SUBMITTED BY:
ARIEL BANGCAYA
REYNAN PABLO
GIFF EBARLE
GLORYROSE DY
CHAPTER I: THE WORLD VISION
Bayanihan is a popular tradition that put Filipinos in the highest pedestal among other nationalities. In the Philippines, though being known as one of the Third World countries, Filipinos can boast their moral and social values due to unexceptional faith to God. Bayanihan is used to be popular in rural towns. This was a method of transferring houses to other location where houses called “bahay kubo” were made of heap and leaves making it lightweight and easier to lift by a group of strong men (since women were assigned to prepare food or “merienda” for those who helped).
Nowadays, the definition of “bayanihan” does not refer only to the method of transferring houses. The spirit of bayanihan can also be used to describe a community action of helping one another and working together towards a common goal. It exemplifies the value of unity, cooperation, solidarity and teamwork.
As an observation, the spirit of bayanihan usually abides in a community where people are closely related to each other, either by blood or by friendship. Friendship is one of the basic requirements in developing a community or a neighborhood. Compared to high-end subdivisions where people (especially both parents) are sometimes not in their houses during daytime to work while their children are in school, people in some low-cost subdivisions, squatters’ areas and relocation sites have closer friendship with each other because of the proximity of dwelling units.
There is also a one good reason why there are closer ties between neighbors in some low-cost subdivisions. People need to survive and live happily despite of their low status in life. Instead of shopping, watching movies, going abroad, doing big businesses or just spending money, people who cannot afford these things just enjoys what they have in their community like sports activities or just chatting with their “kumpare/kumadre”.
Through the years, there are NGO’s who have been working to bring transformation in the lives of families and communities and bring back and continue the spirit of bayanihan in each housing subdivision. The World Vision Development Foundation (WVDF), a Non-Government Organization (NGO), volunteered to bring bayanihan back in order to preserve the Filipino values and remind the people the importance of house, home, community and God.
One of their projects was in Palanca Village, Matina, Davao City. The Palanca Project was part of a new national urban initiative of World Vision by journeying with the settlers as they worked towards the realization of their dreams- land acquisition.
Through the years, the World Vision has been working to bring transformation in the lives of children, families and communities. With every accomplishment celebrated and every learning gained, there are also challenges and difficulties that made the victories sweeter.
The case of Palanca settlers is a story that is very familiar to World Vision that inspires people to strive to do better and helping themselves.
The World Vision facilitated its development to see change in the communities. But how much did they want to change in them, particularly when it entails change in perspective and attitude as well as in lifestyle?
The Palanca Project was part of a new national urban initiative of World Vision at the time. While the urban initiative had put forth certain foundational principles, actual project implementation in three major cities (Quezon, Cebu and Davao) was to be determined by the people in communities themselves. It was to be their agenda. World Vision was going to journey with them as they worked towards the realization of their dreams but were determined to teach themselves and went on to do networking. The Foundation’s track record was in rural communities but they quickly learned the ropes of urban community organizing, at times committing mistakes, often reflecting on their own organizing experience as well as others’. Some facilitators went through uncharted water. Some were never trained to do land acquisition
World Vision also brought its urban facilitators together in regular learning events to share experiences and to address critical issues. During these events were honed some strategic processes and some WV’s guidelines on land acquisition and equity loans. The Foundation also co-hosted national urban workshops participated in by other NGO’s and churches from both the Protestant and Catholic sectors. These were times of standing in solidarity with other civil society groups, sometimes critiquing government policies but always on behalf of and with the urban poor.
ACRONYMS
BIR Bureau of Internal Revenue
CMP Community Mortgage Program
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
ECC Environmental Compliance Certificate
HLURB Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board
IPHC Institute for Primary Health Care
MLF Mindanao Land Foundation
NGO Non-Government Organization
NHMFC National Home Mortgage and Financing Corporation
PCUP Presidential Council for the Urban Poor
PLC Purchase Land Commitment
PVHA Palanca Village Homeowners Association
SEC Securities and Exchange Commission
WVDF World Vision Development Foundation
CHAPTER II: THE FACE OF PALANCA VILLAGE
In the late 1960’s, Palanca was just another piece of marshy land with a scattering of urban poor houses. It was hemmed in by the Morales Subdivision on the west side. On one side was the Layug property and all around the back was the Davao Memorial Park. Telyong Te (husband of Teofila “Acao” Palanca) owned the 1.5 hectare property at that time.
