Monday, March 12, 2012
An open letter (with all due respect)
To The Members of the Sangguniang Panglunsod, City of Baguio:
First of all, we thank you for the opportunity to be heard not only by your Honors, but also by the members of the community who cared enough to witness and participate in the two-day public hearing that the City Council conducted. But while we were promised to be given the chance to respond to SM City Baguio’s rebuttal during the second day, we regret that the promise was not delivered due to “overtime cost” concerns (though we believe that this is a critical issue that justifies whatever little money it will cost the City Council).
With that, allow me then to respond to some of the concerns raised and questions posed by some of the members of the council here instead:
“BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE”
While it is true that it was the City Buildings and Architecture Office (CBAO) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources who issued the building and tree-cutting permits, respectively, and thus are the agencies that can revoke the same, we are not barking at the wrong tree by bringing the issue to the attention of both the Mayor’s Office and the Baguio City Council. This issue goes way beyond the building and tree-cutting permits issued. This is about the welfare of the greater majority being compromised for the benefit of a single corporate entity. The impending death of the 182 trees on Luneta Hill also threatens to forever change the face of Baguio City, and its historical heritage as the City of Pines, a heritage that does not only belong to Baguio but to the whole country, Baguio being the Summer Capital of the Philippines.
Having said that, we cannot and we will not accept some of our elected officials’ pronouncements that they cannot do anything to address the issue. You were elected by the people, your power emanates from the people and it is your responsibility to protect the welfare of the people. Instead of exhausting all means to justify your helplessness on the issue, we plead that you exert the same amount of effort in finding ways to address it.
We pay our taxes in Baguio, unlike SM City Baguio. We are the people you swore to protect, and that is why we came before you.
“SINGLING OUT SM”
We are not singling out SM City Baguio, as insinuated by at least two councillors during the hearing. But the urgency of the matter forced us to focus all our efforts to prevent the murder of the 182 trees on Luneta Hill, one of the few remaining forest covers in Baguio’s central business district, that will result in irreversible adverse consequences. We believe that whatever remains of Baguio’s natural environment should be protected and that all development initiatives in the city must be sustainable, which we believe SM City Baguio’s expansion plan is not.
Lastly, “WHY ONLY NOW?”
At the public hearing, the Hon. Nicasio Palaganas addressed this question to anybody belonging to the groups several protesting SM City Baguio’s expansion plan: “What have you done during the last two years about the environment? And why are you only coming out now?”
I answered his question honestly, “personally, nothing.” With presiding officer, the Hon. Erdolfo Balajadia, constantly reminding the protesters to keep their replies brief, I was not able to expound on my reply. I shall do so here, now.
I am an artist and a Baguio resident for the past 16 years. Three of my children were born here. As an artist and a resident of Baguio, I have always endeavoured to give back to the city that I now call home. I have done all I can as a theatre artist to present relevant local social, cultural, historical and environmental issues in all of my works.
I was there when the community took the streets in the late 90’s to protest the development of Camp John Hay. I was there too when the community protested to take the city’s streets back from the tyrannical clutches of Jadewell. I have been the subject of threats and sanctions because of my advocacies as an artist and a columnist for a local paper.
These are what I have done, and these are what I can do.
I asked the Hon. Nicasio Palaganas, “I throw back the question at you, sir, what have you done?” To which he replied, “I refuse to answer that question.”
With all due respect, sir, you CANNOT refuse to answer that question for you are an elected official and you owe it to the people to inform them of your actions while in office. The office, the position you hold is a public trust. It is not about power, sir, it is about responsibility. While we, the protesters, have to contend with living our lives, earning a living, while at the same time doing all we can to protect the welfare of our fellow citizens, you on the other hand have the privilege of serving the city and its people and get paid a salary in the process. And it is our taxes that you get to bring home in that envelope twice a month.
You simply don’t have the right to refuse to answer to the people.
You asked, “why only now?” The question is irrelevant. What’s important is we, the people, are here, right now, doing all we can to do what we believe is right. We have neither financial might nor political clout or influence. The only thing we do have is our unbending principles - which we are willing to defend, and that no amount of money, political pressure or vicious threats can bend.
We are doing something about it now. As a public servant, when will you?
With all due respect.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Yesterday, today and tomorrow
The first half hour of the public hearing last Monday was spent watching and listening to what SM had to say. I couldn’t help but remember Daniel Burnham’s warning that “unless early preventive measures are taken, the misdirected initiative of energetic lumbermen will soon cause the destruction of this beautiful scenery.”
SM City Baguio said that they will be constructing a green building to offset the ecological footprint of the expansion by having a rooftop garden with ornamental plants and trees. Can that rooftop garden really make up for the environmental impact of thousands of cars, thousands of people, tons of garbage that the new structure will generate?
SM City Baguio claimed that they have partnered with the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). But a letter from Jennivine Kwan, Vice President for International Operations of USGBC denied this claim. Among the provisions for the suspension or revocation of the new Building Code of the Philippines is “Incorrect or inaccurate data or information supplied.”
