for this purpose but they made an offer to buy copies of the book and help distribute them among the Ayala subsidiaries and friends.

In July, the municipal government has already conceptualized a proposal to produce the tourism brochures and the foundation book. There were people that helped the municipal government develop this proposal especially with the budget and details. And finally, the muncipal government did suceed in obtaining the necesary funds from the Department of Tourism. The rules are then subject to what the Department of Tourism dictates.

As for other government contracts, there was a bidding process. There is a committee assigned to review and approve the submitted bids and there are established rules for this process. Since this activity is associated with a grant, I am sure the bidding process also incorporated rules specific to the grant. SEPMAR enterprises won the bid. With the awarding of the bid, approval of the proofs of the tourism brochures was in the hands of the Department of Tourism, the granting agency, and not the municipal government. SEPMAR enterprises, I imagine, also worked with the original budget guidelines prescribed by the Department of Tourism.

It is important that we understand the process before we draw conclusions. Some of the conclusions that we hastily draw may hurt the character of some of the people involved in the project.

#28: Opinions Author: TonyB PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:48 am
    —
adedios wrote:
It is important that we understand the process before we draw conclusions. Some of the conclusions that we hastily draw may hurt the character of some of the people involved in the project.


I apologize to the people concerned if I offered some interpretation more than what the facts show, given that the people involved has not shown any interest to spare a few words to clarify the discrepancies. And as I have high respect for you and the people of Paete, I will refrain from offering my own opinion on the matter moving forward. Frankly, I don't exactly understand the bidding process. I am offering the facts as given me by Ka Noel himself and trying to point out some apparent mistakes. I understand that there are many readers who'd rather not see these kind of posts as this causes distractions from our onward march to progress.

BTW, the figures in the Foundation Book also don't match the receipt, 256,000 as per Ka Noel's email to Paete ML and 260,000 as per SEPMAR's receipt. I don't know if it's proper to pursue it any further given that there seems to be very little interest in matters like this. I must be a real pain to them.

But I am glad our town can look forward to the next round of the annual high school math contest. At least in the future, figures will match. Very Happy

Tony

#29: Re: SEPMAR Enterprises Receipt Author: saidaLocation: Saida Cagandahan Dulay PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:11 pm
    —
tony.basa wrote:


Does this mean SEPMAR overbilled the munispyo? Very Happy
Or could it be that I got the wrong receipt? Sad

But if I got the right one, I think SEPMAR should light the proverbial candle? Who is behind SEPMAR BTW?

Tony



On the Invitation to Bid that was posted in the Munisipyo from Oct. 14-23, 2005, here are the details:

Name of Project : Printing of Book and Tourism Brochure
Location : Paete, Laguna
Brief Description : Books and Brochures
Approved Budget
For the Contract : Php385,000.00

SEPMAR [the lone bidder] successfully complied with all the requirements and so the contract was awarded to them.

On the 2 Sales Invoices dated Nov. 7, 2005, SEPMAR billed The Municipal Government of Paete, Laguna for the ff:

A. Sales Invoice #0223
5000 pcs. Tourism Brochure
Managing/Editing Php 30,000.00
Contributing Writers 15,000.00
Photography 15,000.00
Layout 15,000.00
Printing [10 pesos ea] 50,000.00
---------------------------
Php 125,000.00

B. Sales Invoice #0224
1000 pcs 425th Foundation Books
Managing/Editing Php 100,000.00
Contributing Writers 50,000.00
Photography 60,000.00
Layout 50,000.00
----------------------------
Php 260,000.00

On Nov 11, 2005, SEPMAR issued 2 Official Receipts to the Municipal Treasurer of Paete Laguna:
OR#0183 Php 117,120.00 as payment for 5000 of Tourism Brochures
OR#0182 Php 245,760.00 as payment for 1000 pcs 425th Foundation Books

From what I gathered, after the bid was awarded to SEPMAR [for a grand total of Php385,000.00] SEPMAR hired the services of Mr. Ben Afuang and Mr. Bien Saniano as SUBCONTRACTORS to work on the brochures and Paete books. They did the managing/editing, scriptwriting [supplied the write-ups/articles/captions], photography [supplied the pictures], lay-outing. SEPMAR did the printing of the brochures [the bill for Paete books did not include the cost of printing....hindi pa napi-print as of this writing]

Speculations and wild rumors against the persons mentioned are circulating. I do not know them personally but from what I heard, they are well respected figures in their own fields, recipients of the Ten Outstanding Living Paetenians Award [TOLP] It is very unfair for them if their names will be maliciously and continuously dragged in the brochure controversy. To shed light on this hot issue, efforts have been made to reach them so they can give their side but to no avail.

#30:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:24 am
    —
TONY:
I said I will no longer reply to your postings because I would like to encourage you and you brothers to meet with us and clarify the things clouding your mind. But I don’t see it forthcoming so here I am again to rectify the wrong impressions you created in your posting.

You said: “I am offering the facts as given me by Ka Noel himself and trying to point out some apparent mistakes.”

There was no mistake on my part, only your interpretation. Let me go thru this one by one.