See the attached map of Palanca Village.
CHAPTER III: EVOLUTION OF PALANCA
The “Kangkongan” Years
During 1969, the marshy land of Palanca, full of “kangkong” became a community when the old and dilapidated chapel was put up at its center.
Rosita Jagape, the current WV nursery teacher in Palanca and one of the first settlers in the property, recall that there were only three houses in the property back then. There was no drainage, no roads, and whatever rains came, the whole area was flooded.
When Al Camasura settled in 1975, there were about ten households at the time. He was the first president of the association that the residents organized, when they started to pursue acquisition of the land on which they built their houses. All his four children were born in Palanca.
Some residents still remembers those days when their houses would be flooded during rainy season. Many cannot count the times they slept on top of the table. The water would be about a foot deep inside the house. Sometimes it would take a week for the water to subside. Children had to be carried out of the village so they could go to school. Those who had to leave the village would wrap their feet and legs in plastic.
The place was literally a slum area with households resorting to “flying saucers” (human manure wrapped in paper flying out of the window) because of lack of sanitary toilets.
People in the village loved to gamble. They often resorted to alcohol and gambling due to lack of direction and hopelessness. According to Al Camasura, the place had an unpleasant reputation as being a “haven” for rebels and criminal elements.
Despite their impoverished situation, Palanca residents, however, were not squatters. They paid rent to Acao Palanca who came to collect rental fees every month for as much as 40 pesos for bigger lots. For lot measuring around 150 square meters, a rent of 15 pesos was paid.
While their rent seems a pittance today, these amounts were rather a lot to the people at that time. The residents recall that jeepney fares cost 10 centavos regardless of where you wanted to go and a bottle of softdrink costs 30 centavos. Theirs was a hard life, but at least they had a roof above their heads; they ate three square meals a day; their children were at school.
The Troubled Times
Between 1960-1970, however unknown to the residents, Telyong Te mortgaged Palanca to his friend, Cua Ceen, for 50 thousand pesos. Although it was just a loan, Te signed the absolute deed of sale. However, Te still continued to collect rent through his daughter-in-law, Rebecca. This arrangement was all right while Cua and Telyong were still alive. When they died, the problem started. Cua’s son, Jose, took over the management of Cua Ceen’s estateand declared that he was the rightful owner of the Palanca property. A court battle ensued between the heirs of Telyong Te and Cua Ceen and the residents were caught in the middle.
While a court battle for land ownership was ongoing, Jose took 20 of the original residents of Palanca to court for “squatting” on titled property.
In 1984, the Court of Appeals handed down the decision in favor of the residents affirming the legality of tenancy. The residents produced receipts to show that they had been renting the land in good faith from Acao Palanca. But despite the decision, they were still troubled. The legal battle was still going on over who really owned the property. They were very uncertain. This uncertainty drove the people to alcohol and gambling. They did not care anymore about their neighborhood; even the health conditions of their children, they just took for granted.
CHAPTER IV: ISSUES OF PALANCA VILLAGE
Political Issues
It was Mrs. Dinah Dimalanta, the WVDF Project Head Facilitator in Palanca during the land and housing experience, solicited advice and aids from big names in politics namely: Mr. Jesus Dureza (the Presidential Assistant who was then a congressman), Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, former Councilor Aries Albay, Congressman Greg Andolana, Congressman Prospero Nograles and many others. These gentlemen truly helped Palanca without any payments coming from the settlers or from the World Vision. But sadly, there were also people who helped but only to have a brighter future in politics especially during election.
They always brag during community meeting that if they did not helped Palanca during land acquisition, the people would still be sleeping on a muddy bed. They keep on telling the settlers that if they would vote for them during election, street lights and improved roads will also come.
Social Issues
Al Camasura stated that during 1970’s-1990’s, Palanca Village was a perfect haven for criminals because of its location situated in a crampy and very interior area of the city. Until now, there are still reports that many criminals still go in the area to disappear from the eyes of the police. Many times that the village is search by police because of some residents from nearby villages mistakenly reported a wrong person suspected as criminal.
Residents from other villages do not want to go inside Palanca because of their fear that people there will harrass them and extort.