SM City Baguio claims to be offering a solution to the city’s traffic woes by building a parking lot that can accommodate 1,200 cars. This was lauded by the city’s traffic chief, Supt. James Allan Logan. To them, encouraging individuals to bring their cars to the city’s central business district by providing parking spaces instead of encouraging motorists to use city’s public transportation system to lessen the private vehicles on the road makes sense.
SM City Baguio promises a lot, but let’s call a spade a spade: SM City Baguio already enjoys a lion’s share of the city’s consumer market, smaller local businesses can barely survive with what’s left. But SM City Baguio is greedy and wants what’s left of that market for themselves, hence the expansion plan.
Luneta Hill served as the springboard for the establishment of the City of Baguio as a hill station for health and recreation. This is where the city’s pioneers built the first ever structure for that purpose – a sanitarium, and the first area in the city to be beautified with trees and flowering plants. Today, those trees help give us air, prevent flooding in lower lying areas, and maintain the city’s aesthetic value.
Removing those 182 trees and replacing it with a concrete monstrosity erases the city’s glorious past and endangers and ruins its present. I’ve said here countless times and I say it again, we inherited a City of Pines from the city’s pioneers, what kind of Baguio are we passing on to the future generation?
Let’s say no to the death sentence handed down by SM City Baguio to the 182 trees on Luneta Hill!
SM City Baguio said that they will be constructing a green building to offset the ecological footprint of the expansion by having a rooftop garden with ornamental plants and trees. Can that rooftop garden really make up for the environmental impact of thousands of cars, thousands of people, tons of garbage that the new structure will generate?
SM City Baguio claimed that they have partnered with the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). But a letter from Jennivine Kwan, Vice President for International Operations of USGBC denied this claim. Among the provisions for the suspension or revocation of the new Building Code of the Philippines is “Incorrect or inaccurate data or information supplied.”
SM City Baguio claims to be offering a solution to the city’s traffic woes by building a parking lot that can accommodate 1,200 cars. This was lauded by the city’s traffic chief, Supt. James Allan Logan. To them, encouraging individuals to bring their cars to the city’s central business district by providing parking spaces instead of encouraging motorists to use city’s public transportation system to lessen the private vehicles on the road makes sense.
SM City Baguio promises a lot, but let’s call a spade a spade: SM City Baguio already enjoys a lion’s share of the city’s consumer market, smaller local businesses can barely survive with what’s left. But SM City Baguio is greedy and wants what’s left of that market for themselves, hence the expansion plan.
Luneta Hill served as the springboard for the establishment of the City of Baguio as a hill station for health and recreation. This is where the city’s pioneers built the first ever structure for that purpose – a sanitarium, and the first area in the city to be beautified with trees and flowering plants. Today, those trees help give us air, prevent flooding in lower lying areas, and maintain the city’s aesthetic value.
Removing those 182 trees and replacing it with a concrete monstrosity erases the city’s glorious past and endangers and ruins its present. I’ve said here countless times and I say it again, we inherited a City of Pines from the city’s pioneers, what kind of Baguio are we passing on to the future generation?
Let’s say no to the death sentence handed down by SM City Baguio to the 182 trees on Luneta Hill!
Monday, February 27, 2012
Bakit kailangang tutulan ang pagputol ng mga puno sa Luneta Hill?
Kung ang mga pahayag ng SM City Baguio ang ating pagbabasehan, tila nga tuloy na tuloy na ang kanilang planong expansion upang lalo pang lubos na palakahin ang mala-higanteng mall sa tuktok ng Luneta Hill. Para ng gustong palabasin ay wala na talagang magagawa ang local an gobyerno o ang mga taong bayan upang pigilan ang kanilang planong putulin, o i-“earthball” ang humigit-kumulang 182 na puno dito.
Kung sabagay, meron na nga naman silang mga permit galing sa DENR para sa pagputol ng mga puno at sa lokal na pamahalaan para sa pagpapatayo ng gusali. Meron din silang Environmental Compliance Certificate, o ECC, na galing din sa DENR. Ang ECC ay nagpapatibay na ang plano ng SM City Baguio ay hindi makakasama sa kalikasan. Kung paano nila nakuha yun, sa kabila ng malamang na pagkamatay ng 182 na puno, hindi natin alam.
Bakit nga ba dapat tutulan ang balak ng SM? Una, ang bawat isang puno ay kayang mag-impok ng libo-libong litro ng tubig. 182 pa kaya? Kapag natuloy ang plano ng SM City Baguio na tanggalin o putulin ang mga puno sa Luneta Hill, saan pa ba aagos ang tubig ulan kundi sa mga mas mabababang lugar tulad ng Session Road, Gov. Pack Road at Harrison Road na maaaring maging sanhi ng pagbaha dito.
Pangalawa, kung walang mga punong maglilikom ng tubig ulan, maaring lumambot ng labis ang lupa at magdulot ng mga nakamamatay at nakapipinsalang landslides. Parang wala pa rin tayong natutunan sa Ondoy at Pepeng, o sa bagyong Sendong na naghatid ng matinding kalamidad sa Mindanao kamakailan lang.