A. You posted my report sometime in July and I quote:
“6. World Class brochure – An on-going project together with the Foundation Book with the able assistance of Dr. Bien Saniano and Mr. Ben Afuang. Target completion, September 2005.”
This was commented by Indoy:
“"Nagkamali nga siguro dahil ano ang Bidding na naganap ng October 2005 kung September 2005 pa lang eh they already have the brochure? Tapos, July 2005 pa lang eh nasa Development Stage na yung brochure. "
Oh man! "


There was no mistake here. The posting I made last July 2005 was the time we were conceptualizing the brochure and the foundation book. I think it is natural to conceptualize the brochures and the book first before the funding so that we can have an idea on how much to request for the funding. Committees were created as early as March 2005 headed by all members of the SB and applying the principle of synergy as pointed out by Angel de Dios, we tapped resource people and consulted them on the budgetary estimates. Our “TARGET” completion date was September 2005. This was not attained because the funding from DOT was approved only late September of last year, hence bidding was made October. If you read between the lines September 2005, was only a “target” date.

B. When I gave you copies of all pertinent documents on the brochure, I was hoping we could sit down together (with Saida probably over a cup of coffee) and thresh out what ever is not clear with you. But instead, you opted to post it hear and concluded that I made mistakes as you clearly pointed out :” I am offering the facts as given me by Ka Noel himself and trying to point out some apparent mistakes.” ( Colors added. I like letters in red. LOL!)

Tito, the one you posted was a “SALES INVOICE” not an “OFFICIAL RECEIPT”. Sales invoice are always based on “Purchase Request”. Purchase request are based on our Approved Budget for the Contracts (ABC) a product of thorough consultations with the working committee (SB members). The winning bid of SEPMAR (for the brochures) was P122,000. Our disbursement voucher, official receipt of SEPMAR and carbon copy of the check all show that payment made to SEPMAR was only P117, 120, this is P122,000 less P4,880 VAT. (pls see pictures)



(pls note total of Tourism Brochure P122,000)



HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY MISS THIS AND DECLARE THAT WE OVERPAYED SEPMAR? (OR DID YOU ONLY CHOOSE WHAT DOCUMENTS YOU WANT TO POST FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE?)

If you really want to pursue this issue, I beg you, please find time to meet with us, the BAC members and the SB to settle this issue once and for all.

Thank you,
Ka Noel

#31:  Author: saidaLocation: Saida Cagandahan Dulay PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:18 am
    —
kanoel wrote:

B. When I gave you copies of all pertinent documents on the brochure, I was hoping we could sit down together (with Saida probably over a cup of coffee) and thresh out what ever is not clear with you. If you really want to pursue this issue, I beg you, please find time to meet with us, the BAC members and the SB to settle this issue once and for all.


ka noel,

i think the bone of contention of most of our kababayans on this issue lies mainly not on the receipts but on the cost of the brochures as against the finished product. many believe the kind/quality of the brochure does not commensurate the huge cost of production. suspicions were even made worse bec of the "alledged" involvement of the 2 personalities with SEPMAR as SUBCONTRACTORS.

i have talked with a lot of people who have lots of questions about the brochure. they are willing to sit down this holy week and talk things over a cup of coffee. [pero parang aayaw ko ng kape, masyadong mainit yon, summer pa naman....pwede bagang halohalo na lang ...SmileSmileSmile] but they have only one request... they want the presence of the 2 people in-charged in the production of the brochures and paete book. they believe they hold the precious key to all their questions that need answers. would it be possible?

thanks!

saida

#32:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:08 am
    —
Saida,
If the bone of contention of the brochure critics are only the quality and price, why then would Tony post a document which would lead people to believe that there was over payment by the Municipal Government? Copies of all documents are with you (forwarded to him as you said) and yet he choose to post the sales invoice rather than the Official Receipt of SEPMAR, the Disbursement voucher and the carbon copy of the check. Why?

I wish people like the Basa brothers could understand how government contracts work. As Angel pointed out in his previous posting, and I quote: “It is important that we understand the process before we draw conclusions. Some of the conclusions that we hastily draw may hurt the character of some of the people involved in the project.”

Let my try to summarize the history in the most concise form if I can:

A. Sometime in March of 2005 (maybe even earlier, I cannot remember the exact date), in preparation for the 425 yrs foundation of Paete, I formed a committee composed of all the SB members. Because we do not know anything about books and brochures, we tapped knowledgeable people like Ben Afuang and Bien Saniano who were consulted on the budgetary estimates for the layout, write-up, editing and printing of the book and brochures. The conceptual budget was discussed and approved by the committee which was the basis of our request to DOT. (P125,000 in this case for 5,000 pcs brochures and P75,000 for the actual celebration of the 425th foundation day.

B. After we got the check for P200,000, sometime late September, bidding was initiated the following month where only SEPMAR responded. Because the bid of SEPMAR was deemed responsive, with their price (P122,000) below the ABC (P125,000), BAC awarded the contract to SEPMAR. It was a straight contract with SEPMAR, although we required them (as required by DOT) to have the proof of the brochures be approved by DOT before the final printing. Eventually, DOT approved the proof and the production of 5,000 pcs brochures commenced.

