A R A T I o N A L I Z e D L o C A L P L A N N I N G S y S T e M I N T H e P H I L I P P I N e S
A R A T I o N A L I Z e D L o C A L P L A N N I N G S y S T e M I N T H e P H I L I P P I N e S
A R A T I o N A L I Z e D L o C A L P L A N N I N G S y S T e M I N T H e P H I L I P P I N e S
1.0 INTRODUCTION
To begin with, some words about the word “rationalized” in the title.
This is the latest and possibly the last attempt to put order to the present chaos
that characterizes local planning in the Philippines. The chaotic condition owes in
part to the persistence of pre-devolution practices and also the failure to
implement to their full implications the Local Government Code provisions on
local planning. To rationalize the local planning system therefore starts with the
intention to faithfully comply with the applicable provisions of the Local
Government Code.
Corollary to the above dimension is the need for NGAs that are directly involved
in local planning to harmonize or dovetail their planning guidelines with one
another to avoid further confusing the LGUs.
1
Prepared for the Bureau of Local Government Development, DILG, for eventual issuance to all local government units in
the Philippines
Rationalizing the Local Planning System (RPS), 1st Edition 2008 i
General Introduction
All local planning guidelines in use so far begin and end with the planning
process. This is consistent with the long-held notion about planning as a highly
technical activity reserved only for those who are “technically qualified”. Hence,
politicians and decision makers who feel they are not technically competent
tended to shy away from planning. Consequently, plans were hardly
implemented at all.
For planning to become an integral part of local governance, it must not be too
preoccupied with how to produce the plan documents alone. Of equal importance
are considerations about why LGUs ought to plan, who should be involved in
planning, and how LGU plans are implemented. Planning therefore must be
viewed holistically as a system consisting of at least four components: the
planning structure, the mandated plans, the planning process, and the LGU’s
authority levers which it can use to carry out its plans. Above all, local planning
must be understood as primarily the responsibility of the local government. The
local planning system therefore must be established on the foundation of the
nature and function of local governments.
As a body corporate the LGU represents its residents, the inhabitants within its
territory. It is likewise endowed with powers and resources necessary for its
efficient and effective governance and to deliver basic services and facilities to
enable its inhabitants to develop fully into self-reliant communities. Being a
corporate body, every LGU is mandated to promote the general welfare among
the inhabitants within its territorial jurisdiction (RA 7160, Sections 2a, 15, 16 and
17).
Upon this dual personality and role of LGUs the local planning system is
established. The components of the local planning system include:
3) The processes that the planning structure will follow to produce the
desired plan outputs, and
4) The authority levers or tools with which the LGU implements its plans and
programs.
Each of these components is discussed in the chapters that follow. Only brief
descriptions are given in this General Introduction.
Contrary to the notion held by many local legislators, planning is not exclusively a
function of the executive. Planning is both proactive policy making and reactive
problem solving. The first character of planning makes it essentially a political act
while the second is the more popularly known character of planning, that of
management and hence, an executive function. Correspondingly, the local
planning structure has two components: political and technical.
The political component comprises the legislative body (Sanggunian) and the
local development council (LDC). These bodies are composed mainly of elective
officials, hence, of politicians. The only non-politician members of the political
component of the local planning structure are the representatives of the private
sector and civil society who comprise one-fourth of the LDC membership. The
political component is the policy-making body which defines the content and
direction of local development. The principal function of the political component is
that of deliberation to take decisions or lay down policies.
The technical component is made up of the local special bodies, the sectoral and
functional committees, non-government sectors, and the office of the local
planning and development coordinator. Even the heads of offices of the local
government and of national agencies operating in the local area are part of the
technical component of the local planning structure. This component supplies the
technical content and process of local planning. Except for some local special
bodies, the technical component generally has no decision-making powers.
The plan outputs that the local planning structure is mandated to produce are of
two types: the comprehensive land use plan and the comprehensive
development plan.