Pangatlong dahilan ay may kinalaman sa ating kalusugan. Nililinis din ng mga puno ang hangin sa pamamagitan ng paglilikom ng mga nakapipinsalang Carbon sa himpapawid. Kapag mas kaunti ang puno sa isang urbanisadong lugar na tulad ng kinalalagyan ng SM City Baguio, mas madumi ang hangin. At hindi naman kaila sa atin na sa mga puno rin nanggagaling ang oxygen na ating hinihinga. Kapag kaunti ang mga puno, mas kaunti din ang nalalanghap nating sariwang hangin.
Sabi din nila, ang kanilang balak na bagong parking lot makakatulong sa pagpapaluwag ng daloy ng trapiko sa Central Business District. Hindi ako naniniwala diyan. Ako ay may sasakyan din, pero kadalasan ay hindi ko na ito dinadala dahil nga mahirap maghanap ng paparadahan. Kapag nagdagdag tayo ng parking lot, ine-engganyo natin ang mga mamayan na magdala ng sari-sariling sasakyan kasi nga, may paparadahan naman. Mas maraming sasakyan, mas masikip ang daloy ng trapiko. Mas mainam na sagot sa problema ng trapiko ang pagpapahusay ng ating sistemang sasakayang pampubliko.
Ang dami nilang sinasabing dahilan kung bakit sila magtatayo ng bagong gusali – kasama na dito ang pag hikayat daw ng mga turista at upang makapagbigay trabaho sa mga mamamayan. Sa unang banda, hindi SM ang ina-akyat ng mga turista dito kundi ang malamig na klima at ang mga punong pino. Pangalawa, ano nga bang klaseng trabaho ang alok ng SM City Baguio, yung trabahong kung saan hindi ka lalampas ng anim na buwan para manatili kang contractual at walang mga benepisyo?
Aminin muna kasi nila na magtatayo sila ng bagong gusali dahil sa isa at isang bagay lamang: pera. Ang tanong ko lang e, hindi pa ba sila masaya sa laki ng kinikita nila sa ngayon at kailangan pa nilang sipsipin pa ang mga tira-tirang mamimiling pinaghahati-hatian ng mga maliliit na negosyante sa Baguio?
Ilan lang ito sa mga dahilan kung bakit dapat tutulan ang plano ng SM City Baguio na putulin ang mga puno sa Luneta Hill. Dahil kapag hinayaan natin ang SM City Baguio na ipagpatuloy ang kanilang maitim na balak upang itaguyod ang kanilang kasakiman sa pera, paano pa natin mapipigilan ang iba pang nagbabalak ding gahasain ang ating kalikasan?
Hahayaan nga ba nating tuluyang mabura ang imahe at alala ng Baguio bilang “City of Pines?”
Sunday, February 5, 2012
More than 182
What’s with the 182 trees up on Luneta Hill anyway? A lot has been said about the air purifying and water holding capacity of those trees. I am not a botanist, I cannot expound on that.
But the death of these 182 trees, added to the hundreds that have been cut in Camp John Hay and who knows how many more will be cut in the future as they continue their development in the area, the piles of dead trees over at the Diplomat Hotel, are all coming at a time when the nation is still mourning the death of those who died in the flash floods in Cagayan de Oro and Iligan. SM City Baguio’s expansion that will compromise those 182 trees is coming at the heels of the recent garbage slide in Irisan that claimed lives and property.
This after the city along with the rest of the region were hit with landslides brought about by typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng that also resulted in countless deaths not too long ago.
What do you think could’ve prevented these tragedies?
SM Supermalls tells us that they have experts working on this project who can guarantee that the building’s ecological footprint would be kept at a minimum, and they will do so much to make up for whatever effect the project would have on the environment.
Would these be the same experts whose design apparently did not take into consideration the unique weather conditions in Baguio that leaves the interiors of the mall drenched and turns the stairs into virtual waterfalls during the rainy season? And I don’t know about you, but the occasional shaking of the floors especially at the supermarket area never fails to scare me to death. I don't trust your "experts" for how can they be called as such when they believe that removing 182 trees from the earth is not a big deal at all - even a child will tell you that there's got to be something wrong about that.
It is commendable that SM City Baguio promises to plant thousands of saplings (not seedlings, according to them). But where? It is the city’s Central Business District that needs the trees badly. What would really make the promise commendable is if they do it not to make up for something, but just because they really want to help enhance the city’s natural environment.
They have said so much about why they want to expand: promote tourism, provide employment, solve the city’s traffic woes by providing additional parking facilities. You mean tourists will now come up to Baguio primarily because of SM and not because of the climate, the beautiful scenery, the pine trees? And what kind of employment will they provide? The kind where you have to be let go in six months so you don’t become a regular employee who should be provided with benefits as required by law? And really, solve the traffic problem or provide more revenues for SM City Baguio?
Let us not forget that SM City Baguio is expanding primarily because of one thing – MORE MONEY. And at what cost? It’s not like Henry Sy is losing money with his branch here, he will continue to earn millions with or without the expansion.
And the issue on SM’s expansion and its effects goes beyond the environment. It is also about a rotten political system that allows corporate greed to trample on the well-being of the people. Whether you can do anything or not, whether you agree with our protest or not, at the end of the day, if SM City Baguio gets its way and those trees die, we, the people of Baguio lose, and corporate greed wins.
