Iloilo City Mayor Raisa Treñas has raised concerns regarding four flood control projects in her city, citing them as either not working, not existing, or actually causing floods. These projects were managed by St. Timothy Construction Corp. and Alpha & Omega General Contractor & Development Corp.

Mayor Treñas identified three projects handled by St. Timothy Construction Corp. and one by Alpha & Omega General Contractor & Development Corp. Two of the projects by St. Timothy involved flood mitigation structures in Lapuz, Iloilo City, with a combined cost of P300 million. Another project for a flood mitigation structure in Iloilo City, also by St. Timothy, cost P125 million but was suspended due to obstructions and a lack of a specific address. Alpha & Omega General Contractor & Development Corp. was awarded a P150 million project for a comprehensive flood mitigation effort, though its exact location and whether it covered the city or the entire province were not specified.

These firms, St. Timothy Construction Corp. and Alpha & Omega General Contractor & Development Corp., are reportedly linked to the Discaya family. Alpha & Omega's president is Sarah Discaya, who was a political rival of Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto. St. Timothy is reportedly managed by an individual who previously worked for a company handled by Sarah Discaya's husband. Together, these two companies were awarded over P10 billion in flood control contracts between 2022 and 2025, according to an audit report.

Mayor Treñas has called for a thorough investigation by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and independent experts into these projects. She emphasized the public's right to know about any delays, shortcomings, or misuse of funds, and stated that those responsible should be held accountable. She also urged the national government to demolish any projects found to be defective or harmful, as they are worsening flood situations and causing damage.

This situation comes after President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. ordered an audit of flood control projects. An earlier report indicated that a small group of 15 contractors received 20% of the P545 billion budget allocated for nearly 10,000 flood control projects during the first half of the current administration's term.

Original article

Actionable Information: There is no actionable information for a normal person to *do* right now. The article reports on concerns and calls for investigation, but it does not provide steps for individuals to take.

Educational Depth: The article provides some educational depth by highlighting a potential issue of mismanagement and questionable effectiveness in public works projects. It touches on the scale of government spending on flood control and mentions an audit report, suggesting systemic issues. However, it does not delve into the technical reasons why the projects might be failing or the specific processes of audits and investigations.

Personal Relevance: The topic has personal relevance as it concerns public funds allocated for infrastructure that directly impacts citizens, such as flood control. Ineffective projects can lead to continued flooding, property damage, and wasted taxpayer money, all of which affect the daily lives and financial well-being of residents.

Public Service Function: The article serves a public service function by reporting on potential misuse of public funds and ineffective government projects. It brings attention to concerns raised by a local official and mentions a presidential order for an audit, indicating a broader effort to address such issues.

Practicality of Advice: The article does not offer advice or steps that a normal person can practically implement. The calls for investigation and demolition are directed at government bodies, not individuals.

Long-Term Impact: The article has potential long-term impact by raising awareness about accountability in public spending and infrastructure projects. If investigations lead to corrective actions, it could result in more effective future projects and better use of public funds.

Emotional or Psychological Impact: The article might evoke feelings of concern or frustration regarding the potential mismanagement of public funds and the ineffectiveness of essential infrastructure. However, it also presents a call for accountability, which could foster a sense of civic engagement.

Clickbait or Ad-Driven Words: The article does not appear to use clickbait or ad-driven language. It reports on specific concerns and factual information.

Missed Chances to Teach or Guide: The article missed opportunities to provide more practical guidance. For instance, it could have suggested ways for citizens to monitor local infrastructure projects, report concerns to relevant authorities, or access public information about government contracts. A normal person could find more information by: * Researching the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) website for information on project oversight and reporting mechanisms. * Looking for local government transparency portals or public procurement databases to understand how such projects are awarded and monitored.

The described actions of awarding significant sums for flood control projects that are either non-functional or detrimental to the land directly undermine the clan's duty to protect its kin and preserve resources for future generations. When resources meant for community well-being are mismanaged or wasted, it weakens the collective ability to care for children and elders. The failure of these projects to provide actual flood mitigation means that families, particularly the most vulnerable like young children and the elderly, remain exposed to environmental hazards, eroding the trust that kin will be safeguarded.

The reported links between the construction firms and a specific family, coupled with the vast sums awarded, suggest a potential prioritization of familial or group enrichment over the shared responsibility for the community's survival. This behavior fractures the bonds of trust and mutual obligation that are essential for a clan's cohesion. It creates a situation where a select few may benefit, while the broader community, including its children and elders, bears the burden of ineffective or harmful infrastructure. This also shifts the natural duty of fathers and mothers to provide a safe and secure environment onto distant and impersonal entities, which may not share the same vested interest in the long-term well-being of the local people.

