Download now or preview on posterous

Statement of Rep. Ed Salas on POB Initiative 07.13.09.pdf (11 KB)

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Download now or preview on posterous

SCR16-69 (SLI16-10 HS1).pdf (104 KB)

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Download now or preview on posterous

Petition.Mandamus.02.27.09.pdf (782 KB)

Download now or preview on posterous

03REG 10th Day 03-04-2009 DRAFT.doc (79 KB)

Download now or preview on posterous

D-Agenda (Next SNILD session).doc (81 KB)

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Posted via email from Tina Sablan

Here are the highlights from the sessions this week, November 12 (Saipan & Northern Islands Legislative Delegation) and November 13-14 (House):

SNILD passes new Zoning bill

The bill proposes to repeal and reenact the Zoning law, and includes changes with respect to signage and lighting, road standards, adult businesses, microbreweries and home day care centers, road standards, etc.  The bill also eases zoning requirements to facilitate the reuse of old garment factory warehouses.  In discussions with Zoning Board Chair Mr. Henry Hofschneider, and Zoning Administrator Mr. Steve Tilley, some members, including Senator Pete Reyes and I, said that in the future, they preferred to see the Zoning Board enact zoning changes by regulation rather than coming to the Saipan delegation again and again to repeal and reenact the law.  

All members present voted yes to the bill.  The bill now heads to the governor.  

House Bills Introduced on the Floor (not on the agenda)

• HB 16-191: the Commonwealth Emergency Relief Act, to amend and clarify the Governor’s authority to declare a state of emergency, and require reports within a specific time frame on the use of available funds and actions taken to address the emergency. (Rep. Arnold Palacios +14).  The introduction of this bill was timely; it followed the Governor’s most recent issuance of two new states of emergency on the CHC Pharmacy and CUC.   
• HB 16-192: to exempt concession stands on Managaha from the prohibition on alcoholic beverage sales on Election Day – PLACED ON CALENDAR AND PASSED ON FIRST AND FINAL READING
• HLB 16- 24: appropriating $10,000 from Rota’s local pachinko and poker license fees to pay for travel and accommodation expenses for the Sinapalo Elementary School Chamorro Club’s participation in the 6th Annual Chamorro Language Competition on Guam (Rep. Vic Hocog)  
• HLI 16-122: to amend Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution to provide for elections consistent with the election of the nonvoting delegate, and providing for 3-year terms for the Governor, Lt. Governor, Senators, Mayors, House, Municipal Counsils, and Board of Education during the interim period until the general election in 2012 (Rep. Diego Benavente +9)  

House Resolutions Adopted

1.  HR 16-62: encouraging the Commonwealth Development Authority board and executive director to deny granting additional benefits to the existing Qualifying Certificate to Saipan Laulau Development, Inc.  

Supporters of the resolution noted that the CNMI had been quite generous to Saipan Laulau Development, Inc. already, granting breaks on the lease of the property as well as tax breaks worth $18million, and there had to be reasonable limits placed on such generosity, as well as tangible benefits to the community arising from the investment.  Speaker Palacios in particular noted that the decision to approve new lease terms and reduced rent for SLDI had been the hardest decision he’d had to make during the 15th Legislature, but he had ultimately endorsed the proposal because of the promise of additional tax revenues, jobs, tourists, and other benefits – only to find that SLDI would subsequently ask for tax breaks, scale back its investment, and then ask for more tax breaks.  

Opponents of the resolution argued that the problem lay not with Saipan Laulau Development, Inc. for requesting the additional benefits, but with the government for sending mixed signals to investors and with the Qualifying Certificate program itself.  Rep. Santos informed the members that she was presently developing a bill to overhaul and depoliticize the Qualifying Certificate program, and urged Rep. Yumul to withdraw his resolution and work with her on the bill instead, but Rep. Yumul said that the Legislature had attempted in the past to amend the program without any success and his primary concern as the Ways and Means chair was to prevent further erosion of the CNMI’s tax base as a result of any additional benefits that CDA might grant to Saipan Laulau Development, Inc. 

In my comments on the floor, I concurred with Rep. Santos and other members that our focus should be on improving the QC statute and minimizing political influences in the program, rather than targeting an individual investor’s request for QC modifications.  I noted that other investors in the past had requested modifications to their Qualifying Certificate, and had been denied because CDA regulations did not allow for reconsideration of approved QCs.  Now the CDA Board is attempting to revise its regulations to allow such reconsideration to accommodate SLDI, and though SLDI is at present the only investor requesting additional benefits, I worried that the new regulations, if promulgated, would open the floodgates for additional requests from other investors that would also have to be accommodated.  I said that rather than singling out one investor in a resolution, we should devote our attention to ensuring that the QC statute provides for the fair, objective, and consistent implementation of the program.  

