MANILA, Philippines — A coalition of environmental advocates has rejected the Manila city government’s defense of a significant increase in garbage collection fees for businesses, arguing that Ordinance No. 9151 is legally flawed and lacks transparency.
The ordinance, approved by Mayor Francisco “Isko” Moreno Domagoso in December 2025, makes payment of the revised fees a prerequisite for the issuance or renewal of business permits. While the city defends the hike as necessary to cover actual service costs, green groups warn it could violate national laws and constitutional rights.
The Mayor’s Defense: ‘Science and Per-Capita Costs’ In a recent broadcast, Mayor Moreno acknowledged the “sticker shock” for business owners—citing cases where annual fees jumped from P1,000 to P12,000—but argued the cost remains reasonable when broken down:
- Daily Computation: Moreno explained that a P12,000 annual fee equates to about P32 per day.
- Per-Employee Cost: For businesses with multiple staff, the mayor argued the cost could be as low as P7 to P10 per person per day, which he claimed is cheaper than paying private pushcart collectors.
- Funding Gap: The city seeks to bridge a massive gap in waste management funding, which has grown to an estimated P1.35 billion annually, while fees had remained unchanged since 2013.
Legal and Policy Rebuttal The Manila Anti-Incinerator Alliance (MAIA) and legal experts from the Community Legal Help and Public Interest Centre (C-HELP) highlighted several perceived defects in the ordinance:
- Transparency: Advocates argue the city has not provided clear computations or identified the specific types of waste being charged.
- Legal Precedent: MAIA cited the 2015 Supreme Court ruling (Ferrer Jr. v. Quezon City), which invalidated a similar fee for lacking a clear nexus between the charge and the service rendered.
- Waste-to-Energy (WTE) Concerns: Groups fear the added revenue will be used to subsidize a proposed P26-billion waste-to-energy incinerator in Smokey Mountain. They argue this contradicts Republic Act No. 9003 (Ecological Solid Waste Management Act), which prioritizes recycling and composting over incineration.
- Constitutional Rights: Advocates warn that favoring hauling and burning over reduction could violate the constitutional right to a “balanced and healthy ecology” and encourage more waste generation to keep incinerators fueled.
The City’s Legal Standing City Legal Officer Luch Gempis Jr. countered that the comparisons to the Quezon City case are inaccurate, as Manila’s fees are strictly regulatory charges on businesses, not households, and are tied directly to waste production levels. City Treasurer Paul Vega added that the adjustment is vital to account for the increased costs of transporting waste to the New San Mateo Sanitary Landfill in Rizal.
As the renewal season for business permits continues, the tension between fiscal necessity and environmental policy remains high. Green groups have called for a full public disclosure of the city’s computations and a shift toward a zero-waste strategy that aligns with Manila’s long-term environmental commitments.