WHERE THE FLOOD MONEY GOES

By Mark Barcelona

Flood control, public funds, and the communities still waiting for dry ground

Every rainy season, Pangasinan is reminded of a problem it has known for generations, water does not simply fall from the sky, in many communities, it stays.

For residents of flood-prone communities in Pangasinan's First and Second Congressional Districts, flooding has become an interruption woven into ordinary life. Roads become impassable, businesses close, classes are suspended, homes are evacuated, and families move their belongings to higher ground. For some, the flood lasts for hours. For others, the consequences remain long after the water disappears.

Yet alongside the recurring floods is another story. The continued investment of public money into flood-control infrastructure.

In 2025, the Pangasinan 1st District Engineering Office reported ₱1.578892 billion worth of flood-control projects in its district. This formed part of 46 flood-control projects implemented from 2022 onward, with reported flood-control spending of ₱431.4 million in 2022, ₱713 million in 2023, ₱3.150647 billion in 2024, and ₱1.578892 billion in 2025. The figures amount to nearly ₱5.87 billion in reported flood-control spending across those four years. The district office also maintained that there were no ghost projects or corruption within its jurisdiction.

A project in the Second District demonstrated that flood-control infrastructure can produce immediate benefits. In Lingayen, a roughly ₱23-million floodgate and pump project in Sitio Aplaya, Barangay Pangapisan North, was reported to have already prevented flooding in a residential area serving around 1,400 families even while the project was only about 60 percent complete in December 2024. The system was designed to prevent high-tide waters from entering the community and to pump out accumulated water when rainfall and tidal conditions combined. 

These projects present two important realities at once. First, the government is investing significant resources in protecting communities from flooding. Second, infrastructure alone has not eliminated the problem.

The ultimate test of flood control is not the amount written on a project document, nor the number of structures completed. The ultimate test is what happens when the rain comes.

In July 2025, that test came.

Heavy monsoon rains enhanced by Tropical Storm #CrisingPh produced widespread flooding across Pangasinan. By July 23, the Philippine Information Agency reported that 585,178 individuals, or 189,711 families, across 27 municipalities and three cities had been affected. Lingayen, Calasiao, Santa Barbara, and Dagupan City were placed under states of calamity. Thousands of residents sought refuge in evacuation centers or stayed with relatives and neighbors. 

The numbers reveal the scale of the problem, but numbers alone cannot explain what flooding means to a community.

For a student, flooding can mean missing class. For a worker, it can mean losing a day's income. For a vendor, it can mean spoiled products. For a family, it can mean moving appliances, furniture, documents, and other possessions to higher ground. For a small business owner, it can mean closing a store and spending money on repairs. For an elderly resident or a person with a disability, a flooded street can become a physical barrier to safety.

And for an entire community, repeated flooding can gradually transform an extraordinary disaster into an ordinary expectation. 

This is where the question of flood-control spending becomes more than an issue of engineering. It becomes an issue of development. If billions of pesos are being allocated for flood mitigation, communities have the right to ask whether those resources are producing the protection they were intended to provide.

The question is not necessarily where did the money disappear?

It should first be where did the money go, what was built with it, and did it work?

That distinction is important.

The national controversy surrounding flood-control projects in 2025 created legitimate reasons for the public to scrutinize government infrastructure. Investigations at the national level exposed allegations involving ghost, substandard, and overpriced projects. During a Senate inquiry in August 2025, DPWH officials acknowledged that some projects were undergoing validation amid information pointing to possible ghost projects. Based on a PNA report, the government's flood-control program was reported to have reached approximately ₱545.6 billion in funding, prompting calls for greater transparency and accountability. 

The controversy also led the government to establish mechanisms through which citizens could access information about flood-control projects and report questionable projects. This was significant because it shifted part of the responsibility for monitoring infrastructure toward the public itself.

But the national controversy should not be used to automatically label every local project as corrupt.

That distinction is particularly important in Pangasinan.

In August 2025, the Pangasinan 1st District Engineering Office publicly denied the existence of ghost projects or corruption within its jurisdiction. District Engineer Engr. Marieta Mendoza said that the 46 flood-control projects implemented from 2022 onward were being monitored. The office also acknowledged that some newly constructed dikes had suffered cracks or minor damage during severe weather but said these were being addressed and repaired. 