Rationalizing the Local Planning System (RPS), 1st Edition 2008 iii
General Introduction
The CLUP is the plan for the management of local territories. Planning as
management of local territories is a function of the LGU pursuant to its status as
a political unit. Hence, the body principally responsible for the CLUP is no less
than the highest policy-making body, the legislative council or Sanggunian. This
is the reason why the adoption of the CLUP and its enactment into a zoning
ordinance are planning functions exercised exclusively by the Sanggunian (RA
7160, Section 20c, 447, 458, 468). This devolved function is being exercised by
the Sanggunian on behalf of the national State which is directed by the
Constitution to “…regulate the ownership, acquisition, use and disposition of
property…” (Art. XIII, Sec. 1). State regulation of land use also implies that there
must be vertically integrated physical framework plans from the national down to
the municipal level. The CLUP therefore must be consistent with its higher
counterparts, the PPFP, the RPFP and the NFPP, at the provincial, regional and
national levels respectively. Conversely, the LGU territory is the stage upon
which national policies and programs converge and find application on the
ground. Therefore, national government agencies (NGA) are required to
coordinate or consult with LGUs before undertaking their projects (RA 7160,
Sections 26 and 27) within the local territorial jurisdiction.
In some cases, NGAs that have functional responsibility over certain portions of
LGU territory tend to exercise exclusive territorial powers over these areas as
well. This practice effectively prevents the LGU from exercising its powers over
those particular portions of its territory. And yet these “enclaves” are still
considered part of the LGU’s territorial jurisdiction. For one, the inhabitants of
such areas are regarded as residents and voters of the particular LGU. Moreover,
such NGA-held areas are included in the determination of the LGU’s total land
area as a basis for allocating its share in the internal revenue allotment (IRA).
Consistent with their status as partners in national development, LGUs shall now
share responsibility for managing the environment and natural resources within
their territorial jurisdiction (RA 7160, Sec. 3i).
In a word, the CLUP is the long-term guide for the physical development of the
local area, the framework for the management and co-management of the local
territory. At the city and municipal levels, the CLUP serves more than a
framework plan. It is at this level where the CLUP is enacted into a zoning
ordinance(RA 7160, Sec. 20c) hence, it becomes a statutory plan whose
provisions are not merely indicative but are legally enforceable.
The CDP is the plan with which the LGU promotes the general welfare of its
inhabitants in its capacity as a corporate body. The responsibility for the CDP is
given to the LDC (RA 7160, Sec. 106 and 109). It must cover all the development
sectors to be comprehensive. (See Chapter 2 below.) Its time frame may be
multi-year but a short-term slice must be taken off which is coterminous with the
term of the elective local officials so that it can serve as an input to their
executive-legislative agenda (ELA).
The CDP consolidates the programs and projects necessary to carry out the
objectives of the different development sectors. Some of these programs and
projects are incorporated in the local development investment program (LDIP)
and are implemented through the annual investment program (AIP) and the
annual budget. Other programs may be picked up by the national government
and still others by the private sector for implementation.
The CDP, moreover, is the plan that the LGU prepares in its capacity as a
corporate body. By their involvement in the CDP process the inhabitants seek to
exercise autonomy as self-reliant communities. Therefore there should be no
more need for higher authorities to review or approve the CDP. National
agencies with sectoral responsibilities should not impose their requirements on
LGUs as though the latter were their subordinates or clients. There should be an
end to the prevailing attitude of NGAs which has been developed from decades
of dependency relationships wherein LGUs were on the receiving end of national
government’s generosity or lack of it. Only by enabling them to become self-
reliant will LGUs become effective partners in national development.
Up to this point in time planning has been consultant driven. It is the consultant
who usually does everything and when the plan output is handed over to the
LGU the latter is left not knowing what to do with it.
For simplicity, the preparation of the CLUP and the CDP can be divided into four
modules consistent with the capability-building approach. (Refer to chart.) Each
module is described briefly as follows:
Module III – formulation of the PPFP in the case of the province and the CLUP
in the case of component municipalities. Main activities include:
1. Generation of alternative spatial strategies taking into account
the regional or provincial spatial strategy and choosing the most
desirable alternative for the province or municipality, as the case
may be.