To our government officials, elected or otherwise, do not be too vain as to think that this is about you. It is not. The issue is so much bigger than your bloated egos. Remember that when we air our sentiments about your apparent inaction, we are addressing it to your office, and your office is a public trust. You just happen to be the one sitting on that chair at the moment. Oh how you degraded yourself dancing onstage like a monkey, begging us to put you where you are now just a couple of years ago. Remember that we can unseat you too.
And never forget that what makes a community, a city great is not its parking facilities, not a sky garden, not a mall - it’s the people whom you swore to protect, uphold the rights and welfare of.
This is not merely about the 182 trees up on Luneta Hill, this is also about the welfare of the more than 300,000 people who live in Baguio.
*OUT IN THE OPEN, Cordillera Today Feb. 5, 2012
Monday, January 30, 2012
Congratulations, Councilor
I see that you have finally made a statement regarding the issue - it's about time. I congratulate you for that.
I must say though that, well, you lost me at "your wrong opinion."
The issue about SM's plans was brought to the public's attention (or at least, my attention) in the early days of this month. On January 8, 2012, a petition was started by Michael Bengwayan which spread like wildfire all over the internet. I, as a member of the community, was shocked - how can they get away with the virtual murder of 182 pine trees at a time when Baguio is still reeling from a devastating garbage slide and the numerous landlsides before that? Not to mention the recent natural disaster that claimed hundreds of lives in Mindanao? I looked to you (not you personally, but you - Baguio's leaders) for guidance, for an explanation, for some kind of justification - you were elected to protect our welfare, work for our well-being.
A week passed, and then another, and there was hardly anything from you (not you personally, but you - Baguio's "public servants"). A rally was organized, stil no word from you. The rally happened, and still nothing from anyone of you (the presence of people and institutions connected to you is NOT AN ACHIEVEMENT YOU SHOULD TAKE CREDIT FOR).
I didn't want you to say you were on our side, nor did I want you to defend SM City Baguio's expansion plans. I was at a loss, and looked to you (again, not you personally) to shed light on the issue. Afterall, you should know better - you were elected to serve the people. Whichever side you were on, I was more curious about why you chose to be on that side.
I see you (all of you) a lot in the newspapers, on TV, I hear you on the radio - you're all quick to consider any form of mass media as a "proper forum" when trumpeting your truimphs. There's nothing wrong with that, I, as a resident of Baguio, love hearing about the good that all of you do. So I was totally shocked when hardly any one of you came forward to make statement about the issue. I can shut up about it. My neighbor can say nothing about it. The driver of the jeepney I rode this morning can not have an opinion about it - but not you. You owe it to the people to make a stand. It didn't matter which side of the political fence you're on - your position is a public trust, it is your responsibility to make a stand (hopefully for the greater majority's good) I hope you have not forgotten that.
And that's why I was suprised, scared even to receive a personal message from you (now I mean you, personally). You took offense at my status update that stated:
To the people Baguio voted for in the last election - you're quick to pose for a photo pretending to plant trees during tree planting photos ops, professing to be defenders of the environment to the media, making your presence felt in Facebook pages that advocate the protection of the environment such as Kafagwayan - Park Capital of the Philippines, etc. - Park Capital of the Philippines, etc. - YOUR SILENCE ON THE ISSUE OF THE PLANNED MASS MURDER OF TREES UP ON LUNETA HILL IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SUSPECT!
Did I mean YOU personally? Yes, you and the rest of you that the people elected to care for the people's welfare. You're message, in part, said, "I think you had a different opinion of me, and have influenced others with your WRONG OPINION." (caps mine).
Now that's scary - an opinion being wrong simply because you don't agree with it. How is my opinion that "YOUR SILENCE ON THE PLANNED MASS MURDER OF TREES UP ON LUNETA HILL IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SUSPECT" wrong? In that lengthy exchange of messages, I asked you repeatedly what your stand is on the issue of SM's expansion, and you answered with your impeccable environmental efforts in the past. I asked again and again, but you only answered with how you have planted way more trees than most Filipinos (bravo!) in the past - still you dodged the question - where do you stand as far as SM's expansion plan is concerned?
You told me that you will do so "in the proper forum." Why is the internet a proper forum for letting the people know of your "environment-friendly efforts" but not for making a stand on the SM issue?
Did you see my last status? -
"I am Karlo Marko Altomonte, an artist, a father and a resident of Baguio, and I hereby PUBLICLY DECLARE that I am against the earthballing/relocation of trees up on Luneta Hill to pave the way for SM City Baguio's expansion project.
(now how hard is that, dear Public Servants? No, declaring you're an environmentalist and is generally against the cutting of trees and have planted trees in the past does not state your position on the matter. And yes, THIS IS A PROPER FORUM)"
Have you seen how many people from all walks of life have put that as their status? It's that easy if one had principles and the conscience and courage to stand up for them.
You did say that you sent private messages to certain people stating your position. Lucky for those people, at least they knew where you stood. But as for us, we had no idea until your lengthy position statement you published today. SO I GUESS FACEBOOK IS A PROPER FORUM AFTER ALL? What took you so long?
For the record, I take offense, and it scares me even, to be singled out by an elected official out of the thousands who've been cursing all of you for your silence.
