1.3.2 the urban development housing act of 1992 1 public action for urban poverty reduction: policy...

11.3.2 The Urban Development Housing Act of 1992

PUBLIC ACTION FOR URBAN POVERTY REDUCTION:

POLICY OPTIONS AND NATIONAL–LOCAL GOVERNMENT ROLES

UPA Package 1, Module 3


THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT HOUSING ACT OF 1992


The Socio–Politico Context

Post 1986 Philippines: Redemocratization after Martial Law Regime

1987 Constitution• Article II Sec. 23. The State shall encourage non-governmental community-based

or sectoral organizations that promote the welfare of the nation• Article XIII, Sections 9 and 10.

Provides for a continuing program of urban land reform and housing Make available at affordable cost decent housing and basic services to

underprivileged and homeless citizens Promote adequate employment opportunities for these citizens No eviction of urban or rural poor dwellers except in accordance with law and

in just and humane manner• Article XIII, Sections 15 and 16

Respect the role of independent people’s organizations to pursue and protect their collective interests and aspirations through peaceful and lawful means

Recognize the right of people’s organizations to effective and reasonable people’s participation at all levels of social, political and economic decision–making


The Socio–Politico Context

Local Government Code of 1991

• The Code mandates local government units to adopt a comprehensive land use plan and enact integrated zoning ordinances

• Through the Code, the responsibility for providing basic serviceswas shifted to local government units


The Passage of RA 7279: The Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992

December 14, 1987 – Senate Bill 234 filed and introduced by Sen. LinaDecember 15, 1987 – Bills were referred to the Committee on Urban Planning,

Housing and Resettlement and the Committee on Finance1998 to 1990 – Seven public hearings were conducted by the CommitteesAugust 15, 1991 – Committee on Urban Planning, Housing and Resettlement

filed Committee Report No. 1397, recommending approval of a substitute SB 234

December 9, 1991 – SB 234 approved on the 3rd Reading; All 20 Senators present voted in favor of the bill

February 3, 1992 – Conference Committee Report was approved by the Senate

March 24, 1992 – RA 7279 UDHA Law was approved and signed into law by President Corazon C. Aquino

March 28, 1992 – Publication in two newspapersMarch 29, 1992 – Date of effectivity


Features of RA 7279

Objectives of the Law

• Uplift conditions of underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban and resettlement areas through decent housing at affordable cost, basic services and employment opportunities

• Provide rational use and development of urban lands as a means of ensuring1. Equitable utilization of residential lands in urban areas, focusing on the

needs and requirements of underprivileged and homeless citizens and not simply on market forces;

2. Optimization of the use and productivity of land and urban resources;3. Development of urban areas conducive to commercial and industrial

activities which can generate more economic opportunities for the people;4. Reduction in urban dysfunctions, particularly those that adversely affect

public health, safety and ecology; and5. Access to land and housing by the underprivileged and homeless citizens.


RA 7279

National Urban Development and Housing Framework • The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB),

under the direction of the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) shall formulate the National Urban Development and Housing Framework.

• This framework includes:1. a review and rationalization of existing town and land

use plans, housing programs, and2. provision for social housing and other related activities

such as the development of livelihood programs, public transport systems, maintenance of ecological balance and monitoring of population growth in urban areas.


RA 7279

Supports Decentralization

• Local government units are implementors of social housing programs. LGUs are expected to be more responsive to the hosing needs of theirCommunities.

Moratorium on Eviction of Program Beneficiaries• Provides for a moratorium on the eviction of all program

beneficiaries and the demolition of their dwellings for a period of three years from the effectivity of the law.


RA 7279

Private Sector Participation

• Tapped the private sector’s capability and financial resources for social housing through such incentives as: Simplification of qualification and accreditation requirements for participating developers Creation of a one-stop offices in the different regions of the country for the

processing, approval and issuances of clearances, permits and licenses; Simplification of financing procedures; and Exemptions from taxes like capital gains tax for raw lands used for socialized housing projects, value added tax for the project contractor, transfer tax for both raw and completed projects, and donor’s tax for lands donated for socialized housing. Private developers of proposed subdivision projects required to set aside am area for socialized housing equivalent to at least 20% of total subdivision area.


RA 7279

Community Mortgage Program

• Institutionalized community participation and initiative in the provision of social housing through the Community Mortgage Program (CMP), a major component of the law.

• CMP is a mortgage financing program which assists legally organized associations of underprivileged and homeless citizens to own the land they occupy or where they choose to be relocated to.


