MCB computation based on dubious ordinance (2)

In a previous article, we presented the position paper of the civil society organizations. They claimed that the computation adopted by the Marawi Compensation Board (MCB) was based on an illegal ordinance. There was a lack of publication of the ordinance and other requirements sine qua non to enact a measure into law. This made Sangguniang Panlalawigan Ordinance No. 02, series of 2021 of Lanao del Sur void ab initio, nonexistent, and it should not have been the basis upon which the MCB based its computations.

But more defects in the ordinance surfaced. The position paper again quoted, “Provincial Assessment has not Undergone the Mandatory Public Hearing.”

Republic Act (RA) 7160, Section 187 provides for a “Procedure for Approval and Effectivity of Tax Ordinances and Revenue Measures; Mandatory Public Hearings. (Before) the approval of local tax ordinances and revenue measures public hearings shall be conducted for the purpose prior to the enactment thereof...” Yet nowhere in the ordinance was it expressed that a public hearing was conducted for the purpose of submitting to the public a provincial assessment (Ordinance No. 2, series of 2021) on the Schedule of Fair Market Values to comply with the requirement of the law.

The same public hearing requirement is repeated in the Department of Finance Manual on Real Property Appraisal and Assessment Operations, where Article III, Section 5 C states: “C. ...The procedure for approval of local tax ordinances and revenue measures shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 187 of RA 7160, provided that public hearings shall be conducted for the purpose prior to the enactment thereof.”

Simply stated, the ordinance is deemed to have not been enacted because it did not comply with the mandatory public hearing requirement. The provincial assessor’s adoption in toto of the prepared Schedule of Fair Market Value is insufficient.

Another argument posited by the position paper is that the “Provincial Assessor has no Jurisdiction over the City of Marawi.”

Pursuant to Commonwealth Act No. 592, as amended by Republic Act 1552 (15 June 1956), Marawi was declared a Chartered City. Thus, the proceeds from its real property tax collections shall be for the account only of the city and its component barangays. The province of Lanao del Sur, therefore, shall be excluded therefrom. This is in accordance with Section 271 of the Local Government Code, to wit:

“Section 271. Distribution of Proceeds — The proceeds of the basic real property tax, including interest thereon, and proceeds from the use, lease or disposition, sale, or redemption of property acquired at a public auction in accordance with the provisions of this Title by the province or city or a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area shall be distributed as follows:

(b) In the case of cities:

(1) Seventy percent shall accrue to the general fund of the city; and

(2) Thirty percent shall be distributed among the component barangays of the cities...”

From the foregoing, it is clear that the province of Lanao del Sur is not entitled to a share in the real property tax collections of the Chartered City of Marawi. Thus, by analogy, the Provincial Assessor has no jurisdiction over the City of Marawi.

Therefore, the relevant data for the Schedule of Fair Market Values should originate from the Marawi City Assessor, not the Provincial Assessor.

The Department of Budget Management has clarified this analysis in its Legal Opinion No. L-B-2002-05, where it declared in the case of the City of Calamba versus the Provincial Government of Laguna that “pursuant to Section 271 of the Local Government Code, upon ratification of the creation of the City of Calamba, the Provincial Government of Laguna is no longer entitled to the proceeds from basic real property taxes collected by the City.”

More in next columns.

amb_mac_lanto@yahoo.com