Inside Cityhall

CITY STRATEGY AND GOVERNANCE:
THE NAGA CITY MODEL

The Philippines is widely recognized to be in the forefront of “localization.” This is pursuant to the mandate of our present Constitution, which has embraced local autonomy and decentralization as a development strategy.

Interestingly, the World Bank agrees with this direction. In its World Development Report, it said “localization” and the new global economy could either revolutionize prospects for economic and human development or lead to increased political chaos, strife and suffering.”

Over the last 14 years, Naga City is proud to have made significant strides in this area, some of them even before Congress enacted the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC), the enabling law for the “localization” policy. This paper presents our experience on strategic planning and governance at the city level.

A riverine city in southern Luzon, Naga is located in the province of Camarines Sur, between 13 to 14° North Latitude and 123 to 124° East Longitude. It is about 450 kms south of Manila and about 100 kms north of Legazpi City, the government center of the Bicol region—one of the country’s 16 administrative regions.

As a city, Naga is one of the country’s oldest. Originally called Ciudad de Nueva Caceres, it was one of the five cities created by royal Spanish decree in the late 16th century.

The “Heart of Bicol,” Naga has established itself as the religious, educational and business center of Bicol. Since the Spanish era, the city has served as seat of the Archdiocese of Nueva Caceres which oversees the Roman Catholic hierarchy of the whole region.

It is home to two of the country’s oldest colleges—the Holy Rosary Minor Seminary founded in 1793 and Colegio de Sta. Isabel, the first normal school for women in the Orient, founded in 1868.

Naga is not a big city. Of the 114 Philippine cities, it is the 63rd largest in terms of land area and 53rd in terms of population. Its 84.48 square kilometer territory pales in comparison with Davao and Puerto Princesa whose land area both exceed 2,000 square kilometers. Naga has a population of only 137,000.

Naga is not a port city. It is landlocked. It does not have direct access to the sea and is, therefore, at a disadvantage compared to other port cities such as Manila, Cebu, Davao, Iloilo and General Santos.

Naga is not centrally-located. It is around 450 kilometers away from Manila and Cebu. As one person who accessed our web page noted, Naga cannot even claim to be the center of Bicol as it is not a regional government center. The city’s distance from our two primary urban centers puts Naga at a disadvantage business-wise. It is also a handicap in a highly capital-focused government system.

Naga is, therefore, just a typical Philippine rural city— one of those faceless, ordinary urban centers dotting the countryside.

These limitations notwithstanding, Naga has made a name for itself in the area of local governance.

It is a recognized center of local innovations. Over the years, Naga has built a reputation for being a model local government unit, and a center for innovations in local governance.

This is borne out by more than 40 national and international recognition accorded to Naga by various award-giving bodies. Among these is the 1998 Dubai International Award for having one of the Top 10 Best Practices worldwide.

In November 1999, it was cited by Asiaweek as one of four most improved cities in Asia in recognition of its participative processes, strong democratic traditions and commitment to excellence.

It is a livable city. Naga, likewise, is considered one of the Philippines’ most livable cities, says Interface, the newsmagazine of the League of Cities of the Philippines.

It has a strong non-government sector. Another outstanding feature of Naga is the presence of a strong non-government sector, in the form of civic, business and people’s organizations.

It took advantage of local autonomy. Finally, the state policy to promote local autonomy and decentralization has helped Naga mainly because it has helped itself, crafting a number of innovations that even antedated the 1991 Local Government Code.

The Naga that we have today did not happen overnight; along the way, we had to overcome formidable challenges that helped shape much of our development strategies.

When I ran for mayor in 1987, my campaign was anchored on a vision of transformation, which was impelled by results of a situational analysis my core staff and I did. Whoever wins had to contend with the following problems:

Social. The government’s tight financial position spawned a vicious cycle that impacted negatively on service delivery.

Combined, these socioeconomic problems led to the loss of faith and confidence of the people in their local government.