The lack of clear accountability and the potential for misused funds directly violate the ancestral principle that survival depends on deeds and daily care. When those entrusted with resources fail to deliver on their duties, it breeds cynicism and erodes the social fabric. This can lead to a breakdown in neighborly cooperation and a diminished sense of shared responsibility for the land and its inhabitants. The failure to protect the land from further damage due to poorly executed projects also jeopardizes the resources necessary for procreation and the sustenance of future generations.

If these behaviors spread unchecked, families will face increased vulnerability to environmental threats, diminishing their capacity to protect children and elders. Trust within communities will erode, making collective action and mutual support more difficult. The stewardship of the land will suffer, leading to a decline in the resources available for future generations, ultimately threatening the continuity of the people and their ability to thrive.

The text uses strong words to describe the projects, which can make readers feel angry. For example, it says the projects are "not working, not existing, or actually causing floods." This language paints a very negative picture of the projects and the companies involved. It helps to show Mayor Treñas's side of the story by making the projects sound like a complete failure.

The text suggests a connection between the companies and a family, then mentions a political rival. It says, "These firms, St. Timothy Construction Corp. and Alpha & Omega General Contractor & Development Corp., are reportedly linked to the Discaya family." Then it adds, "Alpha & Omega's president is Sarah Discaya, who was a political rival of Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto." This might make readers think the problems with the projects are because of politics, not just bad work. It tries to link the companies to something negative by mentioning a political rival.

The text mentions an audit report that shows the companies were awarded a lot of money. It states, "Together, these two companies were awarded over P10 billion in flood control contracts between 2022 and 2025, according to an audit report." This large sum of money, when presented alongside the problems with the projects, makes the companies seem irresponsible or corrupt. It highlights the financial aspect to support the idea that something is wrong.

The text mentions that President Marcos Jr. ordered an audit, and then talks about a small group of contractors getting a large portion of the budget. It says, "An earlier report indicated that a small group of 15 contractors received 20% of the P545 billion budget allocated for nearly 10,000 flood control projects during the first half of the current administration's term." This information, placed after the specific complaints about the Iloilo projects, might suggest that the problems are widespread and part of a larger issue with how the current government handles these projects. It broadens the criticism to the national level.

The text conveys a strong sense of concern and frustration from Mayor Raisa Treñas regarding the flood control projects. This is evident when she states the projects are "not working, not existing, or actually causing floods." This phrasing highlights a deep-seated worry about the effectiveness and even the negative impact of these projects, suggesting a significant problem that needs immediate attention. The emotion is quite strong because it directly challenges the purpose of the projects, which are meant to help, not harm. This concern serves to inform the public about a serious issue and to prompt action by demanding accountability.

Furthermore, the text expresses a clear emotion of outrage or indignation through Mayor Treñas's call for a "thorough investigation" and the demand that "those responsible should be held accountable." The mention of projects being "defective or harmful" and "worsening flood situations and causing damage" amplifies this feeling. This strong emotion is used to persuade the reader by framing the situation as a grave injustice, where public funds and safety are being compromised. It aims to create a sense of shared grievance and a desire for justice, encouraging readers to support the call for an investigation and accountability.

The writer also uses the emotion of urgency when Mayor Treñas urges the national government to "demolish any projects found to be defective or harmful." This strong imperative suggests that the situation is critical and requires swift, decisive action. The urgency is meant to impress upon the reader the severity of the problem and the need for immediate solutions, rather than allowing the flawed projects to persist and cause further harm. This emotional appeal aims to galvanize support for the mayor's demands and to impress upon the reader the importance of addressing these issues without delay.

The writer employs persuasive techniques to amplify these emotions. The use of descriptive words like "not working," "not existing," and "actually causing floods" paints a stark and negative picture, making the situation sound more dire than a neutral description might. The repetition of the idea that projects are failing and causing harm reinforces the message and strengthens the emotional impact. By linking the companies to a political rival and highlighting the large sums of money involved (over P10 billion), the text subtly suggests potential impropriety or mismanagement, which fuels the reader's indignation and distrust. These tools work together to steer the reader's attention towards the perceived failures and to foster a negative opinion of the projects and those involved, ultimately aiming to persuade the reader to agree with the mayor's assessment and demands for action.