USUFRUCT
8.6.7 Coordination with other government institutions
Administrators of both sites admitted having encountered coordination difficulties with regulatory agencies such as DENR, RD, and the BIR. But this did not hinder Taguig from implementing its social housing projects. The city made it a point to put everything in writing, and to have all transactions and agreements properly documented. The Mayor also personally talked with the concerned offices regarding project concerns. 8.7 Summary
“
Usufruct has turned out to be a viable approach to providing incity tenure to poor people.
�
Usufruct is a peculiar property right in which beneficiaries are entitled to enjoy nearly all rights of ownership, except the right to have a legal title and to alienate, transfer or dispose property. It has turned out to be a viable approach to providing in-city tenure to poor people. Two municipalities in Metro Manila, Taguig and Muntinlupa, have applied the usufruct arrangement to respond to the housing needs of their poor constituents. As of 2009, the city government of Taguig provided housing units in medium-rise buildings to 204 families, in partnership with the NGO, Habitat for Humanity Philippines. In order to retain the city’s ownership of the land, the project entered into a usufruct arrangement with HFHP which constructed the residential buildings and provided financing to the beneficiaries. Meanwhile, in Muntinlupa, the National Housing Authority utilized a usufruct approach on a proclaimed land for a largescale resettlement project in Southville 3 benefiting 7,000 informal settler families displaced from the rights-of-way of the South-Rail Linkage Project and from various areas of the New Bilibid Prison site. Beneficiaries were provided residential units measuring 20-32 square meters which they could occupy for 50 years. The units were priced from Php 75,000 (rowhouses in Southville 3, Muntinlupa) to Php 180,000 (mediumrise housing units in Taguig), payable in 15-30 years. The price is relatively cheaper compared to other socialized housing products since land was not included in the cost. Such repayment rules and other terms were contained in legally binding documents such as Memoranda of Agreement, Usufruct agreements and Contracts to Sell among the concerned parties. Resistance on the part of the beneficiaries was initially experienced as no land title would be awarded. Moreover, the maximization of land in areas under usufruct made them live in densely populated residential structures that required them to make adjustments in their way of living. However, these initial hesitations were superseded by acceptance through persuasion and the demonstration of the first successful project. Community organizations were also formed (or retained) to function mainly as negotiators and amortization-collecting bodies protecting the overall welfare of fellow community members. The accomplishments that this approach has achieved can be credited to the partnerships forged between project administrators and government and private institutions.
79