P1-B or P30-M? Marcos criticizes Keon’s road proposal

A brewing political feud between Ilocos Norte First District Representative Ferdinand Alexander “Sandro” Marcos and Laoag City Mayor Michael Marcos Keon has come to light over a contentious road project proposal.

The dispute centers on a stark discrepancy in the estimated project costs submitted by the local government and the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), raising questions about transparency and governance.

Rep. Marcos publicly criticized Mayor Keon’s proposed budget for a road near a mall in Laoag City. Keon’s letter, dated 21 February 2024, pegged the cost at P1 billion, shared equally between the national government and the mall owner. However, the DPWH’s assessment of the same project amounted to only P30 million.

Speaking at a press conference with select members of the press from Ilocos Norte, Marcos expressed disbelief, stating, “If I had agreed to this figure, P470 million of public funds would have been wasted.” He clarified that the DPWH’s version of the project had already been included in next year’s national budget and emphasized the importance of ensuring transparency in the allocation of public funds.

The staggering difference in the estimated costs has prompted closer scrutiny. Experts note that local government units (LGUs) and the DPWH follow distinct processes for project costing. LGUs, in their proposals, may factor in broader expenses such as land acquisition and additional infrastructure improvements, as Keon claimed by mentioning the need for dikes and private property acquisitions.

However, the DPWH’s costing guidelines under the Government Procurement Reform Act (RA 9184) and DPWH Department Order No. 197 limit estimates to the core infrastructure scope, excluding non-essential components. The DPWH relies on market-standard rates and established cost metrics, minimizing the risk of inflated budgets.

Mayor Keon defended his proposal by asserting that the P1 billion figure was a preliminary estimate meant to accommodate potential complexities. Nevertheless, the DPWH’s program of work for the project did not include land acquisition, raising doubts about the accuracy of the mayor’s justification.

Rep. Marcos’s concerns align with provisions under RA 9184, which mandates competitive bidding and adherence to strict cost evaluations to prevent irregularities in public spending. Moreover, the Mandanas-Garcia ruling, which devolved more functions to LGUs, obliges them to avoid redundancy with national government responsibilities.

While the budgetary concerns remain central, the controversy also reveals a deepening political rivalry between Rep. Marcos and Mayor Keon, both members of the Marcos family but representing divergent political styles. Marcos emphasized that his criticisms were not politically motivated but driven by his responsibility to protect taxpayers’ money. “I want to clarify, Laoagueños deserve better. Laoag needs to do better,” he said.

Keon, however, hinted at politicking, suggesting that Marcos’s public comments were aimed at undermining his administration ahead of the upcoming elections. The timing of Marcos’s statements—during the filing period for certificates of candidacy—has fueled speculations about political maneuvering within the family’s stronghold.

This dispute is an example of broader governance challenges in the Philippines, where LGUs and national agencies often clash over project priorities, costing, and accountability. Analysts argue that stricter oversight mechanisms and improved coordination are necessary to bridge such gaps and prevent the misuse of public funds.

As the controversy unfolds, it underscores the need for transparency, collaboration, and adherence to established laws and guidelines in public infrastructure projects. Whether this debate will reshape Laoag’s governance or remain a flashpoint in local politics remains to be seen.