CADIZ CITY ORDINANCE INFORMATION SYSTEM

Cadiz City Ordinance Information System

Specification Documents

Presented to the

HOLY INFANT ACADEMY DIOCESE OF SAN CARLOS, Inc.

Cadiz City, Negros Occidental

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for

the new Grade-9 Computer of

Web Application Development

Kimberly J.Ardo Michael Sher P. Montalban

Cathleen Kaye L. Camagong John Kerby Balisi
Alliah Pearl Egcas Rodge Hulleza
Ariel Neil Celeste Alken Enolia
Roi Alvin Villanueva Trizia Obahib

Mr. Clem Marvin Son, MIT

Computer Teacher

S.Y. 2019-2020
 Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study:

Ordinance is a rule or law enacted by the government. This includes the rules and

regulations that people must follow. Nowadays, many people lack discipline and they don’t

know how to follow even simple rules and some of people are not aware of what is happening in

our city. The researchers are going to propose the Cadiz City Ordinance Information System

because this study enable us to enhance our knowledge and improve our skills in understanding

such as ordinances and to internalize and practice doing it in our everyday life. Through this

study, it is not just about the people of Cadiz but also it is about the people who would like to

visit our system the way the government control the peace and order situation here in Cadiz City.

In this system it will help the users to thoroughly understand the value of each and every

ordinance that the city government implements. This system can easily access information about

ordinances in our City .Our system contain rules and regulation, its significance , the uses of

that ordinance, the penalties and consequences for violating such ordinance. The researchers and

administrators wants to help the users in order for them to be aware of what is happening through

opening our system.

Our most common goal is to create an easier, fun and useful way of looking through the

system to inform the users that there are many ways of learning not just by reading a book but

also opening the system. By this it allows the users to be aware of the existing rules that they

must follow. We have decided to create such system, also for to benefit those people who are not

yet oriented with the different ordinances being implemented by the government. Because the
researchers believe that if the people are being taught of the proper ways that people must do

then it contributes to the orderliness of the city.

Objectives of the Study:

This study aims to fulfil the following objectives:

- To help people understand the value of each and every ordinance that the city

government implement.

- To improve the understanding about the rules and regulations in our city.

- To improve the knowledge about how the government maintain the peace and order.

- To learn what is the use of each and every ordinances.

- To help people know the rules that they need to obey in the city.

Significance of the Study:

This system will benefit the following people:

 Tourist - this can help them understand and help them to be aware of what are the rules

and regulations of the city for if they do not know such rules they might get penalized for

violating it.

 Citizen of Cadiz City - this can give them enough knowledge about ordinances that we

our practicing here in city of Cadiz. Also it helps to make those people who are not

following the ordinance, that there is a penalty if they violate such ordinance.

 Researchers- also our system can help some of researchers in some country or place

because this will served as an inspiration for them to follow some of the rules here in our

city. Also to make our city more organize because the citizens are law abiding.
Scope and Limitations:

This system focuses on the Ordinances or the rules that we are practicing here in city.

The system will contain title, definition of terms, application and coverage, term of office,

function and responsibilities, effective clause ,purpose ,date issued and the people who approved

those ordinances.This system was conducted to help the people of Cadiz and also the tourist to

know the rules that exist in our city. By this system they can access information that can help

them appreciate the value of each and every rules that the government created. This will not

covers the ordinances of different cities but only in Cadiz.

Review Related Literature:

According to Organization of American States, An ordinance is the name typically used for

a law passed by a local political subdivision, such as a city, country, village, or town.Ordinace

may address a wide variety of local issues, from local government structure to speed limits and

sign sizes. The law is important for a society for it serves as a norm of conduct for citizens. It

was also made to provide for a proper guidelines and order upon the behaviour for proper

guidelines and order upon the behaviour for all citizens and to sustain the equity on the three

branches of government. It keeps the society running, without law there would be chaos and it

would be survival of the fittest and everyman for himself. Not an ideal lifestyle for must part.