2. Formulating policies on settlements, production, infrastructure
and protection areas consistent with the preferred strategy.
3. Formulating the implementation tools.
Module II – should be done with the political component and the general public.
The technical component only facilitates the proceedings. Long-
term goals are formulated for inclusion in the CLUP. Medium-term
and short-term objectives are formulated every 3 years in
conjunction with the CDP-ELA process. The long-term vision
statement should not be changed but should be carried through in
Rationalizing the Local Planning System (RPS), 1st Edition 2008
vii
General Introduction
Module III – should be initiated by and with the full and active participation of the
Sanggunian. The technical component only facilitates the process.
It is done once and when enacted into a zoning ordinance will
remain in force until amended or repealed. Amendments or
revisions may be done in intervals of 3, 6, or 9 years, synchronized
with the term of elective officials. (Refer to chapters 5, 7 and 9.)
Module IV – is the responsibility of the local development council with inputs from
the sectoral and functional committees. The CDP and ELA will be
prepared after every local election. The AIP which is the annual
component of the LDIP is prepared every year synchronized with
the annual budget cycle. (See chapters 6, 8 and 9.)
5.1 The authority levers to implement the CLUP include the zoning ordinance,
the use of selected taxes on real property, eminent domain proceedings, public
capital investments, and co-management arrangements. These are discussed at
length in Chapter 7 below.
5.2 The tools to implement the CDP consist mainly of the use of financial
resources and fiscal authority of the LGU. Local governments are given the
powers and authority to raise the funds needed to undertake the above activities
including the levy of taxes, fees and charges, the use of their productive assets
and operation of municipal enterprises. LGUs are also entitled to a share in
national taxes as well as in the proceeds from the utilization of national wealth
and resources (Sec. 18 and 22, RA 7160). They can also secure financial grants
and donations in kind (Sec. 23) and create indebtedness in various modes such
as the build-operate-transfer (BOT) scheme wherein private capital is utilized to
fully finance the provision of certain public facilities like toll roads, public markets,
bus terminals, etc. (RA 6957, Sec. 302, RA 7160).
Despite the availability of fiscal powers to source out funds for their programs
and projects LGUs often find their resources inadequate for the requirements of
the services they must provide to their constituencies. Hence, LGUs must learn
to augment or complement public investments with desired private investments
so that the combined effect of these two investments is an increased capital build
up in the community that will redound to greater economic and social welfare of
the inhabitants. This is the rationale for the inclusion among the functions of
Local Development Councils of the formulation of private investment incentives
to promote the inflow of private investment capital (Sec. 109, a, 4). To this end,
the LDC can attract private investments in two ways, explicit and implicit.
Rationalizing the Local Planning System (RPS), 1st Edition 2008
viii
General Introduction
Explicitly the LDC may draft for the adoption of the Sanggunian a series of
private investment incentives ordinances that include, among others, fiscal
measures such as local tax breaks, reduced transaction costs through the setting
up of one-stop shops or elimination of graft and corruption, as well as direct
provision of infrastructure support like access roads, power and
telecommunication lines. Implicitly, and perhaps more effectively, private
investments can be attracted into a locality by making the area a very conducive
place to do business in. Important factors that contribute toward establishing an
attractive business climate are a stable peace and order condition, a high level of
social and cultural services, and the over-all livability of the local environment.
Moreover, planning should not be seen as a purely technical process in which only
the technically equipped can participate. In fact there is now a change in the way
planning should be understood, that is, from a view of planning as basically technical
to one that is essentially political. This can be gleaned from the change in the
composition of the Local Development Council. Under the earlier Local Government
Code of 1983 (Batas Pambansa 337) the LDC was composed of the Mayor/Governor
as head, and heads of offices and departments of the local government unit, as
members. The bulk of the membership then comprised the technical personnel of
various sectoral and functional agencies of government. In contrast, under the 1991
Local Government Code (RA 7160) the membership of the LDCs is predominantly
made up of politicians. The only non-politician members (but who may be equally
political in strategy and tactics) are those who represent non-governmental and
people’s organizations for whom one-fourth of the total membership is reserved.