C. The 5,000 brochures where delivered sometime in November and was accepted by the General Services Office. Letter request to COA for inspection was submitted and payment was effected November 11, 2005.

We were not remiss in any way in our obligations. Bidding procedures were strictly adhered to. The proof of the brochures was approved by DOT prior to printing. Liquidation of all expenses pertaining to the P200,000, grant as required by DOT, was satisfied without any question. The bidding documents have passed the COA audit without any adverse comments.
SEPMAR delivered the goods as contracted. It may not be at par with our expectations, but never the less they have done the end of their bargain and so we are obliged to do ours. This is how Government contracts work. We are governed by certain rules and procedures that not only protect our interest but also that of the other party as well.

Did you expect us not to pay SEPMAR just because we thought the brochures were below standard? If DOT thought it was not, who are we to say otherwise? Whose standard in the first place are we suppose to follow, that of the Basa brothers? That of DOT? That of COA? Or That of Ben or Bien?

We are free to admit that we do not know anything about books and brochures, which is why we dared not do it on our own. Ben and Biens participation during the conceptual stages are most valuable. It is sad, and as you said, “It is very unfair for them if their names will be maliciously and continuously dragged in the brochure controversy.” You said: “... they want the presence of the 2 people in-charged in the production of the brochures and paete book.” If you are referring to Ben and Bien, they are not in charge of anything. SEPMAR is, because it was a straight contract with them. Whatever is the participation of Ben and Bien in the actual production of the brochure is strictly a business between them and SEPMAR. If we wish to clarify matters in this issue, I suggest it be confined within our controllable limit because if the two opted not to be involved in this issue, we have no way of compelling them to do so. And if that happened this will be kept hanging in the air with a lot of different speculations, adverse or otherwise.

Ka Noel

#33:  Author: y@m@kLocation: Mark Anthony Rivera Cadawas PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:02 pm
    —
kanoel wrote:
Saida,

We are free to admit that we do not know anything about books and brochures, which is why we dared not do it on our own. Ben and Biens participation during the conceptual stages are most valuable. It is sad, and as you said, “It is very unfair for them if their names will be maliciously and continuously dragged in the brochure controversy.” You said: “... they want the presence of the 2 people in-charged in the production of the brochures and paete book.” If you are referring to Ben and Bien, they are not in charge of anything. SEPMAR is, because it was a straight contract with them. Whatever is the participation of Ben and Bien in the actual production of the brochure is strictly a business between them and SEPMAR.
Ka Noel


Since I am very particular and have glued my eyes on the quality and appearance of the brochure, not to mention the amount of the Municipality of Paete paid, Is it possible that you can name the project team who artistically spent their time and effort to have this project materialized?

Siguro po ay hindi magkakaroon ng kung anu-anong puna kung maganda sana ang naging material at dun natin masasabi na walang nasayang na pera. Kung titingnan po kasi natin yung brochure, marami kayong makikitang puna talaga.

I have no idea who this Mr. Ben or Mr. Bien was, are they the same people behind the meetings with the UPLB? Like you said their participation during the conceptual stages is valuable, and what do you mean by this..., "they are not in-charge of anything" And again, if SEPMAR is the one we need to interrogate about this issue and I know they are not, what is the "strictly business" between the company and Bien or Ben all about? Was the business related to the Paete Project also?

Nakakalito na po kasi talaga, pakilinaw lang po... Shocked

#34: Dati Magagaling! Author: tukayo! PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:58 pm
    —
Sabi ko noon, ang dami talagang magagaling sa Paete, Laughing

Ngayon ko naman masasabi, ang dami na talagang...

gagaling-galing sa Paete, tulungan na lang natin ang

ating Mayor at wag ng maglabas ng kung ano-ano

issue na nakakasira at walang sapat na basihan...

yun lang po!.... Wink

#35:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:54 pm
    —
Indoy wrote:
" Is it possible that you can name the project team who artistically spent their time and effort to have this project materialized? "

If you will read between the lines of my posting, I said: "I formed a committee composed of all the SB members. Because we do not know anything about books and brochures, we tapped knowledgeable people like Ben Afuang and Bien Saniano who were consulted on the budgetary estimates for the layout, write-up, editing and printing of the book and brochures. "

The whole team is the SB plus Ben Afuang and Bien Sainano.

"Siguro po ay hindi magkakaroon ng kung anu-anong puna kung maganda sana ang naging material at dun natin masasabi na walang nasayang na pera. Kung titingnan po kasi natin yung brochure, marami kayong makikitang puna talaga."

"MAGANDA" is very subjective. It was DOT, the benefactor who has the last say on whehter the quality is acceptable or not . If DOT approves the printing, who are we to contest that (did you read my previous posting?)
If you think the brochure is sub-standard, what standard are we suppose to use, yours? The Basa brothers? that of DOT? that of COA? Please tell me so that next time we produce another set of brochures we can use your recommended standard.