According to Kishan Tiwari, the law is important because it acts as a guideline as to what is

accepts in society. Without it there would be conflicts between social groups and communities. It

is pivotal that we follow them. The law allows for easy adoption to changes that occur in the

society. We need law, then. To ensure a safe and peaceful society in which individuals rights are
respected. There are also rules imposed by morality and because they are designed to control or

alter our behaviour. But unlike rules morality, laws are enforced by the courts, is you break laws,

whether you like it or not you may be forced to pay fines, pay damages or go to prison.

According to OECD-Library ,Regulations are indispensable to the proper functioning of

economies and societies.  They underpin markets, protect the rights and safety of citizens and

ensure the delivery of public goods and services.  At the same time, regulations are rarely

costless.  Businesses complain that red tape holds back competitiveness while citizens complain

about the time that it takes to fill out government paperwork.  More worrying still, regulations

can be inconsistent with the achievement of policy objectives.  They can have unintended

consequences and they can become less effective or even redundant over time. The 2008

financial crisis, and the ensuing and ongoing economic downturn are stark reminders of the

consequence of regulatory failure.  

Reflecting the importance of getting regulation right, this report encourages governments to

“think big” about the relevance of regulatory policy. It assesses the recent efforts of OECD

countries to develop and deepen regulatory policy and governance.  It evaluates the

comprehensive policy cycle by which regulations are designed, assessed and evaluated, revised,

and enforced at all levels of government.  It describes progress developing a range of regulatory

management tools including consultation, Regulatory Impact Assessment, and risk and

regulation. It also illustrates more nascent effort to promote regulatory governance including

creating accountability and oversight of regulatory agencies and creating a “whole of

government” approach for regulatory design and enforcement.  The report provides ideas on

developing a robust regulatory environment, a key to returning to a stronger, fairer and more

sustainable growth path.

According to Diane Coyle,One of the striking changes any rich-world traveler to low-income

countries cannot fail to have missed during the past decade or so is the rapid spread of mobile

phone use, followed now by expanding mobile Internet access. Mobile communications are

playing the same role in social and economic development in Africa, Asia, and Latin America

that the spread of fixed-line communications did in countries like France and the United

Kingdom in the 1970s. Family and social connections, as well as business and educational

opportunities, are being transformed.

A key contributor to this technological transformation was a mandatory EU technical standard

enforced in 1987. The regulation created a continent-wide market for hardware and services, one

large enough that the standard – called GSM, after the Groupe Spécial Mobile committee that

had codified it – was adopted globally. By 2004, there were more than a billion subscribers to

GSM services worldwide. The global reach of the regulation implied huge economies of scale in

the manufacture of handsets and network hardware, so prices fell rapidly, and interoperability

between networks and across countries was much easier to achieve.

Many regulations play this standard-setting role. Contrary to the simplistic view that regulation is

inevitably bad for business, there are in fact three important channels through which regulation

can benefit an economy.

One is the market-creating and market-growing role illustrated by the GSM standard. When there

are competing technological approaches, such as the famous contest in the 1970s between the

Betamax and VHS standards for videotape, consumers are better served if these contests between

similar standards are settled promptly and decisively, to preclude the risk of spending money on

a losing technology. When the standard is set by regulation in a large market like the EU, the
United States, or China, economies of scale kick in quickly. The virtuous circle of falling prices,

quality improvements, and growing demand is thereby established.

This is a powerful dynamic. It explains why British businesses are increasingly appalled by the

prospect that the UK government will not deliver continuing post-Brexit regulatory alignment

with the EU. After consulting thousands of its members, the Confederation of British Industry

(CBI), the country’s biggest business organization, recently called for “ongoing convergence”

with EU rules for goods, services, and digital standards. The scale of the accessible market is

immensely important to growth prospects.

Regulation can also benefit an economy by enabling competition. This seems counter-intuitive,

and indeed some forms of regulation serve to enable rent-seeking behavior. Businesses in

oligopolistic sectors often complain about the burden of compliance; but they clearly rely on

regulation as a barrier to market entry by new competitors. The cost of their regulatory burden is

a fee they pay for market power.