Also the Congressman is represented in the LDC the better for him/her to integrate
his/her own projects or the development funds at his disposal into the plans and
programs of the LGU. More importantly, the Congressman’s membership in the LDCs
provides him/her opportunity to learn local issues that are of national concern which
must be addressed by no less than national policies and legislations.
Consistent with the foregoing ideas the composition and functions of the structure for
local planning are set out in the following sections.
The generic local planning structure consisting of the political and technical
components is depicted in Figure 1.1 below. The political component comprises
mainly the Local Sanggunian and the LDC. These two bodies lay down policy
guidelines and take decisions regarding the direction, character, and objectives of
local development. They do these in their capacity as elected representatives of the
people. In a very real sense, they are the true planners of the city, municipality or
province. The technical component on the other hand consists of non-elective
officials of the LGU, heads of national agencies operating in the area, and non-
government sectors. The Local Planning and Development Coordinator (LPDC)
serves as the technical arm and head of the LDC Secretariat. In that capacity the
LPDC “coordinates” the different programs of the LGU departments and the national
agencies operating locally. The LPDC also coordinates the different
sectoral/functional committees that provide detailed inputs to the comprehensive
multi-sectoral development plan and investment program.
POLITICAL TECHNICAL
Local Sanggunian Local Planning and Development Office
Local Development Council LGU Department Heads
Congressman’s Representative Local Special Bodies
Civil Society Organizations LDC Sectoral/Functional Committees
NGA Office Chiefs in the locality
Private Sector Representatives
It may be noted that the Local Special Bodies should be seen not as co-equal but
subordinate to, and supportive of the LDC, the latter being the “mother” of all
planning and programming bodies of the LGU. Therefore LSBs should form part of
the technical component of the local planning structure.
bookshelves of office executives. The main reason for this unfortunate reality
is that legislators rarely use the plan as a basis for enacting laws and
ordinances. After the mandatory adoption of the plan, the legislative bodies
believe that their role in planning and development is over. Local sanggunians
are known to enact ordinances and to pass resolutions appropriating funds for
projects that are not identified in the local development plan or investment
program. The new LGC (RA 7160) sought to change all that. The automatic
membership in the LDC of the appropriations committee chair of the
sanggunian ensures an effective linkage between the planning and the
legislative functions, and, by implication, lends political support to an otherwise
isolated technical exercise. With the present composition of the LDC, it can be
said that the local planning structure has a very strong political component
represented by the LDC and the local sanggunian.
The important role played by the local legislative body in planning can be
summarized in this definition of the comprehensive land use plan by Hugh
Pomeroy, as quoted in Babcock: “… a plan that makes provisions for all the
uses that the legislative body of that municipality decides are appropriate for
location somewhere in that municipality; it makes provisions for them at the
intensities of use that the legislative body deems to be appropriate; at the
locations that the legislative body deems to be appropriate.”1
4
See Sec. 112, RA 7160
Rationalizing the Local Planning System (RPS), 1st Edition 2008 4
Chapter 1 The Local Planning Structure
Primary Functions
LDC:
Formulate development plans and policies;
LDC Formulate public investment programs;
In Plenary Appraise and prioritize programs and projects;
Formulate investment incentives;
Coordinate, monitor and evaluate implementation
of development programs and projects.
Barangay Development Councils:
Mobilize people’s participation in local development
functions;
Prepare barangay development plans;
Executive Monitor and evaluate implementation of national or
Committee local programs and projects.
Executive Committee:
Represent the LDC when it is not in session;
Ensure that the LDC decisions are faithfully carried
out and act on matters needing immediate
attention by the LDC;
Formulate plans, policies and programs based on
Secretariat principles and priorities laid out by LDC.
Secretariat:
Provide technical support to the LDC;
Document proceedings;
Prepare reports;
Other support functions as may be necessary.