Because this resolution was particularly controversial and subject to such lengthy debate, a roll call vote was taken.  Members who voted yes to the resolution were: Reps. Edwin Aldan, Joseph Camacho, Frank Dela Cruz, Joseph Deleon Guerrero, Heinz Hofschneider, Victor Hocog, Ray Tebuteb, Ralph Torres, Arnold Palacios, and Ray Yumul.  Members who voted no were: Reps. Oscar Babauta, Ray Palacios, Justo Quitugua, Ed Salas, Rosemond Santos, Stanley Torres, and myself.  Rep. Joseph Reyes abstained; Reps. Diego Benavente and Dave Apatang were absent. 

2.  HR 16-63: endorsing the strategic development plan for the establishment of the Micronesian Center for a Sustainable Future, and an administrative, research, and development center for the Micronesian Chief Executives Summit and the Micronesian Presidents’ Summit (Rep. Joseph Camacho)

3.  HR 16-64: requesting the Office of the Public Auditor to conduct a close-out audit of the Office of the Resident Representative to the United States for the CNMI before the term of the Resident Representative expires on January 2, 2008 (Rep. Ray Yumul)

4.  HR 16-65: creating a Small Business Development and Assistance Task Force to assess and analyze the current economic factors leading to to the decline in small business revenue in the Commonwealth, and to formulate a strategy to assist local businesses in increasing current revenue streams and to assist in the development of new revenue generating prospects; the task force will be chaired by Ways and Means Chair Rep. Yumul (Rep. Ray Yumul + 4)

5.  HR 16-66: urging the Department of Public Safety to vigilantly enforce Public Law 15-127, the Fireworks Control Act of 2008 (Rep. Oscar Babauta +13)

6.  HJR 16-4, HS1: to create a joint focus group within the Legislature to study the Guam military build-up and to help prepare the Commonwealth for the military expansion in the Marianas (Rep. Ray Yumul)

7.  SJR 16-96: congratulating President-Elect Barack Obama on his election as the 44th president of the United States of America

Joint Conference Committee Report on the Budget Placed on the Agenda

The official committee report was first circulated to members just before 2pm on Friday, November 14.  Minutes later, the Floor Leader made a motion to suspend the rules to place the joint committee report on the agenda for adoption.  Several members, including Reps. Dave Apatang, Ed Salas, Ralph Torres, and I objected to the motion, and argued that we should at least have a chance to read the report before we take action on it.  Nevertheless, the majority voted to suspend the rules, and the report was placed on the agenda.

Later in the session, the Speaker announced that the Senate had held a session and passed the conference committee’s bill.  The Floor Leader also announced that he would be going off island for a week to accompany delegate-elect Gregorio Sablan to Washington D.C. and also to ”nurture relationships” with members of the U.S. House and Senate and to discuss the CNMI’s concerns with respect to federalization.  Rep. Camacho is a member of the legislative task force on federalization.  He requested that the House not act on the budget bill until his return.  In response, Rep. Vic Hocog pointed out that every day of delay on the budget was costing the CNMI government.  I pointed out that we would still have a quorum in the Floor Leader’s absence.  It was unclear whether or not the Floor Leader’s request would be accommodated.   

House Legislative Initiative 16-4, amending Article XII to extend the lease terms to 75 years, fails to pass in the House

Introduced by Rep. Heinz Hofschneider, this initiative proposed to extend the term permitted for transfer of leashold interests from 55 years to 75 years, to give the courts greater flexibility in determining whether or not land transactions in violation of Article XII should be voided, and to allow holders of existing leashold agreements to negotiate with lessors for the termination of existing leases and to enter into new leases.  Seven public hearings were held on Saipan, Tinian, and Rota.  According to the committee report, a majority of the comments submitted were in favor of the proposal.    

The initiative that ultimately came to the House floor, however, initially proposed to both extend the lease terms permitted on private property from 55 years to 75 years as well as reduce the Northern Marianas descent requirement for corporations from 100% to 51%.  Many members objected to the latter part of the proposal, observing that the NMD requirement for corporations had been the subject of litigation in the past, and had been changed to 100% during the 2nd constitutional convention for good reason.  I was primarily concerned about lumping the two contentious proposals together in one initiative, and said that it would be better to divide the proposals into separate initiatives rather than ask voters coming to the polls to vote on both at the same time.  Rep. Oscar Babauta then offered an amendment to remove the provision pertaining to corporations, and his amendment was accepted. 

