Informal settlers

There appears to be no exact number of informal settlers in Bácolod. The number shifts by the year. We have estimates that they run for 30,000 and above. I hope that the city government will give out the statistic on them as often as it can, even on a bi-annual basis so that people can become fully aware of the situation rather than suddenly be informed of the projects for their welfare.

Popularly known as “squatters” but euphemistically called “informal settlers” these people carry a huge social cost and recently been blamed for the massive flooding in the country. Public awareness of the situation can help the citizens realize the magnitude of the problem and the flow of these settlers from the towns into the city and burden the Bácolod taxpayers of these migrants.

They are also a big bulk of voters so that politicians handle them with care and in some cases with dread of a backlash. On the other hand, many of them are not voters of the city but of other places and yet we pay their cost.

How many are truly Bácolodnons and thus our responsibility?

Mayor Bing Leonardia has just issued a call for them to leave the danger zones which are the banks of the rivers, creeks and esteros of the city. These danger zones are similar in all growing cities of the country. The move is politically sensitive but the risks to life and limb and the dangers to property and time is greater. This is a difficult balancing act, but action demands that the risk must be on the side of helping these settlers to save themselves.

The problem is that they do not want to leave, primarily because they have nowhere to go and if there are relocation sites, they do not want to be away from their work areas or source of it. Moreover they have kids in school and that means dislocation. But the “out of town” ones should be ejected.

There are also professional squatters who are adept in getting the benefits from government. We know that some of them sell their awarded sites to get another one.

The city has already purchased lands for them but these areas have to be prepared with water and electrical facilities as well as roads. Schools must be within easy reach because while public education is free (at least in theory) transport and food are not.

The squatters in the city are not only those in the danger zone during floods or contributory factors in floods. There are squatters along the highways and roads, both national and city, and even barangay and subdivision roads. Some occupy and close road lots.

The squatters in national roads and highways are the responsibility of the Department of Public Works and Highways, and now that he has insisted on it, that of Cong. Anthony Golez.

There had been a lot of declarations by DPWH and its own secretary giving the DPWH a deadline for the removal of these squatters. But nothing had been done and nobody has been sacked for failure to follow the order. The secretary's order was merely a palabas, a waste of saliva although the secretary had received a lot of publicity for it.

Perhaps now that Cong. Golez has admitted that the DPWH is under his turf, then he should call them to task for this negligence.

And while he is at it, Cong. can help the city by directing the DPWH to remove the squatters from the rivers, creeks and esteros. Under the law the river should have an easement of ten meters while creeks and esteros should have three meters easement.

If one looks at the rivers and creeks of the city, it is clear that this easement is not complied with and the DPWH is not doing anything to remove them. These rivers and creeks had been identified as danger zones and if we are strict about it, the DPWH and not the city has the authority to remove them.

Has the city coordinated with the DPWH or are we waiting for another flare-up of jurisdiction? Of course, as we observe, when it comes to tracing of responsibility everybody washes its hands of authority.

The City Legal Office has been tasked to remove these squatters in the danger zone. Have they been authorized by the DPWH or has the city the authority to enforce the law in this regard?

We need to be clarified because of this conflict about who is supposed to be boss on this and that. Rep. Golez says he is responsible for national agencies and DPWH is a national agency so that, without this clearance or coordination, we can say that the city is intruding into the realm of the congressman.*

back to top