Sectoral or Functional Committee:
Assist the LDC in the performance of its functions;
Sectoral or Functional Provide the LDC with data and information
Committees essential to the formulation of plans, programs and
activities;
Social Define sectoral or functional objectives, set targets
Economic and identify programs, projects and activities;
Infrastructure Collate and analyze data and conduct studies;
Conduct public hearings on sectoral planning,
Environment and
projects and activities;
Natural Monitor and evaluate programs and projects; and
Resources Perform functions assigned by the LDC.
Institutional
The institutional structure of local planning and development is spelled out in Title
Six, Sections 106-115 of the Local Government Code. The principal function of
this planning structure is to initiate the formulation of the “comprehensive multi-
sectoral development plan” for approval by the provincial, city, municipal, or
barangay level legislative council. The composition, functions, relationships,
activities and other details about the Local Development Council (LDC) as the
planning body of each LGU are:5 (See Box 2 and Box 3.)
1) Composition
(1) Provincial
The provincial development council shall be headed by the governor and
shall be composed of the following members:
5
As summarized in Article 182, Rule XXIII of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7160.
Rationalizing the Local Planning System (RPS), 1st Edition 2008 8
Chapter 1 The Local Planning Structure
(2) City/Municipal
The city or municipal development council shall be headed by the mayor
and shall be composed of the following members:
(3) Barangay
The barangay development council shall be headed by the punong
barangay and shall be composed of the following members:
2) Representation of NGOs
Within a period of sixty (60) days from the organization of LDCs, NGOs shall
choose from among themselves their representatives to said LDCs. The
sanggunian concerned shall accredit NGOs.
3) Functions of LDCs
4) Meetings
The LDCs shall meet at least once every six (6) months or as often as may be
necessary.
1) Composition
a. Ensure that the decisions of the LDC are faithfully carried out and
implemented;
b. Act on matters that need immediate attention and action of the LDC;
d. Take final action on matters that may be authorized by the LDC except
the approval of local development plans and annual investment plans.
3) Meetings. The executive committee shall hold its meetings at least once a
month. Special meetings may be called by the chairman or by a majority of
its members.
1) Organization
The LDCs may form sectoral or functional committees to assist them in the
performance of their functions. Each member of the LDC shall, as far as
practicable, participate in at least one sectoral or functional committee.
Also, it is highly desirable for each Sanggunian member to select at least
2) Functions
a. Provide the LDC with data and information essential to the formulation
of plans, programs, and activities;
1.2.4 Secretariat
1) Organization
In the case of large and high-income cities that can afford to hire adequate
number of personnel in their local planning offices, a suggested structure of
the Local Planning and Development Coordinator’s Office that combines
functional and sectoral concerns is given below. (See Figure 1.2)
2) Functions
3) Grouping of Functions
The functions of the LPDO may be grouped into the following subjects
corresponding to the major subdivisions of the planning process:
Except for function e above, the other functions of the LPDO are covered
by the functions of the Sectoral Committees within the LDC. It is obvious
that the LPDO needs to align its internal organizational set-up. In terms of
staff capabilities, two generic abilities must be developed by the LPDO
staff: 1) familiarity with all aspects and stages of the planning process; and
2) ability to coordinate activities of the different sectoral committees and
integrate their outputs.
Most local planning and development offices have inadequate staff with
which to organize a planning structure that remotely approximates the full-
blown structure described above. But those LGUs that have the capability
are strongly encouraged to reorganize their LPDOs accordingly. Others
can do it gradually, making use of such stop-gap measures as matrix
organization, inter-office secondment of personnel, and the like. It must be
understood that the functions listed above are the minimum. Having little
resources is not an excuse for not performing those functions.
Probably the most ample avenue for NGO/PO participation in local planning
and development is the allocation to non-governmental organizations of one-
fourth of the total membership of the Local Development Council. Entry,
however, is not open to all POs/NGOs. They have to go through an
accreditation procedure. Those that gain accreditation get to enjoy access to
other local special bodies like the local bids and awards committee, the local
health board, and selected functional and sectoral committees.
Those that are not favored with formal membership in the LDC however, do
still have opportunities for participation, that is, through the sectoral
committees. By actively participating in sectoral planning and programming
activities, POs/NGOs may in fact equalize representation with the government
sector and to that extent influence public policies.