The regulation of some of these sectors, like finance, is an example of what not to do. Officials

imagine that consumer protection requires another regulation whenever something goes wrong,

resulting in thickets of rules that protect incumbents and lead to all kinds of unintended

consequences and complexities. As the new regulations prove ineffective (not surprising, given

the overabundance of scams and mis-selling in finance), a vicious circle is set in motion, with

additional regulation resulting in further failure – and more regulation.

That is why smart regulators charged with ensuring healthy competition, like the UK’s Financial

Conduct Authority, use a “sandbox” approach to enable testing of new technologies and business
models without a crushing burden of regulation. The FCA is proposing to make its regulatory

sandbox method global.

Moreover, there is some safeguard against complex regulatory thickets if new rules need to

undergo a cost-benefit analysis. But such assessments are only incremental, whereas what is

needed is a periodic assessment of the regulatory framework as a whole. Major disasters are

often the result of a failure to think in such terms, as evidenced, tragically, by the fatal Grenfell

Tower fire in the UK.

According to William S. Becker, Republican leaders in Congress and conservative think tanks
are drawing up their lists of federal regulations they want President Trump to help them kill once
he takes office. Judging by his campaign platform Trump is eager to cooperate. He has promised
to “reform the entire regulatory code” and to issue a moratorium on new government rules that
are not required by law.

Trump believes that government regulations “force jobs out of our communities” and punish
Americans for doing business in the United States. “We will no longer regulate our companies
and our jobs out of existence,” he has said.

Are there unnecessary or unnecessarily burdensome regulations? Undoubtedly. Do we want

government controlling our lives? No. But some regulations are necessary to save our lives.
Many actually create jobs, are wanted by business, advance important national goals and are
necessary to protect the American people from the bad actors in our society.

The benefits of good government rules have been obvious for generations. Without laws like the
Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Water Act two years later, and without the regulations that
implemented them, we would have a much dirtier and sicker country. Rivers would still be
catching fire, more oil spills would be killing oceans, fish would be inedible because of toxins in
their flesh, many more of our children would get sick or die from asthma caused by air pollution,
cancer would be as common as the common cold, our water would be unsafe to drink and every
day would be a bad-air day.

Before President Trump begins killing regulations (almost as complicated as creating them), he
should weigh their benefits and costs case by case. Here are a few things he should consider
specifically in regard to regulations on business and industry, the most common source of
complaints that the government handcuffs job creation.

First, to put things in context, there are more than 22.6 million businesses in the United States.
Nearly three of every four are small enterprises, the biggest source of new jobs but also the firms
that because of limited resources may have the hardest time complying with government rules.
Depending on the nature of their enterprises, they must deal with rules that range from worker
safety to the quality of our food. It’s fair to say that relatively few companies are knowingly
engaged in practices that hurt people or the environment.

But not all companies are good corporate citizens. Many regulations, including most of those
involving environmental protection, are a result of industries failing to regulate themselves.

Industries could monitor their “own adherence to legal, ethical, or safety standards, rather than
have an outside, independent agency such as a third-party entity monitor and enforce those
standards.” But history is filled with examples of corporations that put social responsibility far
down their priority lists, if it is on their lists at all. Their first priorities of course are profit,
shareholder returns and competitive advantage. But in pursuit of those goals, some companies
engage in practices that are socially irresponsible, if not dangerous.

Prominent examples today are the powerful companies that produce and burn fossil fuels. We
now know that the pollution from fossil fuel combustion has saturated the atmosphere to the
point that the Earth’s climate is changing in seriously dangerous ways. Oil and gas companies
could be making the transition away from fossil fuels to clean energy not only to limit climate
change, but also to become leaders in the rapidly growing clean energy sector. Instead and in
general, the oil and gas industry is sticking to its old business model of pulling as much product
out of the ground as possible. While the companies profit, millions of Americans already are
being hurt by climate change and countless generations to come will continue to bear the cost of
drought, fire, floods and other disasters.

