This is to announce that the Senate will be holding a session on Monday, July 27, 2009 at 10am in the Senate chamber.  The agenda is attached in this email.

 

This is to announce the following:

 

1)  I have prefiled House Bills 16-266 and 16-267, and will be formally introducing these bills at the next session. 

Both bills are attached in this email.  My thanks to all who assisted in reviewing and commenting on drafts of both bills; any additional comments are also welcome. 

 

2)  There will be a Joint Legislative Meeting with General Ruhlman of Andersen Air Force Base in Guam on Tuesday, July 28 at 9:30am in the House Chamber.  General Ruhlman is Commander of the 36th Wing, and he will be briefing the Legislature regarding the military buildup in the Marianas and the mission of the Air Force in the region. 

Here are the highlights from the House session held on Monday, July 13, 2009:

 

 

At their most recent session on July 9, the Senate had passed the concurrent resolution with an amendment that deleted the House provision earmarking $1,690,000 of anticipated revenues for FY 2010 for the Retirement Fund (30% of the Hotel Occupancy Tax and 20% of the Alcoholic Beverage Container Tax as required by 1 CMC Section 8365). 

 

At the session I expressed my deep disappointment with the Senate's action.  The earmark of the aforementioned revenues for the Retirement Fund is already required by law and has been ignored and suspended by the Legislature for years.  Moreover, the imperative to remit those revenues to the Fund was recently reinforced by a court judgment.  I pointed out that $1.6M is merely a fraction of the $231M total court judgment, which itself is a fraction of the total unfunded liability of the Fund.  That we cannot at this stage in the budget process commit to setting aside even that amount showed extremely bad faith, and did not bode well for the Fund.  I did not understand the Senate's rationale, and therefore could not endorse the amended resolution.   

 

Ways and Means Chair Ray Yumul and Speaker Arnold Palacios both said that they shared the same disappointment, but that in the spirit of compromise with the Senate they were willing to wait for the budget process to reinsert the government's obligations to the Retirement Fund.  Speaker Palacios asked Rep. Yumul if the committee was willing to ensure that the $1.6M would indeed be allocated to the Retirement Fund in the budget process.  Rep. Yumul said he could not promise that but added that it would be proposed for the members to consider.      

 

In the end, 11 members voted yes to this resolution: Reps. Dave Apatang, Oscar Babauta, Diego Benavente, Joseph Deleon Guerrero, Ray Tebuteb, Edwin Aldan, Ray Yumul, Frank Dela Cruz, Stanley Torres, Ray Palacios, and Arnold Palacios.  Four members voted no: Reps. Joseph Camacho, Ed Salas, Heinz Hofschneider, and myself.  Five members were absent: Reps. Justo Quitugua, Rosemond Santos, Ralph Torres, Vic Hocog, and Joseph Reyes.

 

 

During the discussion of this initiative, I said that I continued to be troubled at the unwillingness of the Legislature to hold a single public hearing on such a major proposal to authorize the issuance of potentially hundreds of millions in public debt to pay for years of past neglect of this government's responsibilities to the Retirement Fund.  I further remarked that as recently as the 15th Legislature, in passing the legislation that would become Public Law 15-70, the leaders of the CNMI had recognized that "[t]he adversity created by a nearly $500,000,000 unfunded liability precludes the Commonwealth from entering the bond market at other than an exorbitant interest rate."  A pension obligation bond would likely end up costing the Commonwealth taxpayers more in the long wrong, if investment returns do not exceed the amount that we borrow, and if we factor in these likely "exorbitant interest rates" – saddling my generation and my children's generation with massive debt for years to come.  If we are willing to reduce the size of government and also willing to burden taxpayers with the cost of years of government neglect in order to rescue the Retirement Fund, as this initiative suggests, then we should refocus our energies not on an initiative that may not pass, and would be likely to cost the CNMI more even if it does pass, but on a rational and sensible plan to downsize government and consider other options for remitting badly-needed funds to the Retirement Fund, including selling off assets and raising taxes.