Better late than never, though. So, CONGRATULATIONS, COUNCILOR! for finally making a stand. But as I said, you lost me at "wrong opinion." But I believe I had you at "YOUR SILENCE ON THE PLANNED MASS MURDER OF TREES UP ON LUNETA HILL IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SUSPECT."
But don't worry about losing me, you never had me. I didn't vote for you.
I must say though that, well, you lost me at "your wrong opinion."
The issue about SM's plans was brought to the public's attention (or at least, my attention) in the early days of this month. On January 8, 2012, a petition was started by Michael Bengwayan which spread like wildfire all over the internet. I, as a member of the community, was shocked - how can they get away with the virtual murder of 182 pine trees at a time when Baguio is still reeling from a devastating garbage slide and the numerous landlsides before that? Not to mention the recent natural disaster that claimed hundreds of lives in Mindanao? I looked to you (not you personally, but you - Baguio's leaders) for guidance, for an explanation, for some kind of justification - you were elected to protect our welfare, work for our well-being.
A week passed, and then another, and there was hardly anything from you (not you personally, but you - Baguio's "public servants"). A rally was organized, stil no word from you. The rally happened, and still nothing from anyone of you (the presence of people and institutions connected to you is NOT AN ACHIEVEMENT YOU SHOULD TAKE CREDIT FOR).
I didn't want you to say you were on our side, nor did I want you to defend SM City Baguio's expansion plans. I was at a loss, and looked to you (again, not you personally) to shed light on the issue. Afterall, you should know better - you were elected to serve the people. Whichever side you were on, I was more curious about why you chose to be on that side.
I see you (all of you) a lot in the newspapers, on TV, I hear you on the radio - you're all quick to consider any form of mass media as a "proper forum" when trumpeting your truimphs. There's nothing wrong with that, I, as a resident of Baguio, love hearing about the good that all of you do. So I was totally shocked when hardly any one of you came forward to make statement about the issue. I can shut up about it. My neighbor can say nothing about it. The driver of the jeepney I rode this morning can not have an opinion about it - but not you. You owe it to the people to make a stand. It didn't matter which side of the political fence you're on - your position is a public trust, it is your responsibility to make a stand (hopefully for the greater majority's good) I hope you have not forgotten that.
And that's why I was suprised, scared even to receive a personal message from you (now I mean you, personally). You took offense at my status update that stated:
To the people Baguio voted for in the last election - you're quick to pose for a photo pretending to plant trees during tree planting photos ops, professing to be defenders of the environment to the media, making your presence felt in Facebook pages that advocate the protection of the environment such as Kafagwayan - Park Capital of the Philippines, etc. - Park Capital of the Philippines, etc. - YOUR SILENCE ON THE ISSUE OF THE PLANNED MASS MURDER OF TREES UP ON LUNETA HILL IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SUSPECT!
Did I mean YOU personally? Yes, you and the rest of you that the people elected to care for the people's welfare. You're message, in part, said, "I think you had a different opinion of me, and have influenced others with your WRONG OPINION." (caps mine).
Now that's scary - an opinion being wrong simply because you don't agree with it. How is my opinion that "YOUR SILENCE ON THE PLANNED MASS MURDER OF TREES UP ON LUNETA HILL IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SUSPECT" wrong? In that lengthy exchange of messages, I asked you repeatedly what your stand is on the issue of SM's expansion, and you answered with your impeccable environmental efforts in the past. I asked again and again, but you only answered with how you have planted way more trees than most Filipinos (bravo!) in the past - still you dodged the question - where do you stand as far as SM's expansion plan is concerned?
You told me that you will do so "in the proper forum." Why is the internet a proper forum for letting the people know of your "environment-friendly efforts" but not for making a stand on the SM issue?
Did you see my last status? -
"I am Karlo Marko Altomonte, an artist, a father and a resident of Baguio, and I hereby PUBLICLY DECLARE that I am against the earthballing/relocation of trees up on Luneta Hill to pave the way for SM City Baguio's expansion project.
(now how hard is that, dear Public Servants? No, declaring you're an environmentalist and is generally against the cutting of trees and have planted trees in the past does not state your position on the matter. And yes, THIS IS A PROPER FORUM)"
Have you seen how many people from all walks of life have put that as their status? It's that easy if one had principles and the conscience and courage to stand up for them.
You did say that you sent private messages to certain people stating your position. Lucky for those people, at least they knew where you stood. But as for us, we had no idea until your lengthy position statement you published today. SO I GUESS FACEBOOK IS A PROPER FORUM AFTER ALL? What took you so long?
For the record, I take offense, and it scares me even, to be singled out by an elected official out of the thousands who've been cursing all of you for your silence.
Better late than never, though. So, CONGRATULATIONS, COUNCILOR! for finally making a stand. But as I said, you lost me at "wrong opinion." But I believe I had you at "YOUR SILENCE ON THE PLANNED MASS MURDER OF TREES UP ON LUNETA HILL IS UNACCEPTABLE AND SUSPECT."
But don't worry about losing me, you never had me. I didn't vote for you.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
For our children
We promised that you will not be late for your taekwondo lessons yesterday, and that we will have that special dinner you’ve been begging for, but first, we had to print some posters and help set-up microphones and speakers for a protest rally.