In overcoming the challenges described above, my administration was helped by a participative visioning process that crystallized the aspirations of our people, in the process helping build stakeholdership across society.

Just as Naga was not built in a day, the local visioning process did not come about overnight. It evolved over time, building on individual and institutional management capabilities enhanced by technical assistance from international development agencies. Ultimately, it is the product of our commitment to improve government as a means of improving the city.

As it evolved, the local visioning process can now be summarized in Naga’s governance model.

At its simplest, sustainability is a quality that can been associated with good urban governance. This type of governance therefore can be represented by a triangle, which is the most stable of all geometric shapes.

A development perspective is the philosophy that anchors all development efforts and seeks to mainstream all sectors of society in accepting their role in local development. In the model, it is at the apex of the triangle because it is a function of leadership which the local administration must provide.

In Naga, we have embraced the concept of “growth with equity” as our core philosophy. This seeks to promote economic development (growth) and to sustain the implementation of pro-poor (equity-building or social development) projects to, ultimately, build prosperity for the community at large. We believe that growth and prosperity must be tempered by an enlightened perception of the poor, whose upliftment is an end to governance.

Growth and equity-building can feed off each other. Economic growth provides the resources and sustains the implementation of social development programs. Equity projects, on the other hand, lead to a better quality of life, a better city, that ultimately, fuels further growth. All of this is embodied in our current battlecry—an maogmang lugar or “a happy place”.

The city has pursued a policy of continuing engagement in partnerships. These are vehicles that enable the city to tap community resources for priority undertakings, in the process multiplying its capacity and enabling it to overcome resource constraints that usually hamper government.

The city’s partnership mechanisms can be between the local government unit (LGU) and other community groups or government agencies, or between the LGU and individuals. They can be for growth programs or equity-building strategies. They may also be government-initiated or private sector/community-led.

These are mechanisms that ensure inclusion of individuals and the community in government decision-making. They promote long-term sustainability by generating broad-based stakeholdership and community ownership over local undertakings.

Given Naga’s problems in 1988, the leadership believed that the extent of its success was contingent on how the people responded to its initiatives. The response of various constituencies—be it the businessman, the market stallholder, the squatter, the farmer or the regular household—depends on how receptive the administration was to their participation in the decision making process. Instead of confining deliberation on local government matters within a select group of elected officials, the leadership encouraged and formalized mechanisms to enhance constituency participation.

While partnerships, for operational and practical reasons, more often than not occur between institutions and organized groups, participatory mechanisms give all sectors of the community—including the marginalized-- a voice in government. It mainstreams and engages them in governance.

Naga treats all constituents as both partner and beneficiary. Naga’s preeminent status today is more of a geometric than arithmetic progression. What it is now is not only the sum total of what its people has become; rather, it is the product of what its people have contributed to development.

Naga’s policy of actively engaging in partnerships and encouraging participation in governance, focused on a progressive development perspective, has led to several innovations. Examples of the most significant accomplishments are:

From 1988, the city has adopted several strategies to open up business opportunities and decongest the old Central Business District (CBD). On an individual or group basis, the business community has been an invaluable partner in, as well as a beneficiary of, these efforts. Some of the most notable strategies are:

This was a strategy for expanding the CBD without infrastructure support but only through the local government’s authority to redirect and control growth using its police and regulatory powers. After lengthy deliberations, especially with the private community, all bus and jeepney terminals were relocated outside the CBD. These were operated by interested private sector partners.

The pedestrian traffic created by the terminals perked up economic activities at the peripheries of the CBD. The commercial area effectively expanded by a third. The strategy also eased traffic flow within the CBD, restoring order, life and vitality to the city’s prime commercial hub.

Much of city life, over the past four (4) decades, has revolved around the CBD. At the heart of the district is the Naga City Supermarket, once Asia’s largest. To disperse development to other areas, the city government encouraged the operation of district or satellite markets.

