OPINION: When Land Is Given Away, So Is The Future

Zamboanga Sibugay signs partnerships with national agencies to strengthen public safety, expand housing access, protect OFWs, and preserve indigenous livelihoods under Governor Ann Hofer.

Spread the News

Vice Mayor Amy Olegarioโ€™s words during the Sangguniang Bayan deliberation were striking not because they were dramatic, but because they were restrained.

โ€œBut since you are in the majority, I would like to manifest my opposition to the move to grant the request of the provincial government.โ€

It was a quiet dissent โ€” and precisely for that reason, it deserves to be taken seriously.

The decision of the Sangguniang Bayan of Ipil to donate a 15-hectare parcel of municipally owned land near the provincial capitol to the Zamboanga Sibugay provincial government may appear, on the surface, as a routine act of intergovernmental cooperation.

But beneath it lies a much bigger question: What kind of future does Ipil want for itself?

Land is not excess โ€” it is leverage

For towns aspiring for cityhood, land is not surplus property waiting to be disposed of. It is leverage. It is power. It is possibility.

Public land is what allows cities to plan โ€” not just react. It is where future public markets can rise, where transport terminals can be built, where hospitals, schools, housing projects, and government centers can stand without being hostage to private speculation or exorbitant land prices.

Once land is donated, that leverage is gone.

The argument that the land will be used for โ€œdevelopmentโ€ is not, by itself, sufficient. Development for whom? On whose terms? And at what cost to the host municipality?

Vice Mayor Olegarioโ€™s warning cuts to the heart of the issue: Ipil is vying for cityhood. Cities are not built on goodwill alone. They are built on assets โ€” and land is among the most critical.

A pattern worth questioning

This is not the first time Ipil has donated land to the provincial government. That fact alone should have triggered a more cautious, strategic discussion.

Repeated land donations raise uncomfortable but necessary questions: Is the municipality slowly hollowing out its own capacity to plan for growth? Are long-term interests being sacrificed for short-term political convenience? And who ultimately benefits when municipally owned land changes hands?

These are not anti-province questions. They are pro-Ipil questions.

Intergovernmental cooperation is important, but cooperation should not mean surrender โ€” especially when the asset being surrendered is finite and irreplaceable.

Majority rule, minority wisdom

Councilor Joel Ebolโ€™s remark โ€” โ€œThereโ€™s nothing more we can do except to grant the donation of the landโ€ โ€” reflects a troubling reality in local governance: that decisions of long-term consequence are sometimes reduced to numbers, not judgment.

Majority rule is a pillar of democracy. But history is replete with majorities that made decisions later generations would regret.

Vice Mayor Olegarioโ€™s opposition, even in the face of an assured outcome, represents something often missing in local politics: institutional memory and future-oriented thinking. Dissent, when grounded in public interest, is not obstruction. It is stewardship.

Cityhood is more than a label

Ipilโ€™s push for cityhood is not just about status. It is about capacity โ€” the capacity to govern, to plan, to provide services, and to shape its own destiny.

A land-poor city is a city that must constantly negotiate from a position of weakness. It becomes dependent on private developers, constrained by limited options, and vulnerable to unplanned growth.

Urban planners have long warned that cities that fail to secure land early end up paying a far higher price later โ€” economically, socially, and politically.

The question that lingers

The land donation has been approved. That is now a fact.

But the larger question remains unresolved: Are Ipilโ€™s leaders thinking far enough ahead?

Vice Mayor Olegarioโ€™s opposition may not have stopped the donation, but it placed an important marker in the public record โ€” a reminder that governance is not only about what can be approved today, but about what must be protected for tomorrow.

Because when land is given away too easily, it is not just property that is lost.

It is the future bargaining power of a city yet to be born.

About The Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *