Attached in this email are several updates regarding our public lands, including:

House Bill 16-267, attached in this email, seeks to create a new protected area in Marpi consisting of approximately 936,100 square meters of public lands, including areas that are currently designated by DPL for homestead development.  The Marpi area was the subject of public outcry and a legislative inquiry earlier in the year, when DPL commenced the clearing of approximately 620,000 square meters of native and secondary forest for unexploded ordnance removal in preparation for the homestead development — without a public hearing, without a major siting permit from the Coastal Resources Management Office, and apparently without penalty from any the regulatory agencies.  The same area again became the subject of controversy more recently when DPL inadvertently cleared approximately 10,000 square meters of protected endangered species habitat; the agency subsequently agreed to restore the cleared area, and to protect an additional 175,000 square meters of adjacent public lands in perpetuity as part of the remediation plan.

House Bill 16-267, introduced by myself, Natural Resources Chair Rep. Ray Tebuteb, and Rep. Ed Salas, finds that the area presently designated for homestead development in Marpi is inappropriate for such use for the following reasons: 1) the lack of infrastructure; 2) unusable groundwater resources; 3) thin soil which is incompatible with septic system installation; 4) proximity to highly significant historic and cultural sites, including Suicide Cliff, the National Historic Landmark of Marpi Point, and numerous war memorials; and 5) proximity to protected areas, including endangered species habitat.  The bill proposes to protect the area, incorporate it into the Commonwealth Mitigation Bank created by Public Law 10-47, and require a management plan prepared by a professional biologist that shall include forest restoration, wildlife monitoring, invasive species removal, a fire plan, and public education; the plan shall further be presented for public review and comment by the Department of Lands and Natural Resources for at least 30 days prior to adoption and implementation.

Department of Public Lands Secretary John del Rosario opposes the bill, accusing the Legislature of attempting to “usurp” the agency’s constitutional authority to manage public lands, and further arguing that the current area of protected lands in Marpi is “more than adequately sufficient.”  In addition, Secretary del Rosario asserts that the Department “competently and unquestionably understands its fiduciary responsibility as prudent managers of public lands such that it will duly and diligently ensure that all remaining public lands are optimized and designated for whatever compelling public purposes arise in the short term and long term.”

The bill was introduced in mid-August and is still under review in the Natural Resources Committee.  I have asked the committee chair and co-sponsor of the bill, Rep. Tebuteb, to convene public hearings and solicit comments from the community about best uses for that land, and I continue to hope that public hearings will indeed begin soon.  I recognize that while many, myself included, may favor conservation of the area, others may favor mixed uses to include recreational parks and trails, agriculture, and ecotourism, and still others may indeed prefer homestead development or even limited commercial development.  For me the important component that has thus far been missing in public land use management is the participation of the community in determining the best uses for our public lands — and particularly in the case of Marpi, which is one of the most beautiful, most environmentally sensitive, and most historically significant places on Saipan.  I am hopeful that Secretary del Rosario will see the bigger picture and would be willing to come to the table in public hearings and other discussions on Marpi as he and the agency he represents obviously play a critical role in land use management and can have a tremendous and positive influence in the public involvement process.

The Department of Public Lands has again granted extensions to Flame Sako and Neo Goldwings Paradise to demonstrate proof of financing for their proposed developments north of Paupau Beach (109,000 square meters) and on Tinian (3,000,000 square meters), respectively.  According to Secretary del Rosario, the two companies have been given until December 31, 2009, with the “firm message that when nothing pans out by way of demonstrating fund deposits at local banks here for the projects” the lease shall automatically be revoked.  According to the Secretary, Flame Sako has indicated that an initial deposit of $2million is expected to be made in a local bank by Oct. 22, and construction is expected to begin in December.

The Secretary did not provide supporting documents to show DPL’s grant of the extension or notification of default.  In email correspondence with the Secretary I had requested such records months ago with the first extension for Flame Sako and received no response; I am hopeful that the Natural Resources Committee to seek these records with this second extension, assuming the records even exist.  It is unclear to me what legal authority DPL has even to grant such extensions, particularly when the lease agreements themselves stipulate that leases shall automatically terminate upon failure to provide proof of financing by the specified deadlines.  For Flame Sako, the deadline was April 30, 2009; for NGP, the deadline was Sept. 21, 2009.

Similarly, the commercial lease agreement with Marianas Resort Development, Co. (1,365,000 square meters of public land on Tinian), which was approved by the 15th legislature in May 2007, has come under scrutiny as the proposed casino resort development has also experienced considerable delay.  According to the Secretary, the “requisite studies have been submited and approved by the regulatory agencies,” but the Department is awaiting an update from the Chief Executive Officer of MRDC as to the status of construction, which has yet to begin.  No information has been provided yet about the status of MRDC’s financing plan, which had been required within six months (by November 2007) from the commencement of the lease agreement, with an ”absolute deadline” of August 1, 2009 for phase 2 of the project (golf course construction), to which both DPL and MRDC had agreed according to the joint committee report.

Like Flame Sako and NGP, MRDC did not provide proof of financing for the proposed development at the time that the lease agreement was approved, and questions had been raised about the company’s business plan.  The inclusion of the automatic termination clause in the lease agreement, according to the joint committee reviewing the MRDC proposal, was to “ensure that the subject public land would not sit idle for 25 years should MRDC fail to secure adequate financing for its projects.”

In addition, no information has yet been provided by the Secretary on the status of rental payments required by Flame Sako, NGP, and MRDC under their respective lease agreements.

I continue to be extremely concerned about the CNMI’s practice of approving major commercial leases of public lands to companies that are unable to show proof of financing for their proposed developments.  It had been for that reason, among others, that I had voted against the lease agreements with both Flame Sako and NGP.  The generous terms of the lease agreements, and the considerable leniency that DPL has shown towards companies that have failed to comply with even these generous terms, should raise questions for all of us about the due diligence and fiduciary responsibility being exercised by DPL and the Legislature in approving these leases in the first place — and then in DPL’s enforcement of the leases once approved.  It is time that the CNMI take a much broader look, as well, at the practice in general of leasing public lands for commercial purposes, and moreover, at the continuing lack of an updated public land use plan for the CNMI.  A comprehensive land use plan with respect to public lands, including priority of uses, is required under the constitution, and by law.

For more information about the CNMI’s commercial public land leases with Flame Sako, NGP, and MRDC, see the attached documents.

Thanks very much,

Tina Sablan
House of Representatives
16th CNMI Legislature
PO Box 500586
Saipan, MP 96950
Tel: (670) 664-8931
Cel: (670) 285-3935

Email: tinasablan@gmail.com or
rep.sablanc@cnmileg.gov.mpVisit the Commonwealth Dialogues at www.tinasablan.com/forum

“The citizen can bring our political and governmental institutions back to life, make them responsive and accountable, and keep them honest. No one else can.” — John Gardner