Republic of the Philippines x

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

RECEIVED

TWENTIETH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

330

HOUSE BILL NO.

Introduced by: REP. RACHEL MARGUERITE “CUTIE” DEL MAR

EXPLANATORY NOTE

There has been a raging controversy in the province and cities of
Cebu, particularly in localities served by the Metropolitan Cebu Water
District (MCWD), over the persons and entities to blame for the
undisputed failure of the water district to supply adequate water to its
consumers;

Many consumers have laid a large part of the blame for MCWD's
dismal performance on their governor and respective city or town mayor
and congressman for allegedly neglecting to prod and push the water
district to do its job;

Elected local government officials have mostly left MCWD alone, after
having been repeatedly warned by the Department of Interior and Local
Government (DILG) to keep off water district operations, an order officially
recorded and circulated in these memorandum-circulars in a span of 31
years;

[] Memorandum-Circular #88-15 of March 1, 1998, by Secretary
Luis T. Santos;

[] M-C #97-78 of April 14, 1997, by Secretary Robert Barbers;

[] M-C #2005-21 of March 4, 2005, by Secretary Angelo T. Reyes;
and

[] M-C #2019-03 of January 15, 2019, by Secretary Eduardo Afio.


The said circulars uniformly reminded elected local government
officials and DILG regional directors that (1) Presidential Decree #198 or
Provincial Water Utilities Act of 198, series of 1973 (Section 6, Chapter I] on
Purpose and Formation, Title Il) provides that the water district, once
formed, is not under the jurisdiction of any political subdivision, and (2) the
water districts should “best be allowed to operate with the least hindrance
and interference from local officials.”

The last of the serial memorandum-circulars from DILG (M-C #2019-
03) issued in January last year was most blunt and direct: The local officials
were directed “not to poke their noses into operations of water district.”

Local officials have a compelling duty to address basic needs of their
constituents, water being one of the most essential, and the current public
uproar in Cebu over the inadequate service is a strong reminder of that duty;

Local officials have a larger stake in the issue of water supply and
sharper capacity because of proximity to assess the problem than the
central agency Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), which is
mandated by law to administer and oversee water districts;

Obviously LWUA has failed in that, as amply demonstrated in the
Cebu controversy in which the loud outcry by elected local officials led to the
recent eviction of the five MCWD directors and resignation of its general
manager amid the continuing shortage of water in its area of service.

The autonomy of MCWD and the other water districts in the country,
which PD #198 provides, shall not be interpreted, as DILG has done, to rule
out oversight by LGUs in helping assure adequate supply of water to their
constituents.

Friction or lack of coordination and harmony between the water
district and LWUA, on one hand, and the LGUs on the other will persist if
the law is not clarified or explicitly corrected.

There is therefore the need to amend Presidential Decree #198,
series of 1973, as earlier amended, to allow and encourage the
oversight by local governments on the performance of water districts.

The attached bill was originally filed by my father, the late Raul V. Del

Mar during the 18th Congress, hence, refiling of this bill with earnest hope
that approval of the same be given priority.

rac nage Sees DEL MAR


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Quezon City

TWENTIETH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO. 330

Introduced by: REP. RACHEL MARGUERITE “CUTIE” DEL MAR

AN ACT
AMENDING SECTION 6, CHAPTER II, TITLE Il OF PRESIDENTIAL
DECREE #198, AS AMENDED

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. The pertinent portion of Section 6, Chapter II, Title II of

Presidential Decree 198, series of 1973, shall be amended to read as follows:
“Section 6. Formation of district. This Act is the source
of authorization and power to form and maintain a district.
ONCE FORMED, A DISTRICT IS SUBJECT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT AND THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS WHOSE CONSTITUENTS ARE SERVED BY
IT SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH ITS OPERATIONS BUT
SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT AND DUTY OF OVERSIGHT,
SPECIFICALLY WHEN SERVICE TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS
ARE IMPAIRED. THE MANAGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT,
THROUGH ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND GENERAL
MANAGER, AND THE LOCAL WATER UTILITIES
ADMINISTRATION (LWUA) SHALL GIVE PROMPT RESPONSE
TO ANY REQUEST FOR INFORMATION OR ACTION ON A
COMPLAINT OR RECOMMENDATION AIMED TO IMPROVE


ITS SERVICE. [For purposes of this Act, a district shall be
considered as a quasi-public corporation performing public
service and supplying public wants. As such, a district shall
exercise the powers, rights and privileges given to private
corporations under existing laws, in addition to the powers
granted in, and subject to such restrictions imposed, under this
Act”

“To form a district, the legislative body of any city,
municipality of province shall enact legislation containing the
following:

“XX XXXXXXXXXXX”

SECTION 2. Separability Clause. - If any section or provision of this
Act is declared unconstitutional or invalid, the other sections or provisions
not affected thereby shall continue to be in force and effect.

SECTION 3. Repealing Clause. - All acts, decrees, executive orders,
rules and regulations, part or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions

of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 4. Effectivity Clause. —- This Act shall take effect upon its
approval.

Approved,