A dispute over Cebu City’s waste management plan erupted on Oct. 13, 2026, as Councilor Joel Garganera criticized Vice Mayor Tomas Osmeña over plan submission delays and unparliamentary interruptions.
Osmeña defended submitting a P250-million proposal on time, leaving implementation to Mayor Nestor Archival, while alleging an anomaly regarding a P220-million cost increase for automatic waste segregation equipment.
Garganera noted that Cebu City spends nearly P1 billion annually on garbage hauling, securing approved council motions for updates on the city's 10-year solid waste management plan.
A DISPUTE over Cebu City’s waste management plan erupted during the City Council’s regular session on Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2026, as Councilor Joel Garganera pressed Vice Mayor Tomas Osmeña on a promised proposal, sparking a clash over its submission, cost and implementation.
In his privilege speech, Garganera said 137 days had passed since Osmeña asked the council for 60 days to prepare a plan addressing the city’s garbage crisis. He said the council had yet to receive a comprehensive plan with clear targets and implementation timelines.
Osmeña interrupted to defend his work, saying he had prepared a proposal and submitted it ahead of the deadline.
“You let me continue. You were talking about your solution and you delivered it May 28,” Garganera told Osmeña.
Garganera later rebuked the vice mayor for interrupting him while he was delivering his privilege speech.
“Don’t interrupt me when I talk. You’ve been doing that even before. Don’t do that,” he said.
In a statement after the session, Garganera said council members should be allowed to speak without interruption. He alleged that Osmeña interrupted his speech and shoved papers onto the podium while he had the floor.
“It is unparliamentary to interrupt a member delivering a privilege speech. Every member has his time to speak, and must first be recognized by the presiding officer,” Garganera said.
He clarified that he had not asked Osmeña to prepare a waste management plan. Instead, he said, the vice mayor had requested 60 days to come up with one.
“On the substance, the minutes will show that I did not ask the Vice Mayor to prepare a plan. It was he who asked for 60 days to prepare one,” Garganera said.
Garganera added that if Osmeña’s proposal had already been forwarded to Mayor Nestor Archival in January, as the vice mayor claimed, the council session should have been used to clarify the matter through proper procedure.
“What Cebu City needs is a plan with clear targets and timeframes. I remain committed to getting one,” Garganera said.
Cost dispute
Osmeña maintained that he had fulfilled his commitment by submitting the proposal before the deadline, adding that implementation was the responsibility of Archival’s administration.
He also questioned the reported increase in the proposal’s cost from P250 million to P470 million following the addition of automatic waste segregation equipment.
Osmeña said the original proposal, dated Jan. 29, was worth P250 million and covered the equipment to be installed. The building and bridge were excluded because their processing was still underway, he said.
“The important thing is I kept my word. I said 60 days, I went before 60 days, I submitted it. It’s up to the mayor to implement it,” Osmeña said.
He questioned the additional P220 million, arguing that the inclusion of automatic segregators did not justify the increase.
“Something is wrong. The addition of one small piece of equipment has increased its cost. I smell an anomaly, and the reputation of this council is at stake,” Osmeña said.
The vice mayor said the City should pursue the P250-million proposal without the automatic segregators.
“Now, whatever is decided by the City Government, it will be bidded out,” he said.
The council discussion did not establish which proposal the City Government would ultimately pursue.
Call for long-term solutions
Garganera’s privilege speech focused on the City’s continued reliance on garbage collection and hauling, which he described as inadequate to address the underlying waste disposal problem.
He said Cebu City spends nearly P1 billion annually on garbage hauling and called for a comprehensive waste management plan with measurable targets and clear implementation timelines.
He also cited the Binaliw landfill collapse, which killed 36 workers and a volunteer rescuer, as a reminder of the consequences of failing to address the city’s waste management problems.
Garganera urged the City to enforce existing environmental laws and explore long-term solutions, including waste-to-energy technology alongside waste segregation, recycling and composting.
He also sought updates on the city’s 10-year solid waste management plan and reports on the operations of the South Road Properties Eco Station.
The council approved Garganera’s motions seeking updates and supporting documents on the city’s waste management initiatives.
The approved motions are expected to provide the council with additional information on the status of the city’s waste management efforts and the administration’s planned actions. / CAV