         

Rep. Heinz Hofschneider, who was the author of one of the original versions of the initiative, urged the members to support the initiative.  He said that the initiative provided a plan to rescue the  Retirement Fund — not "the" plan, he said, but a plan, an option, should it be authorized by the people of the Commonwealth, and should it become available to the next administration to exercise.  He acknowledged that now is not an appropriate time to enter into the bond market, and further acknowledged that the CNMI government has a few "demerits" against it that would make our attempts to borrow money a challenge.  He also said that our responsibility, and the responsibility of the Election Office, would be to educate the community on the pros and cons of the initiative so that voters can make well-informed decisions.  Rep. Hofschneider later introduced an amendment to cap the total amount that could be borrowed at $200M, which the members accepted.  (The previous version of the bill set the cap at the total actuarially determined unfunded liability, which now exceeds $500M.)     

 

Vice Speaker Joseph Deleon Guerrero then added that I was free to introduce legislation to raise taxes or to downsize government if I thought such legislation would offer a better solution, and further asked why I would vote against the pension obligation bond initiative just because I thought that other options should be considered.    

 

In response to Rep. Hofschneider's comments, I said that without a cost benefit analysis, or a risk assessment, or a clear strategy to pay back what we borrow, the pension obligation bond initiative is not a "plan" but an "idea," and that the CNMI government indeed has numerous demerits against it that make our consideration of more public debt seem totally illogical, including: 1) CPA's existing airport and seaport bonds presently on shaky ground; 2) the government's continuing failure to pay employer contributions even now, even at the 11% rate; 3) two stipulated orders against CUC that will undoubtedly cost the government millions to address in the coming years; 4) numerous other debts and judgments against the government that have gone ignored for many years; 5) an unwillingness to commit even $1.6M from the Alcoholic Beverage Container and Hotel Occupancy Taxes for FY 2010, only a fraction of the $231M judgment, which itself is only a fraction of the total unfunded liability; and 6) a bill presently on House calendar, even in the midst of this fiscal crisis, which seeks to increase benefits for retirees who re-employ with the government.  I could have gone on, but stopped there.  

 

In response to the Vice Speaker's comments, I disagreed that the "solution" to the Retirement Fund crisis is more legislation or more public debt, and said that this government should instead start paying the employer contributions and commence negotiations with the Retirement Fund to work out a payment agreement to address the $231M judgment.      

 

In the end, the initiative passed with 12 members voting yes and 3 members voting no.  Reps. Heinz Hofschneider, Dave Apatang, Diego Benavente, Stanley Torres, Ray Palacios, Arnold Palacios, Ray Tebuteb, Ray Yumul, Edwin Aldan, Oscar Babauta, Joseph Deleon Guerrero, and Frank Dela Cruz voted yes.  Reps. Ed Salas, Joe Camacho, and I voted no.  Reps. Rosemond Santos, Joe Reyes, Ralph Torres, Vic Hocog, and Justo Quitugua were absent. 

 

Because it was amended, the initiative now heads back to the Senate for approval.

 

Attached in this email is Rep. Ed Salas's statement explaining why he voted no to this initiative.

 

 

All 13 members voted yes to this bill, myself included.  Seven members were absent:  Reps. Justo Quitugua, Joseph Reyes, Rosemond Santos, Vic Hocog, Edwin Aldan, Ralph Torres, and Ray Yumul. 

 

The bill now heads to the Governor for signature. 

 

 

I am very happy to announce that as of July 9, 2009 the popular initiative to apply the Open Government Act to the Legislature has been certified by the Office of the Attorney General for placement on the ballot this November election.  Attached in this email is the certification letter from Acting Attorney General Greg Baka.  

 

The successful placement of this initiative was the result of over two years of hard work on the part of dozens of volunteer citizens committed to improving transparency in the legislature.  Our thanks to all who helped collect signatures and engaged in public education and dialogue about the importance of a clean and honest government that serves us all.  We also thank the diligent staff of the Commonwealth Election Commission and the Office of the Attorney General for their role in advising volunteers about initiative regulations and election law, in certifying signatures, and in ensuring that the initiative is duly placed on the ballot for voters to consider.

