The Cebu City Council, during its regular session on December 11, upheld the commercial reclassification of the Carbon Public Market, with only four councilors voting for its revocation. | Screengrab from Sangguniang Panlungsod Cebu City – Secretariat/Facebook Live
CEBU CITY, Philippines — The Cebu City Council has upheld the commercial zoning of the hawker area at the Carbon Public Market, rejecting calls to revoke its reclassification despite strong opposition from vendors and allegations of procedural lapses.
During its regular session on December 11, the council voted down a motion by Councilor Nestor Archival Sr. to rescind an earlier resolution that reclassified the Warwick Barracks area from institutional to commercial land use.
The reclassification is central to the city’s joint venture agreement (JVA) with Cebu2World Development Inc., a subsidiary of Megawide Construction Corporation, for the redevelopment of the Carbon Market.
The session attracted members of various vendors’ organizations, many of whom attended to voice their opposition, while others staged protests at Plaza Sugbo.
Vendors argued that the reclassification would pave the way for commercialization, potentially jeopardizing their livelihoods and transforming Carbon from a traditional public market into a privatized space favoring large corporations.
READ:
Cebu vendors resist Carbon Market reclassification to commercial
Carbon market vendors: P20 daily to help fund market improvements
Carbon Market plans to go ‘zero-waste’
In a position paper, Erwin Goc-ong, president of the Carbon Market Vendors Development Cooperative (CEMVEDCO), urged the council to prioritize the welfare of small vendors over corporate interests. He expressed fears of rising rental rates and diminished incomes, warning that the move could replicate the alleged failures of similar public-private partnerships elsewhere.
Archival, who had seconded the original reclassification resolution in November, filed the motion to revoke it after uncovering what he described as “new information.” He claimed that no proper public hearing was conducted before the zoning board approved the application and raised concerns about compliance with procedural requirements.
“We were made to understand that everything had been complied with. But it’s very clear now that it has not been,” Archival said during the session. He also highlighted unresolved concerns about the preservation of Freedom Park, a stipulation in the JVA that he alleged remains unclear in the redevelopment plan.
However, Councilor Jocelyn Pesquera rebutted Archival’s claims, stating that minutes from previous discussions recorded no objections to the reclassification. She also noted that Archival had supported the resolution before raising concerns.
Councilor Joel Garganera asserted that proper procedures were followed and that vendors’ welfare was considered, while Councilor Philip Zafra defended the reclassification as a necessary technical adjustment to align the area’s designation with its actual use as a market. Zafra assured vendors that the council would continue to protect their interests and prevent any excessive increases in rental fees.
Vendor representatives have consistently argued that the reclassification process was rushed and lacked meaningful consultation. During an executive session on November 28, they revealed that the Barangay Clearance cited in the zoning board’s resolution had not gone through the proper process. This claim was corroborated by Barangay Ermita Councilor Vivian Ando, who confirmed the absence of a barangay resolution.
The City Planning and Development Office (CPDO) has yet to issue a locational clearance for the project, further fueling doubts about the legality of the reclassification. Architect Anna Ruby King of the CPDO acknowledged the pending clearance during the session.
Adding to the controversy is a pending court case seeking to nullify the JVA between the city and Cebu2World. Vendors have also called attention to the outdated 1996 Zoning Ordinance, emphasizing the need for its urgent revision to reflect modern urban development requirements.
The session concluded with the majority voting to uphold the reclassification, while only four councilors—Archival, Mary Ann de los Santos, Jose Lorenzo Abellanosa, and Joy Young—supported the motion to revoke it.