RA 7279

Implementing Rules and Regulations

HLURB – Guidelines for the Inventory and Identification of Lands and Sites for Socialized Housing (Nov. 25, 1992)

HUDCC – Implementing Guidelines for the Acquisition, Valuation, Disposition and Utilization of Lands for Socialized Housing (May 20, 1993)

DOF – Guidelines for Equitable Land Valuation for Socialized Housing, pursuant to Sec. 13 of RA 7279 (Sept. 11, 1992)

DILG and HUDCC – Implementing Rules and Regulations Governing the Registration of Socialized Housing Beneficiaries


RA 7279

Implementing Rules and Regulations

HLURB – Guidelines on Balanced Housing (June 8, 1992)

DOF – Providing Incentives to Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations and Local Govt. Units as well as Private Sector Participating in Socialized Housing and Community Mortgage Program ( March 4, 1993)

DILG and HUDCC – Guidelines on the Observance of Proper and Human Relocation and Resettlement Procedures (Sept. 24, 1992)


National Urban and Housing Development Framework, 1993 – 1998

The Vision

• Better quality of life for residents of cities/urban centers• Cities/urban centers as economic hubs and major contributors

to national productivity and industrialization• Cities and urban communities are socially and environmentally

healthy places• Cities and urban communities as centers for productive and

income generating activities• Cities that house and deliver basic social services to its citizens,

particularly the poor• Cities/urban centers promote political democratization through

greater people participation in decision-making• Urban governments are capable and competent to address

urban issues and concerns


Basic Principles and Considerations

• In over-all national development, urban development shall reinforce and complement rural development

• Urban growth and development to complement natural and man-made investment

• Level of future growth to be sufficient in quantity, quality, and distribution to provide opportunities (employment, housing, services, etc.) for all citizens

• Cities/urban centers are valuable resources to be supported and their welfare are linked to the country’s welfare



Basic Principles and Considerations

• Urban resources will be developed to achieve multiple uses.• Land use and growth decisions are principally a local

prerogative, supported by higher levels of government• People, private sector and other institutions shall play a primary

role in building the nation’s cities. Principle of popular initiative and self-help shall b pursued with government as enabler and facilitator.

• Harmonious relationships between the city/urban center and its environment, rural surroundings, and urban growth shall be assured

• Enhanced urban life should allow enhanced individual welfare• Preservation and continued production of prime agricultural land

shall be paramount



Implementing RA 7279

How was RA7279 Received?

• It was viewed as the crowning achievement of the struggles of urban poor organizations, civic groups, non-governmental organizations and church groups.

• Consultative processes in drafting the law participated in by: a) representatives of non-governmental organizations and people’s organizations, b) National Housing Authority (NHA), c) Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP), d)Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)

• It was noted that local government officials were not active participants in this process.



Issues and Concerns

• LGUs not engaged in its formulation were opposing its implementation

• LGUs and those undertaking demolition lacked awareness or refused to accept the procedures prescribed by the law

• Initially, courts were more familiar with PD 772 which criminalizes squatting and judges issued issuing court orders dismissing petitions for restraining orders on illegal demolitions.

• Some local chief executives admitted that they did not want to make an inventory of their land as the urban poor may occupy these areas.



Issues and Concerns• Local autonomy countered weak national sanctions and this

resulted in local officials non compliance with requirements set to control forced evictions

• NHA was traditionally responsible for providing resettlement sites and took care of relocation operations. LGUs tended to depend on NHA, who is unable to produce enough sites for the growing number of dislocated squatters.

• DPWH and other national agencies’ projects were delayed due to their inability to move communities. Their lack of experience on relocation led to costly projects which beneficiaries found unacceptable.

• With so many agencies involved in relocation, roles and accountabilities of these agencies were not well defined.



Issues and Concerns

Delayed Preparation of Land Use Plans and Identification of Social Housing Sites• LGUs lack information and political will• LGUs had no incentives to undertake these activities• LGUs had no resources allocated for these functions• Lack of LGU resources/capability for urban development

Strong market pressure to use land for commercial, industrial and infrastructure uses



Criticisms of UDHA

• It created the squatting industry, as it gives incentives instead of penalizing or discouraging it.

• The law penalizes local and national officials who coddle squatters, but no such officials have been prosecuted.

• The law penalizes members of squatting syndicates. While well known to squatters who pay rent and protection money to these syndicates, no member of a syndicate has been convicted.



Criticisms of UDHA

• Executive Order 152 designated the Presidential Commission on the Urban Poor (PCUP) as the clearing house for the demolition and eviction of squatters.

• This EO requires local government units and other agencies to get a clearance from PCUP before anyone can eject or demolished squatter shanties.

• PCUP requires a checklist (at least 12 items) of documents required to be attached to the application for clearance.

• This executive order conflicts with RA7279 which designates local government units as the implementing arm of the law.

1.3.2 the urban development housing act of 1992 1 public action for urban poverty reduction: policy...

Documents

urban development housing

national urban development

development of urban

eviction of urban

housing framework

urban resources

urban planning

urban dysfunctions