Whether of not the Veto message of the Municipal Mayor is consistent in its entirety or of is ambiguous with regard to the scopre of its application ie.e. the entirety of the ordinance or only to spec

provision on the imposition of a condition in the release of funds for the CNA incentive and SRI appears to be legally untenable. In particular, the said provision requires that the Office of the SB “must be furnished with a copy of the list of all recipients with the corresponding amount of said benefits prior to its release to justify the amount intended for the different allocations.” With regard the fourth issue, while it may be prudent for the SB to ask for the list of recipients of the incentives for reference and a mechanism to safeguard government funds, the same should not be made a condition precedent in the grant of such incentives, there being no clear legal basis for making it a prerequisite. Coming to the Jast issue, it is worth noting that the grant of CNA and SRI should be in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Department of Budget Management (DBM). Nowhere in the existing guidelines can we find that the SB “must be furnished with a copy of the list of all recipients with the corresponding amount of said benefits prior to its release.” Hence, the question on the legality of the action of the Mayor in the release of incentives sans submitting the list of recipients to the SB is immaterial as this condition is not explicitly provided in the DBM guidelines, particularly in the grant of CNA and SRI. This opinion is being rendered without prejudice to any contrary opinion of competent authorities or the courts. We hope to have guided you accordingly. Very truly yours, BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY: ie ATTY. EO P. — Undersecretary for External, Legal and Legislative Affairs OUSELLA/RPB/LLLS-LRALLD/jam Ce: LEOCADIO T. TROVELA, CESO III Regional Director, DILG VII — Central Visayas Sudlon, Lahug, Cebu City Page 3 of 3