You first had to join thousands of other people to march down from the top of Session Road to People’s Park at the bottom, holding up the posters we printed that said, “It’s Not About What You’ll Build, It’s About What You’ll Kill!.”
What’s really happening?, you asked. SM City Baguio, where our theatre group performed a few times – a play called “Pepe” that rallied the youth to take a more active part in issues affecting the country; “Sa Saliw ng mga Gangsa,” a concert that featured songs that told the audience about the importance of protecting our natural environment; excerpts from “Jesus Christ Superstar” where the stylized crucifixion scene had Jesus being nailed to a concrete pine tree – and where you guys go for your piano and guitar lessons, remember how amazed you were when you were much younger at how huge the mall was? Well, it’s the biggest commercial centre in Baguio, and they want to make it even bigger!
How are they going to do that when the mall’s surroundings are covered with pine trees? Well, they would have to get rid of those trees, and that’s not good for the environment, for the city – that’s not good for you! Remember your elementary science lessons about trees? How they breathe out oxygen which makes us breathe? Well, three to four of those pine trees can provide our whole family with oxygen to breathe. And all that black smoke coming from cars going up to SM City Baguio? Notice how the people on Session Road would cover their noses to avoid breathing those poisonous fumes? Let’s do some math: a single tree can absorb almost 50 pounds of that poison a year, so all the trees they want to remove from SM, about 180, can absorb 9,000 pounds! Because it’s a gas, it’s very light, so 9,000 pounds is really a lot of carbon! And trees also absorb water and discharge it in the air – that’s why it’s cooler in areas where there are lots of trees. All those 180 trees can absorb more than 60,000 litres of water everyday, and if you remove them, all that water will not be absorbed and can come rushing down from Luneta Hill towards Session Road and Harrison Road and can cause floods. Remember the news about the floods in Mindanao last December? Or how about the landslides that happened in La Trinidad and Tublay a few years ago? That happened because there were not enough trees to absorb the water and hold the land together. What do you think can happen when most of those trees around SM are removed?
And that’s why we have to join all these other people who want to stop SM City Baguio from removing those trees. Some people will tell you that they’re not going to kill the trees, they will “earthball” them, which is basically what I do when I transfer a plant in our garden from a small pot to a bigger one. Except that trees are much bigger, their roots spread out much deeper into the ground and much wider, so digging them out from the roots is not easy, you need those huge backhoes to do that, and if you cut some of those roots while doing so, they will die.
Why do they want to make SM City Baguio even bigger? Some people will tell you that it’s because they want to provide more parking spaces so that our streets will be cleared of cars. That they’re building a “green” building, meaning it’s environment-friendly. Maybe that’s true, but that’s not why they want to make SM bigger. SM exists only because of one thing: to make money. Just like Ate Edith with her store up our road – she may be nice, she may be friendly, once in a while she helps her neighbours and friends, but she put up her store to make money. So SM wants to make their mall bigger simply because they want to earn more money.
The owner of SM City Baguio, kids, is one of the richest people in the world. Remember when we had to borrow money to pay the hospital when one of you got food poisoning from one of the restaurants along Session Road? Henry Sy will not need to borrow money when his kids get sick, in fact, he can pay for the hospitalization of tens of thousands of children like you and he will still be rich. He can buy 10 nice cars and still be rich. He can have an Ipad, a Playstation, a bicycle, an Optimus Prime action figure, a nice pair of soccer cleats, all the Harry Potter books, watch a movie every day, go to the beach every weekend, have hamburgers and pizza any time he wants, give all his children a huge allowance, and buy his own airplane(!) and he will still be rich! So why does he want to earn more money?
Because he’s greedy, and it’s not good to be greedy, kids, remember that.
Oh, and you were wondering last night why some people, some of whom you know are even part of a group that’s supposed to take care of the environment, were there in SM to watch some guy named Sam Milby instead of with us in People’s Park to beg SM and our Congressman and Mayor and councilors to stop the killing of those trees.
Well, maybe they really just don’t care, and always remember that it’s bad not to care.
*my column in the Jan. 22, 2012 issue of Cordillera Today
You first had to join thousands of other people to march down from the top of Session Road to People’s Park at the bottom, holding up the posters we printed that said, “It’s Not About What You’ll Build, It’s About What You’ll Kill!.”
What’s really happening?, you asked. SM City Baguio, where our theatre group performed a few times – a play called “Pepe” that rallied the youth to take a more active part in issues affecting the country; “Sa Saliw ng mga Gangsa,” a concert that featured songs that told the audience about the importance of protecting our natural environment; excerpts from “Jesus Christ Superstar” where the stylized crucifixion scene had Jesus being nailed to a concrete pine tree – and where you guys go for your piano and guitar lessons, remember how amazed you were when you were much younger at how huge the mall was? Well, it’s the biggest commercial centre in Baguio, and they want to make it even bigger!