 

***

In other Open Government Act news, the Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for oral argument on the government's appeal of the Superior Court's order to disclose certain financial records related to the federalization lawsuit.  The government's Opening Brief and my Reply are both attached in this email.    

 

***

 

Finally, the House has scheduled a session on Monday, July 13, 2009 @ 1:30pm in the House Chamber.  The draft agenda is attached.

 

Here are the highlights from the House sessions held on June 30, 2009 and July 8, 2009:

 

 

This initiative was recalled from the House Judiciary and Governmental Operations Committee and placed on the bill calendar for action during the July 8 session. The Senate initiative is similar to a House initiative, both of which were passed in their respective chambers several months ago, in that both are intended to synchronize the federal general election of the U.S. Delegate with the local CNMI elections in order to save on the costs of having an election every year.  The difference between the two initiatives, however, lay in the transition period that would begin with the 2009 election.  The Senate proposed to extend all terms by one year, giving the Senators, Governor/Lt. Governor, and Mayors a five-year term, incumbent Senators who are up for mid-term reelection this year an additional year in their term, and House members a three-year term.  The House proposed three-year terms for all elected offices, thus shortening by one year the terms of the Senators, Governor/Lt. Governor, and Mayors, and increasing the normal two-year House term by one year.  

 

House supporters of the Senate initiative said that the Senate would never pass the House version of the initiative, and that the goal of realizing cost savings was important enough to justify compromising and simply passing the Senate version.  I said that the goal of realizing cost savings was indeed important enough to warrant our good faith effort to place on the ballots an initiative that would be likelier to pass.  I had suggested months ago that we convene public hearings to present the community with at least the opportunity to weigh in on the two possible options, and reiterated that recommendation at the session.  We could reasonably expect the public to find our efforts to pass an initiative that would lengthen the terms of public officials rather self-serving, especially when there was already an obvious alternative to shorten the terms during the transition and achieve the same goal.  Rep. Joe Camacho further expressed concern that the Senate proposal would give three sitting Senators an additional year that they had not earned in the 2007 election.   

 

Rep. Ray Palacios disagreed with the suggestion of a public hearing, and said that few members of the community would be likely to show up at the public hearing.  Other members argued that time was of the essence and we had to ensure that we meet the deadline to place initiatives on the ballot.  I said that if the issue of whether the next group of legislators and executives should be given longer terms in this next election is important enough to people, they will participate in hearings and submit their comments; if it is not that important, then we should move forward and simply make that policy call, but at least we would have given our constituents a chance to express their views.  I further pointed out that we have more than four weeks before the initiative deadline — ample time to hold public hearings and then vote on the initiative. 

 

Rep. Heinz Hofschneider remarked that the proposal to lengthen terms by one year during the transition period would perhaps not be so controversial if public opinion of the Legislature were not so low at this time and if the Legislature were to also act on the initiative he introduced last year to downsize the Legislature and make it part-time.   

 

The motion to end debate was eventually made and seconded.  Ten members voted yes to this bill — Joseph Deleon Guerrero, Arnold Palacios, David Apatang, Diego Benavente, Vic Hocog, Edwin Aldan, Heinz Hofschneider, Ray Palacios, Rosemond Santos, and Stanley Torres.  Six members voted no — Reps. Ray Tebuteb, Ed Salas, Joe Camacho, Frank Dela Cruz, Ray Yumul, and myself.  Four members were absent — Reps. Joe Reyes, Edwin Aldan, Ralph Torres, and Justo Quitugua.  After the vote, some of the supporters of the initiative commented that because we had killed the initiative, we were going to have an election every year from now on.  Frankly, my vote might have been different if we had cared enough to simply have had public hearings on the proposal. 

 

 

Introduced by Rep. Joseph Deleon Guerrero, and drafted in collaboration with the Commonwealth Election Commission, House Bill 16-220, HS1, SD1, HD3, SD3 would provide for election procedures governing runoff elections that would be constitutionally required in the event that no candidates for governor and lieutenant governor garner more than half of the votes cast and counted in a general election.  A particular point of contention deals with a provision in the bill that would allow registered voters who fail to vote in the general election to participate in the runoff election.  Some members, and particularly Reps. Vic Hocog and Rosemond Santos, objected to this provision and argued that registered voters who fail to vote in the general election should be removed from the registry (consistent with current practice) and precluded from voting in the runoff election.  

