LET’S HAVE MORE PUBLIC RENTAL HOUSING

LET’S HAVE MORE PUBLIC RENTAL HOUSING My dear countrymen, when I was living in New York City many years ago, I was able to observe how the city government was able to turn a problem into an opportunity and let me tell you why. Just like in the Philippines and in many other countries, there was a housing backlog in that city which seemed hopeless and never ending at that time. Fortunately, however, for one reason or another, some former city officials thought about the public rental housing strategy, and the rest is history. From being a big problem in New York City, public housing became an opportunity because it became one of the city’s sources of revenue. The public rental housing business of the city (yes it became a business) not only was self-sustaining, it also became self-generating because it was able to earn additional income that was needed to finance the city’s other projects. But how can we do that in the Philippines? How can we convert a public problem into a public opportunity? How can we convert a burden into an opportunity? In theory, Public and Private Partnership (PPP) is project funding approach that includes the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) scheme. PPP is the broader term that includes many types of collaborations between the public and private sectors. BOT is simply a specific type of PPP. In general, PPP can cover a wide range of projects, including public transportation, public parks, public hospitals and many more. There are many applicable types of revenue models, but it usually involves the payment of user fees or tariffs, government payments or a combination of both. Risks are shared between the two parties, depending on the pre-arranged agreements. Under the BOT scheme, a private company finances, builds and operates a project for a specified period, and after that period, the ownership of the project is transferred to the public sector. BOT is generally used for major infrastructure projects such as highways, power generation and water systems. The revenue model is similar, also usually by way of fees or revenues generated prior to the transfer. The private company bears most of the risk during the period of operation (prior to the transfer). Supposedly, there is no need for the government to go into a BOT scheme if it is fully capable of building and operating a project by itself. It could however be argued that the government may be capable of building a project but may not be capable of operating it. or it could be the other way around, the government may not be capable of building a project, but it could be capable of operating it. The latter argument could be the reason why the government could still go into a property management contract, even after the ownership is transferred. In the case of public housing for rental projects, I think that the most ideal approach is a PPP project using a BOT scheme, but there should be a separate property management contract given to the developer, after the project ownership is transferred. The management contract may be subjected to public bidding in accordance with procurement laws. What is important is that our citizens who could not yet afford to buy their houses could rent in the meantime. Your friend, IKE SENERES/11-16-2024/visit my blog senseneres.blogspot.com