District markets are generally owned and operated by local governments. Instead of using government resources, however, the city decided to involve the private sector. As part of the Naga Local Initiatives for Economic Activities and Partnerships (LEAPS) program, businessmen were encouraged to construct and operate satellite markets in strategic areas within the city, following a set of government requirements.

There are now five (5) privately-owned district markets, attracting commercial development at their peripheries.

At no cost to the city government, this strategy created a new business corridor out of a kilometer-long eyesore—the swampy Philippine National Railways (PNR) property along the railtracks and Panganiban Drive which, from the east, serves as the main thoroughfare leading to the CBD.

Utilizing its zoning authority and the promise of reasonable return to the owner, the PNR, the city government leased and sub-leased the abandoned portion of the right-of-way. Interested developers were required to conform to the city’s site development plan which was conceived in partnership with the private sector. Under a Build-Operate-Lease arrangement, and with the national government and the business community as partners, a new commercial-cum-beautification project came to life.

Another strategy for commercial district expansion, CBD-II is a 27-hectare area developed by Ruby Shelter Builders and Development Corporation. Compared to the UTTMP and the Panganiban Upgrading Project which moved growth to other areas at the periphery of the old CBD, CBD-II is an effort to create another distinct commercial area. The UTTMP and the Panganiban project are government-led partnerships. On the other hand, the CBD-II project is an example of a partnership with the private sector at the helm.

CBD-II is a private development with the local government being tapped to provide the growth stimulus. Using the learnings from the UTTMP, the city established an integrated bus terminal on a lot donated by Ruby Shelter. The terminal is one of the anchors of CBD-II development. City Hall is also constructing a sports complex on another donated lot. Furthermore, it built some of the main arteries in the area. All of these projects were approved by Nagueños in a local referendum.

The private sector and the local government are continuing to mutually benefit from this project. The city was able to acquire land that it uses for public facilities. The private sector, on the other hand, was able to expand commercial activities and use the facilities constructed by the city as “anchors” for development.

Dubbed as Naga’s transport exchange, CBD-II is now host to other facilities such as two privately-owned integrated jeepney terminals servicing two-thirds of all inter-municipality PUJs. Establishments supporting and catering to the market created by these facilities have sprouted within the area. CBD-II has resulted in a 100% expansion of the commercial district. It has been able to stabilize the previously exorbitant prices of commercial space in Naga.

This is a multi-billion property development project at the southwestern portion of Naga. The development covers approximately 90 hectares. It was inaugurated early last year and is in partnership with one of the country’s leading property development conglomerates. It will be anchored on the construction of a new four-lane diversion highway that opens up the entire area to future development. The private sector will shoulder the cost of road construction. The city government, on the other hand, will take care of right-of-way problems.

Equity programs are targeted at the poor to ensure that they benefit from the fruits of development. They are service delivery mechanisms for fulfilling the promise of development for all— particularly the poorest sectors of society— which every leadership aspires to. Delivery of these services are generally, in partnership with non-government organizations and the community. These include:

Naga’s multi-awarded urban poor program is one of the most successful of its kind in the Philippines. Built around the concept of tripartism— where government, private landowners and urban poor associations work together in finding mutually acceptable solutions to tenurial issues— we have generated a number of innovative approaches to the perennial problem of squatting and urban blight.

The program has already benefited 6,940 urban poor households, which represents 27 percent of the entire population of the city. This year, we are introducing a housing component. Instead of just providing a relocation site, the program will provide relocated families with a house and lot to settle in. This will be piloted at the CBD-II Resettlement area and will cover 127 families. The United Architects of the Philippines (UAP) is working on model houses.

Through Kaantabay sa Kauswagan, the city helps the poor acquire capital (land) over time. Our livelihood program allows them to develop capability and build capital now. This program seeks to augment the incomes of target clients— defined as those households whose average monthly income is below P 15,000.00. Among the program components are micro-lending, training and marketing assistance.