How are they going to do that when the mall’s surroundings are covered with pine trees? Well, they would have to get rid of those trees, and that’s not good for the environment, for the city – that’s not good for you! Remember your elementary science lessons about trees? How they breathe out oxygen which makes us breathe? Well, three to four of those pine trees can provide our whole family with oxygen to breathe. And all that black smoke coming from cars going up to SM City Baguio? Notice how the people on Session Road would cover their noses to avoid breathing those poisonous fumes? Let’s do some math: a single tree can absorb almost 50 pounds of that poison a year, so all the trees they want to remove from SM, about 180, can absorb 9,000 pounds! Because it’s a gas, it’s very light, so 9,000 pounds is really a lot of carbon! And trees also absorb water and discharge it in the air – that’s why it’s cooler in areas where there are lots of trees. All those 180 trees can absorb more than 60,000 litres of water everyday, and if you remove them, all that water will not be absorbed and can come rushing down from Luneta Hill towards Session Road and Harrison Road and can cause floods. Remember the news about the floods in Mindanao last December? Or how about the landslides that happened in La Trinidad and Tublay a few years ago? That happened because there were not enough trees to absorb the water and hold the land together. What do you think can happen when most of those trees around SM are removed?
And that’s why we have to join all these other people who want to stop SM City Baguio from removing those trees. Some people will tell you that they’re not going to kill the trees, they will “earthball” them, which is basically what I do when I transfer a plant in our garden from a small pot to a bigger one. Except that trees are much bigger, their roots spread out much deeper into the ground and much wider, so digging them out from the roots is not easy, you need those huge backhoes to do that, and if you cut some of those roots while doing so, they will die.
Why do they want to make SM City Baguio even bigger? Some people will tell you that it’s because they want to provide more parking spaces so that our streets will be cleared of cars. That they’re building a “green” building, meaning it’s environment-friendly. Maybe that’s true, but that’s not why they want to make SM bigger. SM exists only because of one thing: to make money. Just like Ate Edith with her store up our road – she may be nice, she may be friendly, once in a while she helps her neighbours and friends, but she put up her store to make money. So SM wants to make their mall bigger simply because they want to earn more money.
The owner of SM City Baguio, kids, is one of the richest people in the world. Remember when we had to borrow money to pay the hospital when one of you got food poisoning from one of the restaurants along Session Road? Henry Sy will not need to borrow money when his kids get sick, in fact, he can pay for the hospitalization of tens of thousands of children like you and he will still be rich. He can buy 10 nice cars and still be rich. He can have an Ipad, a Playstation, a bicycle, an Optimus Prime action figure, a nice pair of soccer cleats, all the Harry Potter books, watch a movie every day, go to the beach every weekend, have hamburgers and pizza any time he wants, give all his children a huge allowance, and buy his own airplane(!) and he will still be rich! So why does he want to earn more money?
Because he’s greedy, and it’s not good to be greedy, kids, remember that.
Oh, and you were wondering last night why some people, some of whom you know are even part of a group that’s supposed to take care of the environment, were there in SM to watch some guy named Sam Milby instead of with us in People’s Park to beg SM and our Congressman and Mayor and councilors to stop the killing of those trees.
Well, maybe they really just don’t care, and always remember that it’s bad not to care.
*my column in the Jan. 22, 2012 issue of Cordillera Today
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Fail
What comes to mind when you read or hear the following? "When you care enough to send the very best." "Ikaw lamang, wala ng iba." "Just do it." "Finger lickin' good." "Langhap sarap." "Connecting people." Or fill in the blanks: "Have a break, have a ___," "Come to where the flavor is, come to ___." "The united colors of ____."
While my 13-year old son didn't get everything, he got most of it. My wife got them all. The first one's been Hallmark's slogan for, like, forever. It makes sense, it makes you do a head tilt and go, awww. So does Johnson & Johnson's vow of fidelity. Nike's command makes you want to go buy a pair and sweat it out or conquer the world. While KFC's promise hits it just right. The aroma of MSG-laden fastfood makes you salivate every time you pass by a Jollibee, which currently means practically at every turn in Baguio's Central Business District. you send a text or answer a call and you know Nokia does connect people. A lot of us have even found ways to quote Kitkat's, Marlboro's and Benetton's slogans in casual conversation.
They're clever, witty even, they stick, they make sense.
I received a lot of reactions when I posted, as my status on Facebook, my thoughts about "It's more fun in the Philippines," the new tourism slogan of Department of Tourism developed by the advertising agency which got the contract, BBDO Guerrero. Basically, I personally don't like it. It's not amusing, it doesn't stick, it doesn't inspire. When I read it, I didn't purse my lips, bob my head up and down, and go, "nice."
And I don't totally agree with the claim. That's why the Indians didn't say it's more fun in India, because that's not entirely true. Instead they simply said, "Incredible India," and it makes one go, "oo nga naman." The Malaysians told the world that Malaysia is truly Asia, and think about it, this melting pot of various Asian cultures of a country is indeed truly Asia. Angola's syncopated, un-rhyming music video erases memories of a civil war-ravaged country and instead conjures images of a people determined to rise above their beautiful country's past, and I believed.
It is true that ours are among the most beautiful beaches in the world, our culture among the most diverse (drive a couple of hours to anywhere in any direction from anywhere in the country and they speak a different dialect or language there already), there are 7,107 possibilities for a wonderful visit to the Philippines - we have beautiful mountain ranges, we still have some rain forests left, a lot of places that paint a beautiful picture of our colonial past, unique world-class products from textile to sculptures to jewelry to food, etcetera, etcetera. See, my problem with "It's more fun in the Philippines," is it's too general you don't know what it means exactly, too bold a claim that is hard to accept at face value specially for outsiders who've only been hearing about rampant corruption, extra-judicial killings, let's not even go that far - one of the worst airports in the world.