 

Other members, and particularly Rep. Deleon Guerrero, argued that the short time frame allowed under the constitution for a runoff election (14 days from the date that the results of the general election are certified) could potentially deprive individuals of their right to vote — i.e., if they are removed from the voter registry for failing to vote in the general election, but are not given a reasonable amount of time to re-register (which would necessarily be less than 14 days) so they could participate in the runoff election.  Election Director Mr. Robert Guerrero and legal counsel Megan Hasselshearer, who testified during this session, also held this view. But some members maintained that voters who fail to vote in the general election should simply not be allowed to vote at all in the runoff.  After all, a runoff election would only be triggered by the results of the general election; why should individuals who failed to vote in the general election be allowed to participate in the runoff?   

 

In the end, the members agreed to defer action on this bill until the next session to allow for additional time to consider the Senate amendments.

 

 

Introduced by Sen. Pete Reyes, this bill proposes to clarify that an individual shall neither occupy nor serve in the capacity of Attorney General, Acting Attorney General, or Interim Attorney General for more than 30 days without a nomination to the Senate, nor more than 90 days upon nomination without a confirmation from the Senate.  The bill would disqualify individuals who have assumed the title of AG, Acting AG, or Interim AG without a timely nomination from serving in any of those capacities for two years, would automatically terminate the appointments of individuals who have not been timely confirmed, and would render null and void contracts, purchase orders, or time sheets certified by individuals who have acted in these positions in violation of the Act, though the duties and functions of the office to prosecute criminal cases and represent the CNMI shall not be impaired.  The bill would also give the Senate President legal standing as a party in interest to seek a writ of mandamus in the event that a qualified candidate is not nominated within the required time periods.   

 

The bill passed with 13 members voting yes, myself included; Rep. Oscar Babauta and Vic Hocog voting no; and Rep. Stanley Torres abstaining.  Reps. Justo Quitugua, Ralph Torres, Joe Reyes, and Edwin Aldan were absent.

 

 

Introduced by Rep. Heinz Hofschneider, this bill proposes to amend Public Law 16-17, the CUC Private Sector Partnership Act of 2008, to clarify requirements for contracts with independent power producer, to clarify the requirement that CUC procure the services of a "United States Certified Contractor," and to remove the requirement that a successful bidder for the full privatization of CUC's electric power generation pay not less than $250million in cash and equivalent infrastructure improvements.  The bill was developed in collaboration and consultation with CUC.  It passed with all 16 members present voting yes, myself included; Reps. Justo Quitugua, Ralph Torres, Joe Reyes, and Edwin Aldan were absent.   

 

 

Introduced by Rep. Ray Tebuteb, this bill proposes to vest the Department of Lands and Natural Resources with the management and disposition of a certain tract of public land (TR 21077-2) in Sadog Tasi for the development of a public park to be managed by the Division of Parks and Recreation.  The Committee on Natural Resources recommended passage.  All 16 members present voted yes to this bill, myself included; 4 members were absent — Reps. Justo Quitugua, Ralph Torres, Joe Reyes, and Edwin Aldan. 

 

 

Introduced by Rep. Ray Yumul, this bill proposed to appropriate a total of $295,000 using the excess Marianas Public Lands Trust interest payments for FY 2009 – $122,630.13 of which would be used to pay runoff claims incurred by members of the CNMI government health insurance program to Aetna,  for Aetna, and $172,369.87 of which would go to the Election Commission to pay for the costs of the 2009 general election and possibly the runoff election.  

 

The bill was drafted during lunch hour and introduced for the first time at approximately 4:15pm that day, and Rep. Yumul asked if the rules could be suspended and the bill placed on the calendar for action because the Aetna issue was an urgent one, and Aetna was threatening to suspend coverage if the CNMI did not pay.  I objected and asked if we could first verify the figures provided, and also verify that the administration had not already paid Aetna, as I was aware that Aetna had notified the CNMI in June that it had until June 26 to make the payment and it was already June 30.  If this were such an "urgent" issue, I said, we would not be waiting until four days after that deadline to draft and introduce a bill for the first time.  Rep. Yumul said he was not sure if Aetna had yet been paid, and after placing a call to the Retirement Fund, said that it might have been, but we should still pass the appropriation just in case.

