FCT's Masterpiece of Gobbledygook

Volume 2, Issue No. 43

OPINION/COMMENTARY

/ News That Fears None, Views That Favor Nobody /

. . . . . A community service of The Filipino Web Channel (TheFilipinoWebChannel@gmail. com) and the Philippine Village Voice (PhilVoiceNews@gmail.com) for the information and understanding of Filipinos and the diverse communities in North America . . .

 Our latest as of Tuesday, December 8, 2020 

~ Reading through the "message from the FCT board of directors" of Filipino Centre Toronto leads me to believe that it is a masterpiece of gobbledygook and obfuscation. Nothing clear is to be found in the 18-paragraph statement issued late Sunday night in the form of a press release. Many questions from whistleblowers remain unanswered by this non-profit whose top officials have vowed to be transparent, honest, and open to communications. It's now apparent that FCT does not walk the talk; it just talks and talks.

     . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   

THE $5.9-MILLION PUZZLE REMAINS UNANSWERED

FCT Breaks Silence . . . But Not Quite

By ROMEO P. MARQUEZ

Editor, The Filipino Web Channel

“There are only two kinds of faces: Sincere and insincere!” ― Mehmet Murat ildan

TORONTO - Constant needling spanning at least three years has eventually moved top officials of the non-profit Filipino Centre Toronto (FCT) to bare some information about the way it disbursed money from the proceeds of the $5.9-million sale of its old building in the city's downtown.

It sounds like a significant development given that officials had gone the way of the three wise monkeys of Japanese lore who "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" soon after FCT had departed for a new $1.9-million home in the eastern suburb of Scarborough.

On the contrary, whistleblowers and concerned members alleged that they see, hear, and speak evil in the aftermath of the acquisition of the one-story property that now houses FCT. (Related story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2020/11/filipino-centre-torontos-dirty.html).

Rather than shed light on the remainder of the $5.9 million (that's $4 million; $5.9 million minus $1.9 million), the "message from the FCT board of directors" appears more to obfuscate the outstanding issues.

The "message" issued late Sunday (December 6, 2020) night in the form of a press release is the first official public response by the FCT attributed to FCT president Mary Ann San Juan. (Video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZFXKzvQqYY).

She was not quite forthcoming though. Her response to the questions swirling around the money and how it was being expended was a rhetorical question: "Is there someone out there who would be willing to work and be paid only when there was money?"

That was actually a no-answer. It dodges the fundamental points of the controversy, such as the amount of money ($678,000) paid to claimants the moment the $5.9-million sale was consummated in June 2017 and led to an avalanche of IOUs. (Related story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2020/09/from-30000-to-300000-how-did-it-balloon.html).

Perhaps in keeping with its stance to not identify them from early on, San Juan referred to the payees as "two board members," "the other member," and "these 3 individuals" without indicating their names and the sum of money each got from FCT.

However, according to documents obtained by this reporter from sources within FCT, the "IOUs" were paid in this manner: "Vicki" - $300,000; "RCJ" - $96,000; "Felino" - $122,000; "CRA" - $122,000; "Wendy" - $30,000; and "S and J Mechanicals" - $8,000.

The same documents showed "Vicki" is Dr. Victoria Santiago, a dentist, and a former FCT official; "RCJ" was Rosalinda Cerrudo-Javier (deceased), former FCT president; "Felino" is Felino Javier, supposedly a volunteer handyman and husband of RCJ; "CRA" is Canada Revenue Agency; and "Wendy" is Wendy Arena, an FCT administrative assistant.

FCT officials have not acknowledged these facts.

(Full story and video at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2020/06/fct-members-renew-demand-for.html and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MDQoagXLlQ).

Without saying who, San Juan explained: "These two Board Members were paid according to the responsibilities that they carried and acted (one as Building Manager and the other as Office Manager)".

She was also short on details. She said: "The other member who was paid x x x was the Building Superintendent. He was a member of FCT but not a Board Member." Further, she said: "The salary agreed upon was a lot less than the prevailing rate, as FCT could not afford the prevailing rate." 

Left for people to guess is this explanation from her: "These 3 individuals were owed money for a number of years. They were paid when there was money, otherwise it was an IOU note."

FCT is ostensibly playing a guessing game. What is this, kwarta o kahon? Millions of dollars are involved, excluding a recent grant of $100,000.

A review - not an audit - of the 2017 and 2018 financial statements was preferred by FCT, according to San Juan, because "an audit would cost a lot more, about $10,000 more for each year and the result would have been the same." And to justify it, she said: "The FCT Board was being fiscally responsible."

San Juan is being disingenuous. Her judgment that 'the result would have been the same" is fallacious because it ignores the impact an audit has on financial statements. For one, an audit may lead to the discovery of possible anomalies. On the other hand, a review merely evaluates the soundness of the financial statements.

Her excuse that "an audit would cost a lot more" is unacceptable. Whistleblowers and concerned members would still like to know how $4-million is being used up and for what.

A major cause for concern is the ambiguity of the last sentence in this paragraph of the "message", and I quote: "Renovations to the building were approved by the Board – a new kitchen, full washroom, library book shelves for the Filipiniana collection, roof repair, new heating and air conditioning, patio, basement. The Centre has also put $1M in investment." (Italics mine).

Does that "investment" mean money for the renovations? A one-million-dollar allocation is a lot for a fixer-upper, so why was it not announced publicly prior to the overhaul?

Well, I assume that $1-million has just been chipped away from the $4-million FCT had realized from the sale of its old building. How much is left of that amount? (Copyright 2020. All Rights Reserved).