The provincial government likewise supported calls for transparency and investigation. Pangasinan Vice Governor Mark Ronald Lambino expressed support for investigations into flood-control projects nationwide, including those in Pangasinan. At the same time, DPWH Region I Director Ronnel Tan assured the public that the region had no ghost projects and that quality-assurance measures and project inspections were being enforced. PNA also reported that Pangasinan ranked ninth among provinces with the most flood-control projects from July 2022 to May 2025, with approximately ₱13.6 billion in projects.

Still, public scrutiny did reach Pangasinan.

In November 2025, a complaint was filed before the Office of the Ombudsman against former Pangasinan 4th District Representative Christopher de Venecia, Sual Mayor Liseldo Calugay, and several other officials over alleged ghost flood-control projects reportedly worth more than ₱286 million. The allegations concerned projects in Sual and San Jacinto, which are outside the First and Second Congressional Districts. The complainants alleged that certain projects were nonexistent or duplicated, but they also acknowledged that they lacked sufficient documentary evidence and were seeking further investigation. 

De Venecia denied the accusations and said projects undertaken during his tenure were fully documented, properly executed, and delivered to their intended communities. The allegations therefore remain allegations, not established findings of guilt. But their importance lies elsewhere. They demonstrate why transparency matters.

A flood-control project is built using public money. The public therefore has the right to know where it is, how much it costs, who constructed it, when it was completed, and whether it is actually serving the community.

A project should not become invisible once the ribbon is cut. It should remain visible to the people it was designed to protect. This is especially important because the effectiveness of flood-control infrastructure cannot always be determined by looking at a single structure.

Flooding is a system.

Rainfall interacts with rivers. Rivers interact with drainage systems. Drainage interacts with tides. Tides interact with coastal communities. Roads alter the movement of water. Development changes natural drainage patterns. Dikes protect one area but may affect water movement elsewhere. Pumping stations depend on functioning equipment and electricity. Floodgates must operate under changing tidal and rainfall conditions.

A project can therefore function exactly as designed and still be insufficient when the larger flood-management system is inadequate.

Likewise, the Lingayen floodgate demonstrates that infrastructure can work. Even before its completion, the project was reported to have helped protect approximately 1,400 families. Yet the project also raised concerns among some residents about its effect on boat docking and livelihoods. This shows that development cannot simply ask whether a project solves a technical problem. It must also ask whether it creates new difficulties for the people it is supposed to serve. 

Development is not simply about constructing infrastructure. It is about improving people's quality of life.It is about creating a process through which communities can understand, participate, monitor, question, and help shape development decisions.

Residents should not be treated merely as beneficiaries. They should be treated as partners. A resident living beside a river may know where water first enters a neighborhood. A tricycle driver may know which roads become impassable first. A vendor may know how quickly floodwater enters a market. A fisherman may know how tides affect a particular waterway. A parent may know which routes children use to get to school. These experiences are not substitutes for engineering studies, but they are valuable forms of community knowledge. The challenge is to bring these different forms of knowledge together. That becomes even more important when billions of pesos are involved.

The First District's reported ₱1.578892 billion in 2025 flood-control spending should therefore be understood not merely as a financial figure but as a public commitment. 

Every peso represents an expectation. A dike is expected to protect. A riverbank structure is expected to stabilize. A floodgate is expected to control water. A pump is expected to remove water. A drainage system is expected to carry water away. A raised road is expected to maintain access. And ultimately, the entire flood-control program is expected to make communities safer. When those expectations are not met, the public deserves an explanation. This is why the concept of accountability must extend beyond corruption.

Corruption is one possible reason why infrastructure may fail, but it is not the only one. A project can fail because of poor planning. It can fail because of improper design. It can fail because of inadequate maintenance. It can fail because of environmental changes. It can fail because a project was designed for conditions that are no longer representative of today's extreme weather. It can fail because one part of the drainage system was improved while another remained inadequate. And it can fail because communities were not sufficiently consulted.

Accountability means identifying which of these problems exists and addressing it.

The 2025 floods also highlighted the need to think beyond individual projects.

In August 2025, Pangasinan launched a 10-year river restoration program involving the dredging and desilting of major river systems, beginning with the Limahong Channel in Lingayen and the Nayum River in Dasol. The initiative was presented as part of the province's broader flood-management strategy. This broader approach is important because flood mitigation cannot rely exclusively on concrete.