 

I also questioned the $172K appropriation to the Election Commission.  I had been aware that recent amendments to the CNMI's election laws would most likely result in additional costs, but it wasn't clear yet how much exactly.  The day before the bill was introduced, the Election Commission had provided a $295K budget request to the Ways and Means Committee Chair.  This request was distributed to the members only minutes after the bill was introduced, so there was very little time to scrutinize the request and determine whether or not the $172K appropriation was sufficient or perhaps excessive.         

 

Nevertheless, most members believed both appropriations were enough of an emergency to justify our immediate action that day, and the debate was ended.  Twelve House members voted yes to this bill; Reps. Ed Salas, Arnold Palacios, and I voted no.  Five members were absent during the vote:  Reps. Rosemond Santos, Ray Yumul, Ralph Torres, Heinz Hofschneider, and Oscar Babauta.

 

The Senate passed this bill unanimously and without amendment the following day.  The bill now heads to the Governor for approval.   

 

After several hours of discussion, the House passed a concurrent resolution approving the total estimated revenues and resources for Fiscal Year 2010 at $162,820,000, pursuant to Article III, Section 9(a) of the Constitition and 1 CMC Division 7.  The resolution included debt service and recognized certain earmarks for the Tobacco Control Fund, the Solid Waste Revolving Fund and the temporary power contract with Aggreko.  An additional earmark for the Retirement Fund, amounting to $1,690,000 (30% from the Alcoholic Beverage Container Tax and the 20% from the Hotel Occupancy Tax, which is currently required to remitted to the Fund by law) was included in an amendment introduced by Rep. Yumul.  After these earmarks and debt service obligations were factored in, the total revenue and resources available for appropriation for 2010 amounted to $148,810,000, not including collections from the Dept of Public Lands.   

 

During the discussion, Rep. Heinz Hofschneider asked whether or not the Governor's projections had been verified.  Ways and Means Chair Rep. Yumul responded that the administration had maintained that its figures were accurate, but added that Ways and Means inquiries probing the figures had generally gone unanswered, including the committee's request for updated FY 2009 expenditures and collections.  Rep. Hofschneider then noted that the administration had recently publicly acknowledged that expenditures for FY 2009 were already exceeding collections and he suggested that the concurrent resolution should incorporate a provision for deficit reduction.  Rep. Edward Salas further questioned the Governor's FY 2010 projections, and pointed out obvious discrepancies between the Governor's annualized projected revenue collections for 2009 and estimated revenues for 2010.  Rep. Salas said that the Legislature should have the actual expenditures and collections to date for FY 2009 in order to be able to arrive at a projection that would most closely adhere to the CNMI's fiscal realities. 

 

I agreed with both Reps. Hofschneider and Salas and suggested that the concurrent resolution should include provisions for both deficit reduction and adjustments for projected resources pending further information from the Governor.  Some members objected said that the Legislature should instead call upon the administration to provide updated information on actual collections and actual expenditures, and adjust the projects accordingly when more data are made available.  I then introduced an amendment urging the Governor to submit a report as soon as possible but not more than 30 days after the adoption of the resolution setting forth any amendments or changes, and including actual revenues and expenditures to date for Fiscal Year 2009, any policy changes proposed since the budget was first submitted on April 1, and other significant factors affecting the budget for FY 2010.  The amendment was accepted.     

 

The next day, however, the Senate voted to reject the concurrent resolution and moved to form a conference committee.  One of their primary concerns centered on the earmark that was added for the Retirement Fund.  During the House session on July 8, Ways and Means chair Rep. Ray Yumul informed the members that he had conferred with Senate Fiscal Affairs Chair Senator Frica Pangelinan, and that the Senate was likely to recall their rejection and insert amendments instead for the House to consider.      