But they did say that there will be lots of publicity gimmicks and other PR efforts that will be done to "prove" the slogan's point. But that's exactly my point - a slogan must be self-explanatory, must not need extra effort to "prove it" for if it does, as netizens say, FAIL.
And then we learn that it's an exact copy of Switzerland's tourism slogan in the 50's. I'll forgive bureaucrats for pulling off something like that, but an established, professional advertising agency? They can't simply shrug and say, "we didn't know." That's just impossible. You belong to an industry that is supposed to have creativity/originality as its main output, you make sure your output is creative and original. "It's more fun in the Philippines" is neither. And this coming at the heels of the "Pilipinas Kay Ganda" logo turning out to be a plagiarized version of Poland's CURRENT tourism logo? Or maybe the BBDO Guerrero group didn't think anybody would find out about the Swiss tourism campaign of half a century ago - just like the lazy student who thought nobody would find out that he copied his book report verbatim from an article that appeared in page 12 of his Google search.
No, "It's more fun in the Philippines" just doesn't cut it. Just like the Baguio tags, "Cleanest and Greenest" (at a time when Baguio was being covered in concrete), "City of Pines" (then big businesses go ahead and cut down beautiful pine trees with impunity), "Character City" (some said it's more like City of Characters), "Beautiful Baguio" (at a time when we had a garbage crisis), didn't.
While my 13-year old son didn't get everything, he got most of it. My wife got them all. The first one's been Hallmark's slogan for, like, forever. It makes sense, it makes you do a head tilt and go, awww. So does Johnson & Johnson's vow of fidelity. Nike's command makes you want to go buy a pair and sweat it out or conquer the world. While KFC's promise hits it just right. The aroma of MSG-laden fastfood makes you salivate every time you pass by a Jollibee, which currently means practically at every turn in Baguio's Central Business District. you send a text or answer a call and you know Nokia does connect people. A lot of us have even found ways to quote Kitkat's, Marlboro's and Benetton's slogans in casual conversation.
They're clever, witty even, they stick, they make sense.
I received a lot of reactions when I posted, as my status on Facebook, my thoughts about "It's more fun in the Philippines," the new tourism slogan of Department of Tourism developed by the advertising agency which got the contract, BBDO Guerrero. Basically, I personally don't like it. It's not amusing, it doesn't stick, it doesn't inspire. When I read it, I didn't purse my lips, bob my head up and down, and go, "nice."
And I don't totally agree with the claim. That's why the Indians didn't say it's more fun in India, because that's not entirely true. Instead they simply said, "Incredible India," and it makes one go, "oo nga naman." The Malaysians told the world that Malaysia is truly Asia, and think about it, this melting pot of various Asian cultures of a country is indeed truly Asia. Angola's syncopated, un-rhyming music video erases memories of a civil war-ravaged country and instead conjures images of a people determined to rise above their beautiful country's past, and I believed.
It is true that ours are among the most beautiful beaches in the world, our culture among the most diverse (drive a couple of hours to anywhere in any direction from anywhere in the country and they speak a different dialect or language there already), there are 7,107 possibilities for a wonderful visit to the Philippines - we have beautiful mountain ranges, we still have some rain forests left, a lot of places that paint a beautiful picture of our colonial past, unique world-class products from textile to sculptures to jewelry to food, etcetera, etcetera. See, my problem with "It's more fun in the Philippines," is it's too general you don't know what it means exactly, too bold a claim that is hard to accept at face value specially for outsiders who've only been hearing about rampant corruption, extra-judicial killings, let's not even go that far - one of the worst airports in the world.
But they did say that there will be lots of publicity gimmicks and other PR efforts that will be done to "prove" the slogan's point. But that's exactly my point - a slogan must be self-explanatory, must not need extra effort to "prove it" for if it does, as netizens say, FAIL.
And then we learn that it's an exact copy of Switzerland's tourism slogan in the 50's. I'll forgive bureaucrats for pulling off something like that, but an established, professional advertising agency? They can't simply shrug and say, "we didn't know." That's just impossible. You belong to an industry that is supposed to have creativity/originality as its main output, you make sure your output is creative and original. "It's more fun in the Philippines" is neither. And this coming at the heels of the "Pilipinas Kay Ganda" logo turning out to be a plagiarized version of Poland's CURRENT tourism logo? Or maybe the BBDO Guerrero group didn't think anybody would find out about the Swiss tourism campaign of half a century ago - just like the lazy student who thought nobody would find out that he copied his book report verbatim from an article that appeared in page 12 of his Google search.
No, "It's more fun in the Philippines" just doesn't cut it. Just like the Baguio tags, "Cleanest and Greenest" (at a time when Baguio was being covered in concrete), "City of Pines" (then big businesses go ahead and cut down beautiful pine trees with impunity), "Character City" (some said it's more like City of Characters), "Beautiful Baguio" (at a time when we had a garbage crisis), didn't.
*my column in the January 8, 2012 issue of Cordillera Today
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)