Mysterious failed bidding at Clark

There seems to be some mystery going on with Clark Development Corp.’s announcement that it was not ready to award the Mimosa Leisure Estate to the firm of William Gatchalian because of a protest filed by a losing bidder. This is already the third attempt to bid out the 215-hectare property since 2003. The first bidding was an embarrassment because no interested bidder showed up. In the second bidding held in May 2006, a Korean group won but the award was eventually revoked when the winning group failed to shell out the “advanced goodwill payment.” 

I’m told the “plastics king” won the bidding fair and square this time – a fact that even CDC officials have previously acknowledged to the media, saying Gatchalian’s group submitted the best bid. But now it seems CDC is backtracking, couching their reasons under a jumble of “technicalese” in order to accommodate the appeal of the Korean consortium Hanwool which was earlier disqualified due to – you guessed it – “technical reasons,” a very handy and convenient term which could mean anything and everything.

Hanwool reportedly failed to submit a number of bidding requirements, prompting the CDC bids and awards committee to disqualify it. Despite its disqualification, the Korean firm was still given three days to submit an appeal. What’s the use of setting deadlines for submission when extensions can be given anyway? Besides which, if a bidder can’t even comply with simple deadlines and requirements, how can one expect it to show competence in operating a world class property like Mimosa?

It can be recalled that Clark Development Corp. took over the management of Mimosa in 1998 when the firm of “Speedy” Gonzalez lost control of the leisure estate after failing to settle arrears worth P46 million, as well as financial obligations to several creditor banks. It was unfortunate that Tony was not entirely able to fulfill his vision for Mimosa with its vast potential to become a world class destination, offering facilities that would satisfy the demands of even the most fickle tourist or business traveler. 

Tony had always wanted to get back Mimosa and to this day, he continues to exhaust all possible legal means, even suing to stop the foreclosure and the bidding of the property. In fact, disgruntled members of the Mimosa Golf and Country Club (MGCC) are saying they would have been better off if Tony had been allowed to claim back control and management of Mimosa. A couple of years ago, MGCC members were up in arms complaining about problems with management and operations which they said were getting out of hand.  In fact, some were even mulling the possibility of taking legal action and demand an investigation in Congress over shabby accounting and record keeping, and the deteriorating management and control of the golf course with club facilities, fairways and greens not being properly maintained because there were supposedly not enough funds to cover these.

Late last year, complaints again surfaced about the alleged dictatorial policies of management, and the restriction in the use of golf carts which is making life very difficult for some golfers with physical ailments like arthritis and heart problems. What used to be a therapeutic and relaxing game of golf has instead become such a strenuous activity for these golfers. Worse, some elderly gentlemen were reportedly given a very rude treatment by an unnamed official who sarcastically said, “If you have physical ailments, then you should just stop playing golf” or something to that effect.

Today, the property – named after the centuries-old Mimosa rain trees dotting the area – is deteriorating. The golf course is rundown and poorly maintained, the Holiday Inn does not live up to world-class standards and the villas are all jumbled up and look more like motels. Anything government touches has a tendency to degenerate, what’s happening at the leisure estate is just one more proof that government should not be allowed to manage such entities like Mimosa.

With all these complaints and with the way CDC is handling the privatization of Mimosa, it would not be surprising if no one will turn up the next time they announce a bid for the property. As an exasperated businessman remarked, are we trying to keep investors or are we keeping things under wraps for some mysterious reason?

* * *

With gasoline prices continuing to soar at such unprecedented rates on a global scale, one would expect concerned government agencies to focus on ways to work with private businesses in helping ease the burden on Filipinos. But according to information we received, a petroleum company – which is part of the country’s Top 100 Corporations – is allegedly being given the squeeze by some officials of the Bureau of Customs. Sources said the BOC recently slapped the company with a huge administrative fine amounting to P2.7 billion for allegedly not submitting pertinent papers for an audit.

Those familiar with the issue are puzzled how BOC was able to come up with such an amount when it had no basis at all since it claimed the oil firm failed to submit relevant information for an assessment. The company reportedly paid some P1.3 billion in 2006 and approximately P2.3 billion in taxes last year. If such were the case, what was the P2.7 billion administrative fine for and who did the math at BOC?

From the said oil firm’s taxes alone, it’s obvious government derives nearly half of its annual tax revenue from the oil industry. Perhaps BOC would be better off concentrating its focus and energy in going after smugglers instead of trying to put the squeeze on legitimate investors and businessmen, particularly those engaged in a critical area like the oil industry.

* * *

Email: [email protected]