With the advent of the social media and transparency initiatives inside the workings of our government where we the people are the “bosses”, public information disclosure is a must when dealing with elected public office.

Clearly, the Municipality of Naujan had no official website yet. Otherwise Naujan.com would’t have to dig for scraps of information from other sources, be it official or otherwise.

Armed with clear figures and numbers, and the tool to analyze such, we the people can differentiate real and actual developments from mere propaganda a government can easily deploy. I have worked with public relations area in the government, and I know how these things work. The numbers are the most important.

And so we come across these LGU Financial Data reports from the website of the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF).

2007
2008
2009
2010
2011eSRE

These spreadsheets show fiscal data of different Local Government Units in the country. Here you can find financial information relative to the Municipality of Naujan.

Using these reports, we were able to present a separate spreadsheet to show a comparative for the years 2007-2011 as we try to explain, based on our limited resources, and the lack of an Audited Financial Statement, how and where our money are being spent.

Naujan SEI for 2007-2011

Feel free to check the figures to check for errors. To better understand how government budgets work, you can also see Budget ng Bayan.

Using all these reports, we have made a quick analysis to make it clear for everyone trying to figure out what these numbers mean for all Naujeños.

INCOME (Revenue)

Income of the LGUs can be classified into two. Local Sources and External Sources.

Local Sources are derived from the taxes that we pay, other user charges, like permits  and fees that we pay everytime we transact at government offices. It can also come from earnings on investmenst made by the municipality, if there were any investments made.

External Sources comes from outside the locality and comes mainly in the form of Internal Revenue Allocation or IRA, our share from other national taxes, and sometimes, grants.

For the FY 2011, Revenue from Local Sources was Php 17,618,907, and from External Sources Php 139,994,177.

Note the striking revenue difference on local and external sources. 11% of our revenue (and where our budget is based) came from local initiatives while a big bulk of 89% came mainly from the national government.

EXPENDITURES (Services and Investments)

Expenditures are expenses incurred by the LGU. These are classified into two, Operating Expenditures and the Non-Operating Expenditures. FY 2007 and 2008 no data. Operating Expenditures are expenses and costs incurred by the municipality in the provision of public services.  These are the programs provided by the LGU to its communities.

Non-Operating Expenditures are the costs of Capital Outlays, Investments Made, Debt Services Payments. If the LGU buys a motorized tractor, made payments for equipments, and pays interests on existing loans, these expenses fall into this category.

INCOME vs. EXPENDITURES

It is quite normal and expected for the LGU’s expenditure to follow the same pattern as the revenue, mainly because the focus of the LGU is to provide services. The more money the LGU has, the more services they can provide.

But we should also note that, just like in a regular home setting, unneccesary expenses makes less savings. And revenues exceeding expenditures means cash savings. More savings means more budget for services. Especially in time of need.

Figures include the non-operating expenditures (investments), which was excluded on Graph Above.

FUND BALANCE

Fund Balance is the Net Increase/Decrease in Funds and is simply the Total Earnings or Losses (Revenue minus Expenditures) for the fiscal year.

Beginning Cash Balance and End Fund Balance for FY 2007 and 2008 not stated.

OBSERVATIONS

1. No Existing Debt.

This is GOOD NEWS. Imagine the money we should have been paying to service those loans if we have existing debts. While some LGUs try desperately hard to get out of debt, we are DEBT-FREE. Zero debt means more money that can be allocated for public services.

2. More than half of Current Operating Expenditure is incurred on General Public Services

The annual average spent by our local government to finance General Services is 48M. That is a huge chunk. With all the money spent on services, do we see and feel significant changes in Naujan? If yes, then all is good. If no, then we need to re-evaluate our priorities.

3. Services Lacking in Some Areas

Based from the LGU Data, we clearly have money to spend. But we can see items on the list that had no cost, which basicaly means there are no programs in those particular categories. We all know that jobs in Naujan is hard to find, so why not create a program to help our people find jobs?

Or better yet, why not create a Municipal Environment and Natural Resources Office (MENRO) to task on issues of environmental concerns. Clearly, with all the activities in the outskirts of Naujan Lake, we needed that.

4. Not-So-Clear Expenditures.

FY 2007 & 2008 Expenditures shows an added “Other Purposes”, but was taken out entirely for the fiscal years 2009 to 2011. Was it considered to be like Petty Cash?

In the absence of audited financial statements and paperwork to back them up, judging solely from the BLGF reports, the nature and the purpose was just not clear enough.

For the FY 2009-2011, there shows “Prior Years Account Payables”. All “Payables” are basically expenditures. We understand that revenues and expenditures are running continuously, but since they are, why are they not included on the list of itemized expenditures, either the year prior or the current year? What are those payables?

Again, in the absence of audited financial statements and paperwork to back them up, judging solely from the BLGF reports, the nature and the purpose of these items are not clear, and unfortunately, inconclusive.

5. Discrepancies on the Fund End.

The Ending Balance for the previous year does not seem to match the Beginning Balance for the following year. Or are they not really suppose to match because of some pending paperwork that should have been attached to the BLGF Report?

For example, the Fund Balance for the end of the FY 2009 was 80,339,856. But the Beginning Balance for the year after that, FY2010, is 72,511,853. The difference is 7,828,003.

Clearly there are other paperwork filed somewhere but we are not privy to them.

And I repeat, in the absence of audited financial statements, these are unclear. We are judging solely from the BLGF reports.

6. Fiscal Dependence?

Note the striking revenue difference on local and external sources.(See Graph A). Local Sources remain steady while External Sources are on a continuous incline.

11% of our budget came from local initiatives while a big bulk of 89% came mainly from the national government. A huge chunk of our budget is based from funds coming from the National Treasury.

CONCLUSION

Financially, Naujan is in good shape. Savings are up, and we had no debt.

Though some areas somehow are being neglected, perhaps due to lack of program, wisdom, or need, majority of public funds are still being used for public services, which is how it should be. The government’s role is to provide public services, as opposed to running a business which aims purely for profit. And providing services means cost.

The good thing is that while these costs are up, so are our revenues.

But what is a little discomforting to note, is that Naujan, (and probably the majority of all LGUs) is totally reliant on the national government. We are totally dependent on one major source of revenue, revenues which we used to stay afloat and finance our public services. It could not be more clear, for the FY 2011, income from local sources is only 11% while the other 89% comes from the national treasury.

While it is true that the government is mandated to provide services, sometimes we forget that the LGU themselves can also engage in revenue generating ventures, to generate more income, for the provision of a more reliable and broader scope of services. The more money our government has, the more services it can provide the public.

The observations I have noted here are based solely on reports that are readily available online from government sources, mainly the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM). As was also noted, some unclear data can never be verified without audited financial documents, and therefore remains inconclusive.

My intention is to raise awareness among other Naujeños who may not want but obviously need the information. For how can we better judge the workings of our government and our local development if we have no clear picture, and in this case, numbers to ascertain them. And by seeing these figures, we can better see for ourselves the worth of our tax money working for us. Clearly, these are the services that we are getting or maybe, missing.

In the spirit of transparency, I can’t wait for the local government of Naujan to set up their own website, so that programs and more concise public records can be readily digested by any Naujeño, wherever they may be.

Because like my friend used to say, you can take a Naujeño out of a Naujan, but you cannot take Naujan out of a Naujeño.

Here’s the full presentation of our special report for download in PDF file.