 

 

 

House Commemorative Resolutions 16-72 – 16-90 -  recognizing  Freddy Salavaria, Keala Peters, Kimberly Hofschneider, Noelani Mcmahon, Tanya Dela Cruz, Yvette Bennett, Yvonne Bennett, Kenlyn Butters, Sung Yul Baik, Donavan-Jose Castro, Edwin Correa, Jr., Jhumil Esposo, Jaclyn Quitugua, Ray San Nicolas, Thomas Castro, Moon Hyo Lee, Monica Pangelinan, Loremel Hocog, Kenneth Palec for their outstanding participation in the Teen Talk Program.  Introduced by Rep. Justo Quitugua +1. ADOPTED. 

 

House Commemorative Resolution 16-91  — conveying the sincere condolences and sympathy of the House of Representatives to the bereaved family of the late Choken Ginoza on the occasion of his untimely passing and paying tribute to his contributions to the tourism industry and his fond memory.  Introduced by Rep. Heinz Hofschneider.  ADOPTED.

 

House Joint Resolution 16-27 – to authorize the CNMI through the Governor to submit to the U.S. Dept of Housing and Urban Development the Action Plan for the Community Development Block grant Application; the HOME Investment Partnership Grant Application; and the Emergency Shelter Grant Application; to receive the funds requested therein, and to assume all responsibilities imposed by the U.S. Dept of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Program, and the Emergency Shelter Grant Program.  Introduced by Speaker Arnold Palacios.  ADOPTED. 

 

Senate Joint Resolution 16-11 – to approve two additional full-time employees for the Community Guidance Center.  Ways and Means Chair Rep. Ray Yumul disclosed a letter from the Community Guidance Center that indicated that no funding was available in FY 2009 to support the additional FTEs; however, the CGC Director requested that the two FTEs be authorized in the FY 2010 budget.  Referred to the Ways and Means Committee.   

 

House Resolution 16-92  — to honor Mr. Kwang Joong Kim (Tommy Kim) of Asiana Airlines for the many contributions he has made to the Commonwealth through his dedication, commitment, and support of its tourism industry.  Introduced by Rep. Joseph Deleon Guerrero + 1.  ADOPTED.   

 

House Resolution 16-93  –  supporting U.S. House Resolution 934, to convey certain submerged lands to the CNMI granting the same benefits as Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, and to preserve the CNMI government's joint management role in the Marianas Trench National Monument.  (Rep Oscar Babauta + 3).  PLACED ON CALENDAR. 

 

**

 

For questions or comments, I can be reached at 285-3935, 664-8931, or tinasablan@gmail.com

 

This is to announce the following:

 

1) Public Presentation on Article XII and Other Blood Quantum Land Laws – Tuesday, July 7, 2009 @ the American Memorial Park Visitors Center from 6pm to 8pm.  Sponsored by the Humanities Council, this presentation will be delivered by Prof. Rose Cuison Villazor of Hofstra University. 
 
2) Workshop on Basic Family-Based and Employment-Based Immigration Law Workshop –  Wednesday, July 8, 2009 at the Multipurpose Center in Susupe, from 7:30pm-9pm.  Sponsored by the Coalition for the Recognition of Ethnic American Minorities (CREAM), this workshop will provide a general understanding of family-based and employment-based immigration law.  Topics that may be covered include immigration petitions based on marriage to a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident; petitions filed by relatives who are U.S. citizens; and sponsorship by employers.  The workshop will be designed for a general audience unfamiliar with federal immigration law, and will be led by Prof. Rose Villazor of Hofstra University. 

3) House Session – Wednesday, July 8 @ 1:30pm in the House Chamber.  The draft agenda is attached.

 

4)  SNILD Meeting with the Zoning Administrator and Board — Thursday, July 9 @ 2:00pm in the House Chamber.  The purpose of this meeting is to hear general concerns regarding zoning. 

 

Attached in this email is the government's opening brief on the appeal of the Superior Court's order releasing certain records related to the Governor's federalization lawsuit, pursuant to the Open Government Act.  My reply is due by Friday, July 10.

 

Also, the Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing on my Motion to Reconsider the stay on disclosure on July 8, 2009 at 10am.