"I have no idea who this Mr. Ben or Mr. Bien was, are they the same people behind the meetings with the UPLB?"

Only Bien Saniano was involved with our meetings with UPLB on the "Ilog Sintunis preservation program".

"Like you said their participation during the conceptual stages is valuable, and what do you mean by this..., "they are not in-charge of anything" "

I mean valuable as defined in Webster Dictionary: "of great merit, use, or service; highly important, esteemed, etc. "

I mean they are not in charge of anything because one, I am the chariman of the committe two, the contract with SEPMAR is a straight contract meaning they are responsible for everything.

" And again, if SEPMAR is the one we need to interrogate about this issue and I know they are not, what is the "strictly business" between the company and Bien or Ben all about? Was the business related to the Paete Project also? "

If you know that SEPMAR is not the one you have to "INTERROGATE" about this issue then you would never know the "strictly business" between them and the two, unless you "INTERROGATE" Dr. Bien Saniano and Mr. Ben Afuang. Because if you know the meaning of "strictly business between them" they are the only ones who can tell you what you want to know.

I suggest you read between the lines of my previous posting. Baka makatulong sa pagkalito mo.

Ka Noel

#36: Usapan Author: Guest PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:19 pm
    —
ngayon ako naniniwala sa magulang ko na huwag humalo sa usapang matanda ang mga bata ...... noon "literaly" ko itong hindi maintindihan, pero ibig sabihin pala ay kapag hindi mo alam ang pinagsasabi mo ay huwag mong ihalo sa mga nakakaintindi ng bagay na hindi mo linya, saka ka na humalo kapag may sapat ka nang kaalaman....maliban na lang na may nagbubuyo sa iyo o inyo....Sabi nga bago ka magtanong sa tao, itanong mo muna sa sarili mo kung bakit...siguro 5-10 beses baka makakuha ka na ng sagot hindi ka pa napahiya....noong nag-aaral ako I always try to outwit my prof...pero naha-hardtime ako...naisipan ko na kapag may tanong ako pagkatapos ng klase saka ako nagtatanong nagiging kaibigan ko pa prof ko. Napansin ninyo ba na panay ang tanong ko, yung siguro ang bagay sa inyo...sayang ang maganda ninyong simula.....sinuwerte na kayo baka mawala pa ha mga bunsoy......

#37:  Author: saidaLocation: Saida Cagandahan Dulay PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:30 am
    —
kanoel wrote:
Saida,
If the bone of contention of the brochure critics are only the quality and price, why then would Tony post a document which would lead people to believe that there was over payment by the Municipal Government? Copies of all documents are with you (forwarded to him as you said) and yet he choose to post the sales invoice rather than the Official Receipt of SEPMAR, the Disbursement voucher and the carbon copy of the check. Why?



Ka Noel,

Though I have the documents, the only copy in Tony’s possession right now is the sales invoice, the one he posted. I think he missed the EVAT portion [which was not clear on the invoice] because he is not so familiar with it considering the fact that he resides abroad.

This tourism brochure has been the hottest issue these days. From bidding to awarding, from SEPMAR to Ben Afuang and Bien Saniano, from straight contract to sub-contract, from the budget of 122,000.00 [or 125,000.00…whatever!] to the finished product of 5000 copies, whether sulit or not sulit, people are free to draw their own conclusions. Ang lahat ay may kanya-kanyang puntos, may magagandang paliwanag na dapat pakinggan. From your own words, just read between the lines at naroon lahat ang sagot. To some your explanations might be enough. To others, it might have only elicited more questions than answers that could spark another controversy.

This is supposed to be a healthy discussion that could help guide us in our future projects. Just a few words to our kababayans who want to join the thread, stick to the issues, walang personalan, no hitting below the belt and no anonymous postings please.

Maraming salamat po!

#38:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:32 am
    —
Saida,
Granted that he only have the Sales Invoice in his position (by the way, why would you send him only the sales invoice? The more relevant receipt is the Official Receipt and the carbon copy of the check if you really want to know how much SEPMAR was paid) he should have ask you first if there are other receipts or documents before he posted that “The receipt is saying SEPMAR billed the munispyo 125,000 not the 122,000 that Ka Noel wrote in the Paete ML.

There was even a connotation that SEPMAR over billed the municipio.

Quote:
Saida wrote:from the budget of 122,000.00 [or 125,000.00…whatever!]

It seems the figures are not yet clear in your mind. This is what I meant when I say, please read between the lines para huwag kayong mailto!

I will say again:
The budget (officially known as Approved Budget for the Contract or ABC which was deliberated by the Committee with the help of Ben and Bien) was P125,000 for the brochure.

The P122,000.00 was the bid price of SEPMAR (which was lower than the ABC)

The Payment made to SEPMAR was P117,120.00(This was derived from the bidding price of P122,000 less VAT of P4,880.00)

Quote:
Saida wrote:" whether sulit or not sulit, people are free to draw their own conclusions. Ang lahat ay may kanya-kanyang puntos, may magagandang paliwanag na dapat pakinggan."