In a perfect society, companies, like doctors, would commit to doing no harm. Their business
model would be to profit from activities that are consistent with the public good. There are many
companies that adhere to a kind of corporate hypocratic oath. More than 200 corporate CEOs
representing 19 million employees worldwide are members of the World Council on Sustainable
Development, for example. One of their projects is to have businesses use fuels that contain 50%
less carbon, a strategy to grow the global market for clean and sustainable energy. More than 80
U.S. companies, including many of our largest, have promised to switch to 100% renewable
energy.

Smart corporate leaders actually welcome reasonable regulation, although they may not admit it
in public. Regulations ensure that each company and its competitors operate on the proverbial
level playing field. Otherwise, clean companies that pay for pollution prevention would not be
able to compete with dirty companies that don’t.

Regulations prevent bad actors from damaging the reputation of their industries and jeopardizing
their “social license to operate”. Several of the regulations that reportedly are on the chopping
block are focused on the natural gas industry, a sector whose production is booming at the same
time some of its practices - fracking and methane leaks for example - are controversial. The
Center for the New Energy Economy (CNEE) at Colorado State University has held annual
conferences with leaders of the oil and gas industry to discuss issues like these. CNEE reports
that:

Reasonable and effective regulation is important to natural gas producers because it creates
business planning certainty; screens out the “bad actors”; reduces the chances that companies
within the energy sector will obtain unfair advantage by engaging in irresponsible practices; and
strengthens the industry’s “social license to operate” - i.e., public trust that energy is being
produced in ways that are consistent with public health, welfare and quality of life.

The National Petroleum Council (NPC) concurs:

Achieving the economic, environmental and energy security benefits of North American natural
gas and oil supplies requires responsible approaches to resource production and delivery...(I)n all
locales and conditions, the critical path to sustained and expanded resource development in
North America includes effective regulation and a commitment of industry and regulators to
continuous improvement in practices to eliminate or minimize environmental risk.

Second, federal regulations are not created by fiat. There is no secret back room in which federal
control freaks plot to regulate business. Most rules are the result of laws passed by the people’s
representatives in Congress. Each proposed new rule must go through an arduous process of
public and legal review before it can become final. Proposed rules are scrutinized for their costs
and benefits to the American people. Once they are finalized, they are routinely challenged by
lawsuits that further test their legality.

Third, regulations can create jobs. For example, federal rules that require companies to repair
environmental damage have resulted in a “restoration industry” in the United States. Researchers
at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have determined that these rules support more
than 220,000 jobs and $25 billion in economic activity. This restoration economy provides more
direct jobs today than coal mining, logging or steel production.

Finally, most Americans support environmental regulation. The Pew Research Center reported
earlier this year that while opinions vary from state to state, 59% of American adults nationwide
say that stricter environmental regulations are worth the cost.

That’s not to say that conservatives and progressive all agree. Weeks before the election, Pew
found a deep divide between Trump and Clinton supporters when it came to regulating carbon
pollution.

But perhaps the divide is a result of the bad rap that government regulations routinely receive
and often do not deserve. It would be a wonderful world if every American and every American
company operated by the “do no harm” principle. Unfortunately, that is not the world we live in.
References:

- Tiwari,Kishan (2016 )”Importance of Law in Society”

https://legaldesire.com/article-importance-of-law-in-socity-amp/

Date Accessed: October 18,2019

- Organization of American States,(2007)”What is Law?”

https://ww/oas.org/juridico/MLA/en/can_mla_what.html

Date Accessed: October 18,2019

- Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)-Library,

(October 25,2013)”The Importance of regulatory Policy”

https://.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/regulatory-policy-and-governance/setting-

the scene-the-importance-of-regulatory-policy_9789264116573-4-en

Date Accessed: October 18,2019

- Coyle, Dianne, (July 18,2018)”3 ways that regulation benefits economies”

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/07/three-cheers-for-regulation/

Date accessed: October 18,2019

- Becker, William S. ,(December 6,2017)”Why regulations can be good”

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-regulations-can-be-go_b_13351686

Date Accessed: October 18,2019