Download now or preview on posterous

Here are the highlights from the House sessions on April 1 and April 14, 2009:

 

 

This bill proposes to rename the Rota Veteran Memorial Park to "Corporal Joe G. Charfauros Jr. Rota Veteran Memorial Park.  All members present voted yes.  Reps. Heinz Hofschneider, Dave Apatang, and Ed Salas were absent.  The bill now heads to the Governor.

 

 

Acting Governor Timothy Villagomez had vetoed House Bill 16-4, HD4, which would require that all public funds be deposited in FDIC-insured banks, claiming that this bill if enacted would have an adverse impact on the Retirement Fund and the Marianas Public Lands Trust.  Although most members had questioned the legitimacy of this claim, Vice Speaker Joseph Deleon Guerrero, the author of the bill, gracefully agreed to seek further advice from both the Retirement Fund and MPLT.  At the session on April 1 the Vice Speaker produced comments from both entities that denied that the proposal to safeguard public deposits in FDIC-insured banks would have any adverse impacts whatsoever.  Indeed, both the Fund and MPLT said that the proposal only made good fiduciary sense, and so we took a vote on the motion to override.  

 

The override ultimately failed with only 12 members voting yes, myself included.  Reps. Heinz Hofschneider, Dave Apatang, and Ed Salas were absent; Reps. Oscar Babauta and Edwin Aldan voted no without saying why; and Floor Leader Joseph Camacho and Rep. Ray Yumul both abstained.  The Floor Leader claimed that he wanted to "avoid any appearance of impropriety," but didn't explain what that meant, and Ways and Means Chair Rep. Yumul said that he believed he had a conflict due to his participation in the Retirement Fund Working Group, which is developing an omnibus bill to protect and strengthen the Fund.  I asked Rep. Yumul what he meant by that, and Rep. Babauta answered for him, claiming to be the "advisor pro tem" for this Working Group, and saying that conflicts might arise if the Working Group was presently considering depositing any Retirement Fund moneys into non-FDIC insured banks.  I expressed alarm at this suggestion, and asked if the Working Group was in fact considering such an idea given the state of the Fund, and Rep. Babauta quickly denied that they were, and then said again that they "might."  I then requested a legal opinion as to whether or not a conflict of interest really existed, since the claimed reasons for abstentions made absolutely no sense to me, and the Speaker instructed the legal counsel to look into the matter.

 

After the session, some members said that they believed that the Acting Governor's veto was really a retaliatory reaction to another bill that had been introduced by the Vice Speaker (HB 16-167) which proposes to take away housing benefits for public officials (including the Governor and Lt. Governor) who opt not to live in government houses.  Because the stated reasons for the veto and for abstaining on the vote seemed totally irrational, because the alleged "real" reason for the veto is so petty, and because there is really no good reason why public funds should not be deposited into FDIC-insured banks, it is my hope that we reconsider the veto override at the next session.  

        

 

 

1) SCR 16-78, recommending passage of HB 16-167, HD1 – HB 16-167 originally proposed to take away the housing benefit entirely for public officials who elect not to stay in public housing (the Governor, Lt. Governor, Senate President, and Speaker).  After lengthy debate at a previous session, the bill was referred to the JGO Committee for further review.  The JGO committee then amended the bill to provide for a monthly housing allowance of up to $500 to cover utilities for public officials who live in their private residences, arguing that these officials often entertain dignitaries at their homes and must cope with higher utility bills as a result.  I noted that the language of both the committee report and the amended bill was unclear, and pointed out that the members all had different interpretations: some said that the bill would only cover utility expenses in their exact amounts with a cap set at $500, others said it would give public officials a flat monthly stipend that could be used to cover utilities as well as mortgage, rent, or other expenses as long as the funds didn't go to upgrades or renovations.  The author of the bill, Vice Speaker Joseph Dlg, flatly objected to the amended bill, and said that it totally altered his original intent which was to take away the housing benefit altogether, not create a new benefit for elected officials.  He called for the bill to be sent back to the committee, and the members agreed.  REFERRED BACK TO JGO COMMITTEE.   

 

2) SCR 16-80, recommending that the full membership fo the House should decide on HB 16-223 — Introduced by Rep. Vic Hocog, House Bill 16-223 proposes to implement austerity Fridays and unpaid legal holidays; to reduce the employers' contribution for the members of the Retirement Fund's Defined Benefit Plan from 18% to 11%; to provide full reprogramming authority to all expenditure authorities; and for other purposes.  REFERRED BACK TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE.

 

During discussion of the report, Rep. Justo Quitugua and other members observed that most of the provisions of the bill were already moot, given the passage of the budget which already incorporated, for example the 11% retirement contribution, and which rendered unncessary the full reprogramming authority proposed for expenditure authorities.  Members asked why the bill hadn't at least been amended to take out the provisions that were obviously obsolete, and Speaker Palacios commented that committee seemed to have relinquished its responsibilities to work on the bill and take some kind of position on it.  I said the committee report also seemed to be lacking some critical information, including how much had actually been saved the last time the government had attempted austerity holidays, and also how much was projected to be saved if this bill were to be enacted.  The report said that the Department of Finance had thus far failed to provide this information, but I noted that the Ways and Means committee had subpoena powers to obtain any information that it needed, and indeed the House members had all endorsed the committee's use of its powers at a previous session.     

