Not Just a City of the Future—A City for All

As Iloilo City reviews an unsolicited PHP18.27-billion proposal for a massive 662-hectare island-type reclamation project, we are reminded that grand visions of progress often obscure quieter but equally important questions: Who is it for? Who gets to decide? And who pays the price?

The Iloilo Global City project, if realized, would be the city’s largest single transformation of its coastline—a literal reshaping of land and sea. It promises modernity, new industrial and commercial zones, and a leap toward “global city” branding. But as the proposal moves into evaluation and potential negotiation, we must not allow the excitement of mega-investments to drown out public scrutiny.

Attorney David Abraham Garcia of PPP Iloilo City clarified that acceptance of the proposal does not mean approval. This early distinction gives the city a rare opportunity to lead with foresight and fairness. This is not just about adding land; it is about redefining our identity. What kind of city do we want to be? And more importantly, for whom is this city being built?

Progress, if it truly lives up to its name, must not come at the cost of exclusion. The promise of 51 percent ownership for the city—secured without spending public funds—is bold, but ownership means little if it doesn’t serve public needs. Will this new land offer space for public housing, waterfront parks, climate resiliency hubs, or fisherfolk who depend on the sea? Or will it become yet another enclave for the wealthy, gated from the very people whose taxes and sacrifices built Iloilo’s foundations?

It is tempting to view projects like this as silver bullets for economic growth. But the global experience with reclamation tells a cautionary tale. From Manila Bay to Dubai, many of these ventures delivered more to developers than to communities. Environmental degradation, displacement, and gentrification followed in their wake. Iloilo must not walk blindly into the same tide.

We urge the city government—especially the Sangguniang Panlungsod—to insist on inclusive planning before any negotiation proceeds. Call a public forum. Convene a citizens’ assembly. Create platforms where urban planners, barangay leaders, fisherfolk, youth groups, environmental experts, and cultural workers can question, propose, and co-create. If Iloilo aims to be a “global city,” let it also be a globally admired model of participatory governance.

This moment is not just about land reclamation—it is about reclaiming democratic space. It is about affirming that development must be by the people and for the people, not just in their name.

Hope, for a city like Iloilo, rests in our capacity to build consensus amid complexity. Agency lies with the council and the community—to steer the process, ask hard questions, and demand a development plan anchored in equity, transparency, and long-term public interest.

And dignity means recognizing that people are not footnotes in feasibility studies. They are the reason cities exist. They are not statistics in a masterplan. They are stewards of the shoreline, keepers of culture, and voices that must be heard as we shape the city’s future.

Let this not be just Iloilo’s biggest land gamble. Let it be our greatest act of inclusive vision yet.