I have no qualms about this. All comments, suggestions,even criticisms are most welcome. But if it becomes derogatory, to the point of creating impressions to a public forum that are defamatory, I think is quite reckless and irresponsible. All I ask is to please carefully weigh first the facts before making such offensive statements.

Ka Noel


Last edited by kanoel on Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:00 am; edited 1 time in total

#39:  Author: y@m@kLocation: Mark Anthony Rivera Cadawas PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:57 am
    —
Shocked reading between the lines... over and over again

Ka Noel: MAY TAMA KA! Pasok ka sa Finals! Very Happy




PS: Pasensya na Tukayo at nagmana ako sa ama ko Confused Just curious.. Are you trying to rattle us?

AY sya, baka gusto nyo bumili ng raffle ticket ng Centurion... part din ng attraction ng Paete yung Senakulo.



************************************************

#40:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:13 am
    —
Sabi ni Indoy:
Quote:
Ka Noel: MAY TAMA KA! Pasok ka sa Finals!


Dito sa atin, pag sinabing "MAY TAMA KA" ang ibig sabihin ay may sira ka sa ulo! I hope this is not what you mean (LOL!)

Cheers! Very Happy
Ka Noel

#41: To Ka Noel Author: TonyB PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:55 am
    —
kanoel wrote:
TONY:
I said I will no longer reply to your postings because I would like to encourage you and you brothers to meet with us and clarify the things clouding your mind. But I don’t see it forthcoming so here I am again to rectify the wrong impressions you created in your posting.

You said: “I am offering the facts as given me by Ka Noel himself and trying to point out some apparent mistakes.”

There was no mistake on my part, only your interpretation. Let me go thru this one by one.

A. You posted my report sometime in July and I quote:
“6. World Class brochure – An on-going project together with the Foundation Book with the able assistance of Dr. Bien Saniano and Mr. Ben Afuang. Target completion, September 2005.”
This was commented by Indoy:
“"Nagkamali nga siguro dahil ano ang Bidding na naganap ng October 2005 kung September 2005 pa lang eh they already have the brochure? Tapos, July 2005 pa lang eh nasa Development Stage na yung brochure. "
Oh man! "


There was no mistake here. The posting I made last July 2005 was the time we were conceptualizing the brochure and the foundation book. I think it is natural to conceptualize the brochures and the book first before the funding so that we can have an idea on how much to request for the funding. Committees were created as early as March 2005 headed by all members of the SB and applying the principle of synergy as pointed out by Angel de Dios, we tapped resource people and consulted them on the budgetary estimates. Our “TARGET” completion date was September 2005. This was not attained because the funding from DOT was approved only late September of last year, hence bidding was made October. If you read between the lines September 2005, was only a “target” date.

B. When I gave you copies of all pertinent documents on the brochure, I was hoping we could sit down together (with Saida probably over a cup of coffee) and thresh out what ever is not clear with you. But instead, you opted to post it hear and concluded that I made mistakes as you clearly pointed out :” I am offering the facts as given me by Ka Noel himself and trying to point out some apparent mistakes.” ( Colors added. I like letters in red. LOL!)

Tito, the one you posted was a “SALES INVOICE” not an “OFFICIAL RECEIPT”. Sales invoice are always based on “Purchase Request”. Purchase request are based on our Approved Budget for the Contracts (ABC) a product of thorough consultations with the working committee (SB members). The winning bid of SEPMAR (for the brochures) was P122,000. Our disbursement voucher, official receipt of SEPMAR and carbon copy of the check all show that payment made to SEPMAR was only P117, 120, this is P122,000 less P4,880 VAT. (pls see pictures)



(pls note total of Tourism Brochure P122,000)



HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY MISS THIS AND DECLARE THAT WE OVERPAYED SEPMAR? (OR DID YOU ONLY CHOOSE WHAT DOCUMENTS YOU WANT TO POST FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE?)

If you really want to pursue this issue, I beg you, please find time to meet with us, the BAC members and the SB to settle this issue once and for all.

Thank you,
Ka Noel


Ka Noel, I admit I made a low blow. I have no excuses. I apologize. I am still out of the country so I cannot drop by the SB. Like what I said, I am not going to offer any more opinion on the matter in this forum heeding Angel's wise counsel to avoid putting other people in a bad light. I still would like to drop by the SB next opportunity, not about the brochure, but the bidding rules. I would like to know how it works. Maybe I will bid myself. Very Happy

Tony

#42:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:01 pm
    —
Thank you Tony. Apology accepted. I admire your courage. I only hope that the 1,771 people who followed this thread also got your apology. You are most welcome to see us. We can use your talent and experience and we can talk of a lot of things other than brochures and bidding.
Regards,
Ka Noel

#43:  Author: y@m@kLocation: Mark Anthony Rivera Cadawas PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:16 pm
    —
kanoel wrote:


Dito sa atin, pag sinabing "MAY TAMA KA" ang ibig sabihin ay may sira ka sa ulo! I hope this is not what you mean (LOL!)