 

3) SCR 16-81, recommending the passage of HB 16-224 — This bill, introduced by Rep. Ray Tebuteb, proposes to vest the Department of Lands and Natural Resources with the management and disposition of a parcel of public land in Sadog Tasi for the development of a public park.  ADOPTED — BILL PLACED ON CALENDAR FOR ACTION. 

 

4) SCR 16-79, recommending the passage of HB 16-132, HD1 – Introduced by Rep. Joseph Reyes, this bill proposes to authorize the Marianas Visitors Authority to regulate tour operators and tour guides by amending 4 CMC Section 2103.  MVA would be tasked with developing a certification program for tour businesses that would include training courses in the history, culture, scenic landmarks, and natural resources of the CNMI, and certification of proficiency in one of the official languages of the CNMI.  MVA would also establish rules of professional conduct, including procedures for filing and disposition of complaints and for suspending or revoking certifications; reporting requirements; certification badges; attire; language proficiency; compensation for tour guides, and any other matters deemed necessary by the Board.  The bill further includes business licensing requirements for tour operators (membership in good standing with MVA; minimum investment of $50,000; and office space; a bank account under the business name; insurance; MVA certificate).  The bill also provides for penalties for violations of the Act.  ADOPTED — BILL GOES ON CALENDAR FOR ACTION.

 

5) SCR 16-82, recommending the passage of HB 16-146, HS1 –  Introduced by Rep. Justo Quitugua, this bill proposes to establish a village and agricultural homesteading program in the Northern Islands, and further includes amendments to the Homestead Waiver Act, incorporating the provisions of an earlier bill (HB 16-127, introduced by Rep. Oscar Babauta), which would expand the list of persons eligible to receive legal title to public land if they have continually used and occupied that land for at least 15 years and would authorize the Dept of Public Lands to waive homestead requirements for such qualified persons.  The bill seeks to implement the intention of Article II, Section 2(a) of the Constitution, which is for the islands north of Saipan to become the 4th Senatorial District after the population of those islands exceeds one thousand persons.  In addition to offering homestead lots to persons currently residing in the Northern Islands and qualified persons interested in residing there, the bill intends to make the homesteaders of the Northern Islands eligible for housing loans, and to promote economic development in the islands north of Saipan through long-term commercial land leases.  ADOPTED — BILL GOES ONTO CALENDAR FOR ACTION.  

 

I was the only member to vote against the adoption of this committee report, as I thought that it was incomplete given that it lacked mention of any comments received from the Dept of Public Lands and from public hearings that had been held several months ago.  I noted the public outcry that had arisen from the UXO clearing for homestead development currently taking place in Marpi, the lack of a public hearing immediately prior to the commencement of the clearing, and the questions that were being asked now about the appropriateness of that area for homesteads, especially in light of the sensitivity of the natural and cultural environment and the total lack of infrastructure.  The same questions would apply to the Northern Islands homestead development proposal, and I argued that every effort should be made to consider and incorporate any comments that had been received, and at the very least to acknowledge them in the committee report. 

 

6) SCR 16-94, recommending the passage of HB 16-225 –Introduced by Rep. Ray Tebuteb, this bill proposes to lower the annual fee for pachinko slot machines from $6,000 to $2,000 in order to "encourage more widespread offering of pachinko slot machines at amusement machine establishments."  According to the bill, "[m]ore machines offered will entice more players, translating to more license fee revenue and jackpot winning taxes for the general fund."  The committee report notes that there are currently no pachinko slot machines licensed in the CNMI, and finds that "if more establishments purchase pachinko slot machines for their businesses it will entice more visitors to their establishments."  ADOPTED — BILL GOES ONTO CALENDAR FOR ACTION.  

 

Rep. Hofschneider began the debate on this report by noting that gambling addiction has destroyed many families in the CNMI, and asking why the members would seek to promote that addiction in the community through this bill.  Rep. Diego Benavente pointed out that pachinko slot machine gaming is presently legal in the CNMI, but because it is not as popular as poker, the fees that presently apply are cost-prohibitive and it would only make sense to lower them; otherwise, he said, we might as well ban pachinko slot machines altogether.  Rep. Joseph Reyes drew members' attention to the revenue-generating potential of pachinko slot machines and said that he and other members had received a letter from a potential investor who had promised to immediately invest $300,000 in licensing fees for pachinko slot machines in the CNMI if the fees were lowered to $1,000. Rep. Joseph Dlg and other members argued that pachinko slot machines would provide an additional tourist attraction, noting that pachinko is very popular in Japan, and further argued that we should not have to worry about local residents gambling at pachinko because residents prefer poker.      