The success of the program hinges on partnerships with cooperatives and people’s organizations, business associations and government agencies.

The city has made significant strides in health, nutrition, and emergency assistance. Partnerships have allowed us to implement a more holistic approach to these programs.

Naga’s Population and Nutrition office is a Hall of Fame awardee, having received the Philippine Nutrition Honor Award from 1998 to 2000. In 1999, we were able to reduce the number of malnourished children to 6.9% of the total pre-school population. In 2001, this further went down to 5.3%. For other cities, the pre-school children malnutrition rate stands at 10 to 15%. This was made possible by our Nutri-Ataman and Nutri-Nanay initiatives. Previously, these programs were only able to provide feeding for third degree malnourished children and pregnant mothers. In partnership with the Rotary Club of Naga and the provincial chapter of the Philippine Pediatric Society, we have been able to move to total rehabilitation. The city continues to provide milk and food. But these are coupled with free pre-natal check-up and medical consultation; and free vitamins and medicine provided by our private sector partners.

Emergency Rescue Naga (ERN) is a showcase of a successful community resource mobilization effort, combining the resources of the city government, other government agencies and private sector institutions. ERN provides the following round-the-clock services:

Within the city proper, ERN is able to respond to disasters and emergencies within three (3) to five (5) minutes. For the farthest barangay, the maximum response time is 30 minutes.

Along with other private sector groups, the business community contributes volunteers, personnel and equipment to the program.

We have been able to introduce several educational interventions with the help of the private sector. For instance, the Ayala Foundation recently inaugurated its Internet project in Naga. This project provides Internet access for all public high schools within the city. The Ayala Foundation shouldered equipment costs while the city government will assume payment for schools’ connections with ISPs. This year, we started a program to transform five (5) of our six (6) public high schools to specialized secondary schools. The areas of specialization are information-technology, entrepreneurship and technical-vocational education. The Naga City Science High School will introduce an IT-oriented curriculum; and we will have WRI Computer College as a partner. The Filipino-Chinese Chamber continues to build public school-buildings.

The barangay and concerned NGOs help us in running our Schools for Early Education and Development, and the HELP Learning Center—designed for children with disabilities.

“Cleaner air, cleaner river, cleaner city” is our current environmental battlecry. Available data from the City Environment and Natural Resources Office (ENRO) confirm significant improvements in air and water quality, on top of a cleaner urban environment obtaining in Naga. The air quality index for suspended particles readings during the same period for the years 2000 and 2001 (76.91 ug/NCM and 74.72 ug/NCM respectively) showed results within the range classified as Good (the highest rating). Comparative water quality readings taken along the Naga River from 1999 to 2001 provided similar results.

The Ladies in Green and other community organizations are partners in our Salvar Salog (Save the River) program. The Isarog Garden Society-- composed of local entrepreneurs and hobbyists-- constructed, operates and maintains the Naga City Ecology Park, a five-hectare enclave owned by the city government.

As emphasized in our governance model, where we treat the various sectors in Naga as both partner and beneficiary, partnership systems should be coupled with participatory mechanisms that allow involvement in government decision-making. Partnerships feed off participation as the latter builds ownership of local initiatives. It allows more project partnerships to flourish as various sectors “get into the act,” so to speak.

Previously, our participatory mechanisms usually involved organizations and aggrupations in government-initiated bodies. We have a current program to involve the ordinary Nagueño in governance.

The presence of a vibrant NGO-PO community is one of the reasons behind Naga’s success. Unlike other local government units which seem to have an institutional aversion to NGOs, we tried hard to breathe life to the provisions of the 1991 Local Government Code promoting participation by and partnerships with private and community-based organizations. Naga was among the first LGUs to implement the Code’s provisions on NGO accreditation. During its first run in 1993, we accredited close to 80 organizations.