Nung umuwi po ako nung January napanood ko yung Game Ka na Ba! Yun ang linya na ginagamit dun sa game show. Ibig sabihin, "You got that Right!" or "Correct!". Idea

#44:  Author: kanoelLocation: Mayor Emmanuel Cadayona PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:55 pm
    —
Quote:
Nung umuwi po ako nung January napanood ko yung Game Ka na Ba! Yun ang linya na ginagamit dun sa game show. Ibig sabihin, "You got that Right!" or "Correct!".


Ah, kaya pala may kasunog na: "Pasok ka sa finals!" Laughing

Thanks, Indoy.

Ka Noel

#45: GOD, please let's there be lights......... Author: Pilipinoy PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:15 pm
    —
Please, please, please, please ........for heaven sake's do not include or use GOD to this discussion....Don't use it to gain symphaty or to gain favor for your issues specially if your are not sure of your accusation and it only based on a hersay only....Because if you do.... you are nothing different to false prophet of old and new times.....focus on the facts and don't be carried away by tsismis....there are a lot of people....dark, dark, very dark bone people that even on their skin reflected it....
In bible, It is said that donot use his names for a things that have no values. Please we have enough trouble in this part of land, let' not have trouble with heaven....

#46: Admirable Person Author: MulatPinoy PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:32 pm
    —
Bihira na ang taong umaamin ng kanyang pagkakamali, I admire you for that Tony, may mga tao kasi na bokya na ay pilit pang humihirit, Marami tayo niyan sa Pambansang Gobyerno, naka-upo man o talunan, O maski sa pribado, kaya tayo hindi umusod usod, (usod lang dahil sa klase ng pag-uugali ng karamihan sa atin mga Pinoy ay bulok na bulok na kaya kahit usod lang ay di' natin magawa) I'm proud of being Pilipino and we are world class...... "individually"......but dahil sa pag-uugali natin wala tayong "UNITY" that make us weak and dwell on the bottom...we use to laugh on the chinese and bombay but where are they now.....We are the sickmind of asia....Again sana maraming natuto sa iyo Tony...

#47: Tao Lamang Tayo Para Magkamali Author: KP PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:25 pm
    —
Sinusundan ko pong tread na ito at maaring me nakasakit o nasaktan pero sa bandang huli ay ang pagtanggap ng pagkakamali na inamin ni Kabayang Tony Basa at paghingi niya ng apology ke Ka Noel. Bihira sa tao ng dahil sa kaniyang pride eh kahit na nagkamali ay hindi aamin pero dito makikita na tao lamang tayo, kaya saludo ako sa iyo Kabayang Tony Basa at pati ke Ka Noel dahil sa pagtanggap niya sa Apology.

Alam nating lahat na walang masamang hangarin ang bawat isa kundi ang makatulong sa pag-unlad ng ating bayan at lalu na sa mga taga Paete kaya po minsan ay nawawala sa loob natin na magtanong.
Kila Saida, Indoy at iba ay saludo rin ako sa inyo dahil alam kong wala kayo sa Paete nasa State at iabng lugar sa Pilipinas ay nandoon pa rin ang inyong pagmamahal sa bayan ng Paete, iyan ang mga tunay na taga Paete kaya saludo rin ako sa inyo.

Siguro isang suhestiyon na kapag me mga tanong po tungkol dito sa ganitong bagay ay mag direct po ng tanungan sa e-mail address ng bawat isa dahil alam natin na kahit papaano po ay mahahaluan ng politiko at personalan dahil tao nga lamang po tayo.

Muli ay aking paghanga sa inyong mga taga Paete at hangad na tagumpay sa hinaharap. Mabuhay! at God Bless


Kumusta po muli,
Kabayang Pinoy
kabayangpinoy@hotmail.com

#48:  Author: saidaLocation: Saida Cagandahan Dulay PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:04 am
    —
Sabi ni ka noel:

>>>>>Saida,
Granted that he only have the Sales Invoice in his position, he should have ask you first if there are other receipts or documents before he posted that “The receipt is saying SEPMAR billed the munispyo 125,000 not the 122,000 that Ka Noel wrote in the Paete ML.”

I admire tony for his courage in asking for apology ON THE RECEIPT ISSUE. like i said, he was not aware of the phil EVAT law and i will not discredit him for that. it doesn't mean too that all his other comments/observations and the comments of others [kahit sila ay pinagpayuhang wag na makidawdaw sa brochure isyu....] are invalid.