 

I questioned the findings of the committee report, the intent of the bill, and the lack of any public hearing or solicitation of public comments.  The committee report did not acknowledge at all the potential economic and social impacts of promoting pachinko slot machine gaming in the CNMI, and given the destructive impacts of poker addiction in our community, I strongly believed we should at the very least have a public hearing before we went any further on the bill.  Moreover, the argument that only tourists and not local residents would gamble at pachinko slot machines was very similar to the argument that had been made years ago to sell us on poker, and we had found very quickly that indeed residents did indeed gamble at those machines and many quickly became addicted. Further, the fact that proponents of the bill had convinced themselves that pachinko slot machines would attract more tourists to the CNMI only underscored the need for more public comment — we should ask the Marianas Visitors Authority, and anyone else in the tourism industry, I said, if they believed that pachinko slot machines would bring in more tourists and be consistent with the CNMI's plans for destination enhancement.    I also noted that the majority of the members in the House were members of the Republican Party, and that the party's platform in 2007 had expressly included a commitment to eliminate poker from our community, in recognition of the blight that poker addiction has become.  If the intent of those members had been to simply replace poker with pachinko, I said they should have clarified that during the campaign; otherwise, this effort to promote the proliferation of pachinko seemed to be a major breach of that promise.  Vice Speaker Joseph Dlg then interjected and clarified that the party had only promised to eliminate poker, not pachinko. 

 

I then made a motion to refer the bill back to committee so that a public hearing may be conducted, but the motion was not seconded by anyone and so we went to vote.  Five members voted against the adoption of this committee report:  Speaker Arnold Palacios, Reps. Frank Dela Cruz, Heinz Hofschneider, Ralph Torres, and myself.  Rep. Ed Salas was absent on medical leave.     

7)  SCR 16-83, recommending the passage of HB 16-15 — This bill, introduced by Rep. Stanley Torres, seeks to amend Title 1 CMC Section 8365 to establish that the Retirement Fund shall begin to receive its tax revenue from the hotel occupancy tax (30%) and the alcoholic beverage container tax (20%) on a quarterly (rather than annual) basis, and directly through remittance by the Dept of Finance at the end of the first fiscal quarter after the approval of this bill.  These taxes were supposed to be allotted to the Retirement Fund on an annual basis in order to support the retirees' health and life insurance programs, but never were.  ADOPTED – BILL PLACED ON CALENDAR FOR ACTION.

 

This committee report was adopted very quickly, and I realized only later that the bill it recommends for passage might conflict with another bill recently passed by the House (HB 16-139) that would transfer the administrative functions of the Health and Life Insurance programs of the Retirement Fund to the Department of Finance.  This potential conflict would probably warrant further review by the committee before the House acts on HB 16-15.         

 

 

 

HR 16-79  — to express sincere gratitude to Mr. Steve Tilley for his commitment and invaluable service to the people of the CNMI (Rep. Joseph Dlg)

 

HR 16-80 — to recognize and congratulate the Tinian High School JROTC Academic Team for their achievement in advancing to the College Options Foundation's 2009 JROTC Leadership and Academic Bowl Finals (Rep Edwin Aldan)

 

HJR 16-26 — calling for a Joint Session of the Legislature to receive the Governor's State of the Commonwealth Address and to receive a report from U.S. Delegate Gregorio Sablan on Wednesday, May 27, 2009 @ 10am in the House Chamber. 

 

***

 

Download now or preview on posterous

Attached in this post is Judge Wiseman's Order Releasing a Portion of Requested Documents.  Judge Wiseman orders Defendants (Governor Ben Fitial and Secretary of Finance Eloy Inos) to release all records within 7 days except for three: 1) the engagement letter; 2) billing documents and statements sent to CNMI for 903 litigation; and 3) payments made by CNMI to attorneys for 903 litigation, and further orders that the Defendants file a privilege log within 10 days of the date of the order (April 14, 2009).  

 

According to the order, "Once the privilege log is filed and received, the Court will further determine the disposition in this matter." 

 

Thanks very much and have a good day,

 

The House and Senate are scheduled to have sessions today, April 14, 2009 in their respective chambers.  The Senate session will begin at 10am; the House session will begin at 2:30pm.  (Note:  the House session was originally scheduled for 10am as well, but has been postponed as of this morning).

 

The draft agendas are attached.

 

Also, I am attaching the latest documents related to the petition for mandamus under the Open Government Act, which was filed against the Governor and Secretary of Finance, seeking the release of records related to funding sources, contracts, amounts paid, etc. with respect to the Governor's lawsuit against the federal government.  These documents include the government's Motion to Withhold Documents, and my response.  A hearing on the merits of the issue was held in Judge Wiseman's court on April 9, 2009; an opinion has not yet been issued.  

Download now or preview on posterous

Download now or preview on posterous

Download now or preview on posterous

Download now or preview on posterous

Download now or preview on posterous