Security Issues
The Palanca Village, as tagged by people from the nearby villages, was a haven for criminals. Since the foundation of Palanca Village Homeowners Association, their actions revolve around the security problems. They do not want to have security guards like other subdivision because first of all they cannot afford to hire a security agency. So they decided to have a “ronda system”. During night, men from their households voluntarily guard the entrances specially the old and narrow path to make sure no one from the outside will come in uninvited, but visitors were welcomed after much interrogation.
Environmental Issues
In 1986, the Institute for Primary Health Care (IPHC), a Davao-based NGO, visited Palanca with the aim of implementing a primary health care program. They held workshops and seminars. At the top of their list was the construction of sanitary latrines in their homes. Most houses only had an “Antipolo system” while some households would only have “flying saucers.
One of the problems that they found out was that their site is classified as not habitable. During the land acquisition, the National Home Mortgage and Financing Corporation (NHMFC) almost did not approve their request to loan because of this environmental problem. The site was not habitable because the land is swampy, located near danger zone and below sea level.
Today, there are still areas inside Palanca which are swampy. These areas can be a breeding ground for mosquitoes which is unhealthy for children.
Economic Issues
During the land acquisition, the livelihoods of the settlers were much affected because much of their earnings went to the payment for the land. 300 pesos monthly would be raised by each tenant to purchase the land. That is why the development of many houses in Palanca is slow because they need money for improvements.
Majority of the livelihood of the settlers are in construction such carpenters, masons and welders. Some are vegetable vendors in Bangkerohan market. Teenagers were recruited to perform in Japan and gain money.
Quality of Pedestrian Spaces
Fig.4: The entrance to Palanca
This is the old entrance of the village when Morales Village did not give the right of way to the Palanca residents.
It only serves people. The only vehicle that can pass thru this is by using bicycle. The vehicles, such as motor bike and cars, use the Morales entrance.
Fig.5: One of the streets in Palanca
There are no visible street signs. The road itself is not enough for two vehicles to pass thru. There is also no path walks for pedestrians. And during fire, fire vehicles would have difficulty reaching their subject. The only concrete road that extend to around 10 meters from the Morales entrance delineate the entrances to the subdivision
Fig.6: The pathway to Palanca
The old entrance has not enough lighting and ventilation produced by the high walls of Memorial park. There are no signages for emergency
Quality of Security
Fig.7: This area had witnessed already many crime scenes like murder, attempted rape and gang war.
Quality of Residential Spaces
Fig.8 :Arrangement of single-detached residential units
The original layout of residential units was spacious since they did not have boundaries yet before land acquisition. Now, spaces are limited.
Fig.9 : An example of a one-storey residential unit
The building in itself has no adequate backyards and front yards. There are no setbacks
Fig. 10: An example of a two-storey residential unit
Open spaces are used for “sampayan” reducing the flow of air and daylight. Firewalls are alien to the residents.
Fig. 11: An example of a sari-sari store attached to a residential unit
Uncontrolled extensions is not encouraged but it is unavoidable due to the notion of making the most rather limited lot which resulted in lopsided and disfigured houses
Quality of Vehicular Spaces
Fig. 12: Exterior spaces in residential unit are used for vehicular spaces
Some houses provided space for parking. Majority of the owners do not have vehicles such as car or tricycle.
Fig.13 : Streets used as parking lots
CHAPTER VI: POTENTIALS FOR SELF-HELP HOUSING
At present, the Palanca Village is already a Self- Help Housing Community with the initiatives of World Vision. The World Vision trained the villagers the process of Land Acquisitions such as
1. organizing a Homeowner’s association by electing officers and members and assigning persons to particular task
2. obtaining a copy of the title of the property from the register of deeds
3. checking the authenticity of the title, further status of the property with concerned agencies
4. researching on the market value of the land for sales and estimate
5. applying for land acquisition loan with the NHMFC through the CMP by securing the following:
Purchase Line Commitment
Letter of Guarantee
Take out
Individualization
6. conducting a land survey and subdivision planning
7. submitting to CMP the following:
Master list of applicants
Survey report
Signature of individuals’ lot owners
Subdivision plan
8. Working on individualization of Land titles
CHAPTER VII: SYNTHESIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The main problem of the Village at present is the lack of open spaces where the community transportation could park their vehicles in times when their services are not need. The underlying problems are still the security of the area because of the narrow roads especially for pedestrians. However, this underlying problem is already been currently and gradually addressed by the World Vision.
Thus, the main recommendation of this case study is provision for open spaces designated for parking lots in the area.
