Lot purchase slammed

CEBU, Philippines — A member of the ad hoc committee investigating the alleged irregularities in the supposed land purchase intended for the affected individuals of the Cebu Bus Rapid Transit (CBRT) raised an objection to the “lack of due diligence” in the evaluation of the lots.

This came after the majority of the members of the committee had approved and adopted the purchase of three private lots in barangays Tejero, Mabolo, and Punta Princesa that were allegedly owned by only one entity, which was what prompted the Cebu City Council in a previous session to call for the creation of the ad hoc committee last Oct. 16.

On that date, the City Council approved the creation of the ad hoc committee that will look into the alleged irregularities in the purchase of the land intended for the Informally Settled Families (ISF) that will be affected by the CBRT packages 2 and 3.

Last Wednesday, the City Council discussed a Nov. 8 letter from Atty. Michelle M. Descartin, CBRT Project Management Office (PMO) legal officer, and an ad hoc committee member.

During the discussion, City Councilor Jocelyn Pesquera clarified that the lots were not included in the approved Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) that the council had unanimously approved last October 23, 2024.

In line with Decartin’s opinion, City Councilor James Anthony Cuenco has moved, which the City Council approved, that the ad hoc committee will include in its report Descartin’s dissenting opinion in its consideration of the lots.

“In this dissenting opinion of Attorney Descartin, it says that the choice as recommended by the lot acquisition committee is defective and violative of the guidelines that have been promulgated specifically that the first choice of the lot should have been the property of the City Government,” he said.

He further said that Descartin’s letter also contains recommendations of lots that are ideal for relocation and owned by the City Government and worth looking into again.

City Councilor Nestor Archival, Sr., however, pointed out that the three identified lots as relocation sites were already approved by the Department of Transportation (DOTr), which is paying for their purchase.

“My concern is we continue to delay this project, I understand from the information that I got from the World Bank that this (CBRT Project) will end in 2026 September. Now, if you are not going to continue this relocation site now, the contract will probably be rescinded,” he warned.

Cuenco, however, argued that it is incumbent upon the City Government as the “purchasing authority” to exercise “due diligence and follow the law” in the purchase of the lots.

Pesquera also said that the three lots are actually yet to be approved by the DOTr since their purchase was transmitted before the Council for the body to assess and approve the RAP. She reiterated that when they approved the RAP last Oct. 23, it excluded the approval of the three lots as relocation sites, hence the creation of the ad hoc committee.

Cuenco further said that dissenting opinions came after the ad hoc committee came come up with a decision and that the City Council is only waiting for its report.

City Councilor Jerry Guardo likewise called upon the ad hoc committee to expedite the release of its recommendations, stating that the DOTr already expressed the possibility that the project will not be implemented if the RAP will not be enacted within this year.

The ad hoc committee is composed of the Cebu City Legal Office, Cebu City Planning and Development Office, Division for the Welfare of the Urban Poor, Business Permit and Licensing Office, City Appraisal Committee, and the CBRT-PMO. It was given 15 from Oct. 23 days to submit its report.

In her opinion letter, Descartin said that the committee officially convened last Nov. 7 and the majority recommended the “approval and adoption” of the three private lots as the resettlement sites.

She said her intent is making the letter is here “sincere submission to determine the propriety, integrity, and fairness of the identification and selection of the proposed resettlement sites and its compliance with the applicable laws, rules, and regulations, and whether or not the same served the welfare and interest of the ISFs as well as the City Government of Cebu.”

Among the reasons for her objection is that the identification and selection of the three lots allegedly did not comply with the provisions of Republic Act No. 7279, or the "Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) of 1992”.

She said the UDHA stipulated the criteria for the socialized housing and resettlement areas which the three identified privately owned lots do not meet.

Among the provisions, he said, is that the supposed priorities for land acquisition are “(t)hose owned by the government or any of its subdivisions, instrumentalities, or agencies, including government-owned or -controlled corporations and their subsidiaries”.

She further said that upon verification with the Cebu City Assessor’s Office, there are “existing and available properties” that were registered under the City of Cebu that were not reportedly presented or offered as options during the selection process.

Descartin then attached the specifications of these lots, which can be found at the Cebu Port Center in Brgy. T. Padilla, and one fronting Arellano Boulevard in the same address.

“Based on the Sketch Plan, the above Cebu City-owned lots that are both situated near Arellano Blvd. & T. Padilla, Cebu Port Center, Cebu City, are more convenient and accessible because these are located just along the main road. Hence, location-wise, they are suitable as resettlement sites,” Descartin said.

She added that the said properties owned by the City Government should have been considered as resettlement sites instead of the three privately owned lots since according to UDHA, “government-owned lots are given priority in the acquisition of lands for resettlement sites.”

She further said that the selection process, which was “concentrated on the three private lots,” allegedly possessed an “element of unfairness, lacks propriety and integrity and failed to embody the sporting idea of fair play and competition.”

“Given the foregoing, it appears that the selection process for the resettlement sites was tainted with irregularity, revealing as it does utter lack of due diligence and non-observance of the applicable law, rules and regulations,” Descartin said.

She added that the three lots being owned by one person also raised “suspicion and doubt to its (purchase) fairness.”

“While I understand the concerns of the World Bank, I cannot agree with the majority's opinion. Arguably, this recommendation may demand more time and effort from the concerned parties,” Descartin said.

“Nonetheless, I am optimistic that the same is more advantageous, mutually beneficial, and would best serve the welfare and interests of the ISFs and the City Government of Cebu,” she added. — /RHM (FREEMAN)