By Danilo P. Padua, PhD
The withdrawal of SM in the needed rehabilitation of the Baguio city market is both a loss and a victory.
It is a loss because the city lost a potential Private-Public Partnership that could have modernized and cleaned the market almost without shelling out cold cash. The rehabilitation (yes, the more appropriate term is modernization) would have cost at least two billion pesos, which the city doesn’t have.
Victory it is also, as people power won the day. I think the airing of the market issue in the KMJS TV magazine show had an influence in the SM withdrawal. It was aired about a week before the disengagement.
Seems that the giant business enterprise would not like to be seen again as a palpable villain in the eyes of Baguio denizens as when they destroyed a great number of pine trees for their store expansion some years ago.
The plan for the market was not bad. It could have solved things like urgent need for parking, cleanliness and sanitation, removal of illegal rental schemes, and many more. It could also mean much needed income for the city.
If the PPP pushed through however, many small business owners could have been dislocated contributing to a heavier plate of problems for the city to resolve, as when CSI and SM itself barged into the city raging like angry bulls.
The withdrawal cast a melancholic mien on the faces of many city council members as they spent a considerable time discussing its pros and cons. Maybe, they had not done better diligence work?
Mayor Benjie Magalong himself looked downcast in an interview. He was hinting of an opportunity lost to make the market more comfortable to everyone, and the city more attractive to visitors. He bewails the fact that some quarters were saying that they have money to do the modernization thing but because of the gargantuan financial requirements for the purpose, they needed to borrow substantial amount far beyond their capacity to repay. And their lies the big problem.
Besides, the good mayor was saying that SM has been a constant in extending a helping hand whenever the city needs some help.
But come to think of it. If a big player, like SM, comes into play, most profit will flow into it, at the expense of the small business people. This will create a wider gulf between the have and the have nots. It is not conducive to the uplifting of the lot of those with meager means. Certainly, it hinders the strengthening of a middle class that could propel the economy of the city on a more sustainable way.
Bottomline is the protection of the interests of more business people and concomitantly, the local household of consumers.
At the same time, the predatory inclination of the better-off entrepreneurs should be stopped as what the city government had been trying to do in the market.
When I had the opportunity to run the Maharlika Livelihood Complex, we were trying to solve this pernicious practice of sub-leasing of stalls in the complex even before the city government started theirs. We interviewed “occupants”and found out that many of them were not the actual lessees that have agreement with the MLC. Sub-leasing in fact sometimes run 4-deep.
MLC, by its livelihood nature is aimed for those who have no source or have very low income. What is happening is that, it had become an investment avenue for those who have money to spare. Some have up to 6 or 7 stalls to themselves. And when we discussed with them, they later engaged the services of lawyers who are not exactly receiving pittance for their legal services.
Imagine for example, a fire victim of the old stone market in the 1970’s who were given humanitarian consideration when a new market was built. More than 50 years and 2 generations later they were still enjoying the same considerations even if many of the original victims were already long gone. Why? They were protected by some outdated city ordinances. They pay less than PhP800.00 per month but they are sub-leasing it for PhP20,000.00 or more (at least up to the time I resigned in 2021) while they have other bigger sources of income.
Also, I had the occasion to interview some new tenants who had acquired a stall without the knowledge of the MLC admin. The couple involved had it for an atrocious amount of 1.5 million pesos. Just for the rights, but which the former holder didn’t actually have.
These are things that have to be rectified if they are not done yet. I hope the people who have loudly opposed the modernization of the market under the SM management are not doing the same contemptible practice.
How about the SM providing the city government a loan for the modernization and earn just the interest; with the colatilla that SM should be part of a monitoring and evaluation team for the proper utilization of the loan. It could be aligned with their corporate social responsibility mandate.**