In 1997, we took the concept of NGO participation a step further through a landmark legislation known as the “Empowerment Ordinance of the City of Naga”. A “Naga City People’s Council” (NCPC) composed of all accredited business, non-government and people’s organizations within the city was established. This Council:

By including representatives of the People’s Council in local special bodies and all Sanggunian committees, we are able to bring down to the community the issues faced by and the development thrusts of the city. This opens up doors for initiatives where the resources and expertise of the community and the private sector are put to use.

Various groups and organizations are involved in other city policy-making bodies. The urban poor is part of the Housing Board. NGOs and community organizations are active members of the Integrated Livelihood Management Council (ILMC)— which oversees our livelihood program. 50% of the membership of the Naga City Investment Board (NCIB) which is tasked with administering the Investment Incentives Code of the city comes from the private sector. The same is true for the Naga City Tourism Council and the Environment Management Council.

Under the auspices of city government-initiated consultative mechanisms dubbed as Naga SPEED (which stands for Socialized Program for Empowerment and Economic Development), the local administration regularly conducts dialogs and consultations with various sectors both at the city and village levels, essentially mainstreaming them in local governance.

In setting up multi-level consultation mechanisms, Naga pioneered the holding of the first and only citywide referendum in the Philippines on August 6, 1993. In the process, it demonstrated that direct participation even at this scale works, especially in deciding development issues with long-term impact on the city.

I-governance is the latest city mechanism to enhance citizen involvement in governance. Through information openness, it seeks to improve transparency and open up wider avenues for dialog, thus, sustaining the city’s innovations.

The program has two components—the city’s website and a Citizens’ Charter. The website is complemented by the Ayala-funded Project ACCESS which makes available to all public high schools information on the web. At the barangay level, the city and the different barangay councils are endeavoring to establish cyber stations at the barangay halls. For the general public, a Cyber Kiosk sa Centro is being set-up at the CBD. The Charter is a guidebook on key city government services which complements the website by providing, in printed form, information on procedures, response times and accountable persons. It is designed for distribution at the household level.

Our experience has shown that partnership systems and mechanisms enable local initiatives to access community resources (particularly the private sector), thereby augmenting the city’s resources.
The beauty of partnerships is that it allows involved parties to attain mutually beneficial objectives even with minimum individual resources. Thus, partnerships multiply the local government’s internal capability, opening doors to opportunities that are otherwise beyond our own resources to pursue and implement. In short, they enable a local authority to do more with less.

In trying to forge functional partnerships, we have identified three operating principles:

1. Role definition. By properly defining and delineating roles of each partner within the partnership, responsibilities and accountabilities are clarified, and clear, unambiguous rules of engagement can be set. This prevents potential conflicts and other operational problems.

2. Resource complementation. A partnership is a venue for resource pooling, and more. It should attain synergy—ensuring that the total is greater than the sum of its parts. A good partner, therefore, must bring resources that others do not have into the partnership.

3. Specialization. This is predicated on marked inefficiencies that arise from the “do-it-all” approach that spawned big governments and unwieldy bureaucracies. In such a situation, the strategic response is to take the opposite direction and move towards one’s core competencies. Or specialize, to put it simply.

Participatory mechanisms allow partnerships to flourish. Both are key components of our governance model. Any partnership must always take the partners’ interests into account. Participation allows these interests to surface. The resulting partnership systems are stronger for parties understand what is at stake for them.

A limiting factor to participatory mechanisms, however, arises from their very nature. At the operational and practical level, participation has to occur between institutions and organized groups, resulting often to the exclusion of individuals and the community at large, reducing them to a spectator’s role in governance processes.

There is a need for stronger participation at the level of individual citizens. Naga is currently trying to address this need through its I-Governance Program.

Various studies show that Naga is now among the country’s fastest-growing economies with an annual growth rate of 6.5%. This is a big jump over 1988. The city now has:

What Naga is now is a result of a community effort. It is an outcome of a people’s—including the marginalized-- resolve to get behind a common development vision, work together and be involved in setting directions for the city.