The House held a lengthy debate on this initiative.  Members who opposed placing the initiative on the ballot argued that we should wait until 2011 to decide on the Article XII question as provided by the Covenant, and that the economic arguments in favor of amending Article XII were misleading, and land alienation laws had little to do with the present state of the CNMI economy.  Members were also concerned about the legislative initiative process itself — although legislative initiatives require the endorsement of 3/4 of the members of both Houses, they only require a simple majority of the votes cast to pass.  These members worried that ”outsiders,” citizens who are not of NMI descent, might ultimately be allowed by the courts to vote on the land alienation issue. 

Proponents of the initiative pointed out that the majority of participants in public hearings supported the placement of the initiative on the ballot, said that new and longer lease terms would encourage existing businesses and other leasees to improve and renovate their properties, and give prospective investors one more reason to consider the CNMI as a place to do business, and that we should trust in the wisdom and intelligence of our people and give them the opportunity to vote on the measure one way or another.  I pointed out that the initiative would not mandate 75-year leases or the termination of existing leases for that matter, but would simply expand the pool of potential leasees to property owners so that individuals who do choose to enter into new lease agreements can get a better deal for their land.   

The initiative ultimately failed to garner the “yes” votes of 3/4 of the House, as required by the Constitution.  Members who voted yes to the initiative were: Reps. Edwin Aldan, Oscar Babauta, Diego Benavente, Frank Dela Cruz, Heinz Hofschneider, Vic Hocog, Ray Palacios, Ed Salas, Stanley Torres, and myself.  Members who voted no were: Reps. Dave Apatang, Joseph Camacho, Joseph Deleon Guerrero, Arnold Palacios, Joseph Reyes, Rosemond Santos, Ray Tebuteb, Ralph Torres, and Ray Yumul. Rep. Justo Quitugua was absent.   

House Bill 16-110, HD1, officially establishing the CNMI Veterans Cemetery, passed in the House

Introduced by Rep. Yumul, this bill would officially establish the CNMI Veterans Cemetery by law, create a new Veterans Cemetery Revolving Fund, require the deposits of veterans license plate fees into the account to help finance the operations and maintenance expenses of the cemetery, and designate the Office of Military Liaison and Veterans Affairs as the official expenditure authority for the funds and as the primary agency charged with the responsibility of maintaining the cemetery grounds. Although construction of the cemetery has been completed since 2006, and the cemetery is now in use and governed by regulations promulgated in the Commonwealth Register, as yet there has been no official recognition by law. 

The bill was reviewed by the Federal and Foreign Relations Committee in consultation with the Office of Military Liaison and Veterans Affairs, which is already managing the cemetery.  All 18 members present voted yes to this bill.  Reps. Heinz Hofschneider and Joe Reyes were absent. 

House Bill 16-6, authorizing the assessment of parking meter fees, passed in the House

The bill proposes to give DPW the authority to construct, maintain, and operate parking meters, and to establish reasonable fees.  Fees would be subject to local appropriation and shall be used for enforcement and maintenance related to parking meter administration.  The Department of Public Safety would be responsible for designating areas along public roadways that would appropriate for the installation of parking meters, and for enforcing the time limits imposed by parking meters.  All 18 members present voted yes to this bill.  Reps. Heinz Hofschneider and Joe Reyes were absent.

House Bill 16-109, HS1, HD1, establishing a Military Family Relief Fund, passed in the House

This bill proposes to create a Military Family Relief Fund, supported funds generated by a new “Support our Troops” license plate, as well as any other donations or other contributions, to assist families of Commonwealth residents who are members of the reserve component of the U.S. Armed Forces or National Guard who are called to active duty.  The Executive Director of the Office of Military Liason and Veterans Affairs shall be responsible for administering the program and promulgating necessary regulations.  Proponents of the bill, including author Rep. Joseph Reyes, explained that similar programs exist in other states, and the new program would be funded by voluntarily-purchased “Support Our Troops” license plates, donations, or legislative appropriation. 

The bill originally proposed also creating a new Veterans Cemetery Revolving Fund and diverting a portion of the fees from both the existing U.S. Armed Forces veterans license and the new Support Our Troops licenses to the Veterans Cemetery as well, but I pointed out a conflicting proposal in House Bill 16-110, which would also create the Veterans Cemetery Revolving Fund and proposed allocating all of the veterans license plate fees to the cemetery.  I offered an amendment to delete all references to the Veterans Cemetery and the amendment was accepted.  All 17 members present voted yes to the bill; Reps. Edwin Aldan, Justo Quitugua, and Vic Hocog were absent, as they were attending the joint conference committee meeting on the budget. 