>>>>>(by the way, why would you send him only the sales invoice? The more relevant receipt is the Official Receipt and the carbon copy of the check if you really want to know how much SEPMAR was paid)

let me make myself clear. i knew from the very start how expensive the price of the brochure was so i didn't care about it anymore. to me the price issue of the brochure is already water under the bridge, kumbaga, nandyan na yan at wala na tayong magagawa pa. from the avalanche of negative comments that we openly heard, unang una na ang photography. sino daw baga ang photgrapher who charged 14,500.00 for a lousy job? bakit may durian pa samantalang wala namang durian ang paete? bakit halatang halata na nakatapal lang yung picture ng lansones sa tabi ng durian? lumang luma at blurred yung mga pictures! then sa scriptwriting, sino daw baga yung scriptwriter who charged 14,500.00 for a very short write-up and captions na marami ring mali? when you said na taga paete yung writers the more it raised negative reactions. hindi daw baga napakiusapang pro-bono na lang, tutal ay taga paete din naman at maigsi lang naman yung write-up? sa halip makuntento ang mga tao, lalong lumakas ang ugong ng protesta at malisyosong pag iisip when you said they requested anonimity.

in the begining i was a only a silent reader of this thread but i became so curious too about the WHO aspects. pero sa halip na kung kani-kanino ako magtanong who will only give me half-baked truths and hearsay, i decided to go straight to you. i asked you for the xerox copies of the documents, hoping to find the names of the people who received payment from the munisipyo. instead of satisfying my curiousity, i got so confused too. i was so surprised to see 2 the sales invoices from SEPMAR billing paete of Php 125,000.00 and Php260,000.00 respectively. i asked myself, akala ko baga ay taga paete yung scriptwriter, bakit SEPMAR ang naningil sa paete ng 14,500.00? same with the paete book when i saw the sales invoice for that. i know a writer who was paid 3,000.00 for an article she wrote but surprisingly, it was SEPMAR who was charging us 50,000.00 for the scriptwriting of paete book. tinawagan ko kaagad yung kilala kong writer at pati siya ay nagulat dahil hindi SEPMAR ang nagbayad sa kanya.

that was the main point i was trying to convey to tony when i asked that those 2 sales invoices be sent to him. bakit SEPMAR ang naningil sa paete ng kabuuang Php385,000.00?

and btw, here's another question...kanino nga bagang standard ang sinunod when you gave the go signal of printing 5000 copies? i understand a sample copy was first presented to you for your approval. ikaw na rin mismo ang nagsabi sa akin sa telepono na nung una mong makita yung brochure ay hindi ka rin nagandahan. why no suggestion for revision was made from that point?



>>>>>There was even a connotation that SEPMAR over billed the municipio.

again, it's because of the EVAT which was overlooked.



>>>>I will say again:
The budget (officially known as Approved Budget for the Contract or ABC which was deliberated by the Committee with the help of Ben and Bien) was P125,000 for the brochure.

so it's very clear that the 2 helped us in the ABC. but are you aware, even before the bidding/awarding, that the 2 has business connection with SEPMAR?



>>>>>>I have no qualms about this. All comments, suggestions,even criticisms are most welcome. But if it becomes derogatory, to the point of creating impressions to a public forum that are defamatory, I think is quite reckless and irresponsible. All I ask is to please carefully weigh first the facts before making such offensive statements.

yes i agree with you. in anything and everything, i would rather go straight to the person and ask straightforward questions than ask somebody else who would only give me half-baked and half truth answers. mas malinaw pag ganun. minsan nga lamang, pag masyadong mausisa ang isang tao, the person is often misconstrued as "sowing intrigues" and that his or her motives are always politically colcored.

i've been trying to review the past postings of this thread but what i saw were all valid though negative comments and no defamatory or derogatory remarks whatsoever. the worst maybe was the comment "taxpayer's money was wasted down the drain" [or something to that effect...] sa nakita ng marami na kabuuan ng tourism brochure, hindi maikakaila na talagang malaking pera ang nasayang. monetary grant from the government such as this do not come easy....once in a blue moon lamang kung dumating kumbaga. i think in projects like this, mas mainam sigurong pag isipang mabuti kung papaano natin masusulit ang bawat sentimo na ipinagkaloob sa atin galing sa dugo at pawis ng mga bumubuwis. a very good example was the suggestion of a brochure making contest among our high school students. siguradong di hamak na naging mas mura ang brochure....at tiyak na mas maganda, nahasa pa ang talento at art skills ng atng ating mga bata.

muli ka noel, maraming salamat!!!

saida

#49: Utak Talangka Author: TonyB PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 9:32 am
    —
saida wrote:
Sabi ni ka noel:

Ka Noel wrote:
>>>>>Saida,
Granted that he only have the Sales Invoice in his position, he should have ask you first if there are other receipts or documents before he posted that “The receipt is saying SEPMAR billed the munispyo 125,000 not the 122,000 that Ka Noel wrote in the Paete ML.”


I admire tony for his courage in asking for apology ON THE RECEIPT ISSUE. like i said, he was not aware of the phil EVAT law and i will not discredit him for that. it doesn't mean too that all his other comments/observations and the comments of others [kahit sila ay pinagpayuhang wag na makidawdaw sa brochure isyu....] are invalid.


I made a mistake with the receipt. Sabi nga naka-bunot ako ng baraha at na-bokya ako. No big deal. Now, sabi nga ni Ka Noel, beautiful is very subjective. I agree with him absolutely. Kaya nga di ako doon sa aspect na yun nagbibigay ng opinion. When I posted the receipt, I knew I made a mistake the next morning on my way to work. Then I saw Ka Noel's post confirming my mistake. Then I got wise counsel from Angel, and a message from my mother later that evening. So I apologized. Prior to my posting that receipt, I already decided that it would be my last post (that charge to experience) as I already stated my thoughts on the matter. I had nothing more to offer.