Pangasinan needs infrastructure, but it also needs functioning waterways, appropriate land-use planning, drainage maintenance, early warning systems, disaster preparedness, environmental protection, and community participation.

Most importantly, these interventions need to work together.

The community should not be forced to choose between a floodgate and a livelihood, between an elevated road and an accessible home, or between development and the environment.

The goal of development should be to find solutions that allow communities to become safer without making other aspects of their lives more difficult. The flood-control issue is therefore ultimately about more than water.

It is about trust.

When residents see a project sign, they should be able to trust that the amount written on it reflects what was actually built. When the government declares a project completed, residents should be able to see and experience the results. When contractors receive public funds, communities should be able to expect quality work.When allegations of corruption arise, investigations should be independent, evidence-based, and transparent.

And when projects fail, officials should not simply point to the weather. Extreme weather can damage infrastructure, but it should also challenge planners to continually improve the infrastructure's capacity and resilience.

Pangasinan's flooding problem cannot be solved overnight. But it can be approached differently. The first step is to stop measuring success only through the amount of money spent or the number of projects completed. Instead, success should be measured through the people protected. How many homes remained dry? How many roads remained passable? How many students were able to attend school? How many workers were able to reach their jobs? How many businesses avoided closure? How many families avoided evacuation? How much damage was prevented?

And most importantly, how many communities became less vulnerable than they were before?

These are the questions that should accompany every flood-control budget. Because behind every project is a community. Behind every budget is a public trust. And behind every flood is a family waiting for the water to go down.

For Pangasinan's First and Second Districts, the challenge is not simply to build higher walls, deeper channels, or stronger roads. The challenge is to build a flood-management system that is transparent enough to trust, effective enough to work, inclusive enough to listen, and sustainable enough to protect communities in the years ahead.

The water will rise again. Rain will return. Rivers will swell. Tides will continue to move. The question is whether the lessons of 2025 will rise with them. Because a flood-control project should never be considered successful simply because the concrete has dried. It should be successful when the people below it can finally live with less fear of the water.

And for communities that have spent years learning how to survive flooding, that is the real measure of development.

The water may eventually recede. But accountability should remain.

References



Austria, H. (2025, January 15). Floodgate with pump project in Lingayen benefits 1.4K families. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/index.php/articles/1241815?

Arguel, E. M. S. (2025, July 23). Dagupan City to declare state of calamity amid flooding. Philippine Information Agency. https://pia.gov.ph/news/dagupan-city-to-declare-state-of-calamity-amid-flooding/?

Arguel, E. M. S. (2025, July 24). Flooding affects over 500K people in Pangasinan; LGU ramps up aid. Philippine Information Agency. https://pia.gov.ph/news/flooding-affects-over-500k-people-in-pangasinan-lgu-ramps-up-aid/?

Bombo Radyo Dagupan. (2025, August 28). DPWH Pangasinan 1st district, nilinaw na walang ghost projects sa kanilang nasasakupan. https://dagupan.bomboradyo.com/dpwh-pangasinan-1st-district-nilinaw-na-walang-ghost-projects-sa-kanilang-nasasakupan/?

City Government of Dagupan. (2025, July 28). Emergency declared: Dagupan now in state of calamity. https://www.dagupan.gov.ph/emergency-declared-dagupan-now-in-state-of-calamity/?

GMA Integrated News. (2025, November 27). Raps filed vs. ex-lawmaker, DPWH execs over flood projects in Pangasinan. https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/967695/raps-filed-vs-ex-lawmaker-dpwh-execs-over-flood-projects-in-pangasinan/story/?

Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System. (2025). Construction of riverbank protection structure along Sinucalan River, Barangay Bacayao Sur, Dagupan City, Pangasinan — Contract ID 25AH0005. https://notices.philgeps.gov.ph/GEPSNONPILOT/Tender/PrintableBidNoticeAbstractUI.aspx?refid=11450791

Philippine News Agency. (2025, August 22). Pangasinan launches 10-yr river restoration, flood control project. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1257151?

Philippine News Agency. (2025, September 2). Pangasinan exec backs probe, transparency in flood control projects. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1257850?

Philippine News Agency. (2025, August 19). Senate probe on flood control bares ghost projects, favoritism. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1256868?