My apology on my mistake about the receipt and subsequent decision to no longer pursue it is personal and should not be used to stifle further discussion if other people think there are more things to clarify. If Saida or others wish to pursue it further, I give them my support but on the sidelines. She is doing our town a favor by stimulating discussion.

tukayo wrote:

Ngayon ko naman masasabi, ang dami na talagang...
gagaling-galing sa Paete, tulungan na lang natin ang
ating Mayor at wag ng maglabas ng kung ano-ano
issue na nakakasira at walang sapat na basihan...


Some people think that I was just trolling or being utak talangka or naggagaling-galingan. That is what we call an ad hominem "argument". The implication is that because the speaker is just naggagaling-galingan or utak talangka, we should not be paying attention to what he/she is saying - or what he/she is saying is false. Rather than offering anything by way of refuting my (or Saida's, or my brother Tito's) points about the issue, they'd instead call you names, as if that helps in clarifying the issue at all. Well, this I will tell them. If you have nothing to offer as an opinion on the matter, you are not helping in any way, and you are the one with the utak talangka trying to stifle the discussion. This goes most specially to tukayo.

I do support the tourism thrust of the munisipyo. I was happy when Ka Noel decided that it must be one of the main thrust of his administration, and presenting a whole set of projects in that direction, e.g., lamppost. I tried to offer constructive ideas in the Paete mailing list as much as possible like saying there are communities in Japan whose source of income is mostly from tourism, and it wont hurt Paete to emulate them citing the fact that Paete is rich culturally. I had planned to start a business that has something to do with tourism. I have been putting my savings into that direction. In short, I have put my money where my mouth is. I was just too happy to see the tourism angle getting the attention of Ka Noel's administration. It's in my best interest that it succeed. This is hardly being utak talangka.

Ka Noel wrote:
Dito sa atin, pag sinabing "MAY TAMA KA" ang ibig sabihin ay may sira ka sa ulo! I hope this is not what you mean (LOL!)


I think that it's intended to have multiple meanings. It's a play on ambiguity for humorous effect.

cheers!
Tony

#50: My take on discussions Author: adediosLocation: Angel C. de Dios PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 10:29 am
    —
There are several elements present in any discussion. The discussion can be enhanced by making ourselves a bit aware of these elements:

1. Agenda - We all have a purpose in joining in a discussion. The only fruitful agenda is the one that is faithful to contributing valid information, one that allows data to present itself.

We may present wrong or incomplete information at times. This is part of reality, that is, errors can be made, but if we are faithful to the single agenda of sharing information, errors are acceptable.

2. Framework - When discussing an issue presents opposing views, it is important to work within a framework. Otherwise, the discussions will not reach anywhere. A framework needs to be defined and the debate should stay within this framework. The framework is what defines the issue. Oftentimes, the framework is reponsible for most of the issues being discussed.

3. Character - Opinions come from individuals. These individuals are persons with character. We all have our own standards and most of the times, these standards are not universal. Morality is an area that even philosophers find very challenging. There are not that many issues that easily fit a categorical imperative. There are not many issues that are clearly black and white. We live in a colorful world after all, a continuous spectrum. Discussions that border on character issues are usually problematic, for this reason.

4. Delivery - The messages shared in a discussion can be shaded by the style. After all, readers can insinuate. Readers can go beyond sometimes from what is actually written. For this purpose, readers need to be careful in how they interpret and likewise, posters need to be aware that their message may be wrongly interpreted.

The "Tourism Brochure" topic in this forum is currently an active issue that is being discussed. Our agenda is to understand the issue so that we could do better next time. To do better next time requires understanding of existing procedures. There is a framework that is defined by the laws and procedures in the Philippines. This framework is important so that we not apply freely our own ideal framework in this issue. To do so is unrealistic. There is nothing wrong with being ideal or creating our own standards, but the fruitful exercise of our thinking is to find ways to work these ideals into the existing framework. Developing a tourism brochure through the schools is ideal, but these need to be adapted into existing procedures. This likewise illustrates when discussions are particularly useful. In any activity, discussions are most fruitful during the planning stage. This is the time when these ideas can be worked into the actual project. Discussions after concluding a project are still useful but only from the perspective of the future. Otherwise, we will be tempted to carry an agenda that differs from just trying to do better in the future.

The "character" and "delivery" elements are unfortunately part of our subjective nature. They can become highlighted if we dwell on them. They can become the focus of the discussion if we choose them to be. But we should not, if we are faithful to a fruitful agenda and stay within a defined framework. Mayor Cadayona accepted that the tourism brochure is not of perfect quality. Based on these discussions on the tourism brochure, there are clearly alternative ways and I am optimistic that these will be explored in the future. This is where we currently stand and hopefully, we did learn from this discussion.



USAP PAETE -> Usap Paete


output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  :| |:
Page 2 of 5

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group