Senate Bill 16-34, HD1, amending 1 CMC Section 6103(a) of the Election Law, passed in the House
This bill proposes to remove the term limits imposed upon the Election Commission members (currently no more than two consecutive four-year terms).  In reviewing the bill, the Special House Committee found that the relatively smaller communities of Tinian and Rota experience greater difficulty than Saipan in identifying qualified individuals who would be willing to serve on the commission, and that this difficulty could hamper the commission’s functions since the commission cannot meet and take official action unless there is a member present from all three senatorial districts.  A review of policies in other jurisdictions revealed that some states and territories with election commissions impose term limits on members, while others do not.  The Special Committee found that lifting term limits would be a logical policy call to make for the CNMI, and recommended the passage of the Senate bill, which was amended by the House committee for technical clarification.  All 18 members present voted yes; Reps Diego Benavente and Joseph Reyes were absent.        

House Bill 16-31, amending the Weapons Control Act to promote shooting resorts, referred back to Committee

The House Committee on Commerce and Tourism recommended filing this bill, citing primarily safety concerns associated with the proposed amendments to the Weapons Control Act and the proposed new industry, concerns which were expressed during public hearings on the islands of Saipan, Tinian, and Rota, and during the public comment period.  Vice Speaker Joseph Deleon Guerrero, himself a member of the Commerce and Tourism Committee who had also signed the report, requested that the bill be referred back to committee for further consideration since it does, after all, offer a new idea that could facilitate economic recovery in the Commonwealth.  Some members, including Reps. Diego Benavente, Ed Salas, and I objected to the motion, and pointed out that the committee had properly reviewed the bill, held public hearings, and put forth its recommendations, and the members should now vote one way or another on whether to file the bill.  I said that the Commerce and Tourism Committee was hardly anti-investment, but that the members had felt compelled to weigh the need for new investment against legitimate safety concerns, and I cited in particular the concerns of then-Department of Public Safety Commissioner Clyde Norita, who had testified against the bill and said that his Department would not be capable of properly regulating the new industry and ensuring the safety of the community.     

In the end, however, 13 members voted to send the bill back to committee, and only six members voted against the referral.  The six members who voted no were Reps. Dave Apatang, Diego Benavente, Frank Dela Cruz, Vic Hocog, Heinz Hofschneider, Ed Salas, and Arnold Palacios.  Rep. Joseph Reyes was absent.  The Speaker then ruled that the bill would be referred to the “Committee of the Speaker.”

House Bill 16-52, to permit a CDA borrower to assign land compensation due from the government to pay for the balance on the CDA loan, filed in the House

Introduced by Rep. Ray Yumul and seven others, this bill proposed to allow a borrower of CDA to assign land compensation due to the borrower from the government, to pay the balance on the CDA loan.  Rep. Yumul argued that this bill would not mandate such agreements, but only provided one more option for borrowers and the government to settle their debts.  Opponents of the bill, including Rep. Diego Benavente and I, said that CDA is not just any regular department of the government, but an autonomous agency and financial lending institution run by a board and executive director with their own fiduciary duties to uphold.  The CDA board and director had strongly opposed this bill, pointing out that land compensation funds have always been uncertain and dependent on appropriations by the Legislature, that the bill could lead to a slippery slope of other similar offset situations, including judgments against the government, tax rebates owed to the people, and vendors not yet paid by the government, and that ultimately CDA could be bankrupted by such offset agreements.  We agreed with Rep. Yumul’s argument that land compensation debts needed to be settled, especially in light of Judge Munson’s recent ruling that forced the Department of Public Lands to finally pay a claimant, but said that that CDA’s autonomy and fiduciary duties should be respected.  

Rep. Hofschneider then suggested that the Commerce and Tourism committee explore policy options to provide relief to the growing numbers of CNMI residents who are facing foreclosure and who are also owed money by the government.  He proposed imposing a stay on any seizures of property until the government pays its debts to such claimants.     

The majority of the House members voted to file the bill.

House Bill 16-85, to provide for a liquid fuel tax holiday two days of every month, referred back to Committee

The Commerce and Tourism Committee had recommended filing this bill, introduced by Rep. Ray Yumul, because of the impact that it would likely have on the government’s revenue base.  At the session, however, the Chairman and other members requested that the bill be referred instead to the newly-created Special Committee on Fuel, which consisted of members of both Commerce and Tourism and Ways and Means, for further review.   

House Bill 16-39, HS1 to repeal and reenact the mechanics lien law, passed in the House

Introduced by Rep. Oscar Babauta and three others, this bill proposes to repeal and reenact the mechanics’ liens law by providing certain assurances required by title insurance companies doing business in the CNMI so that these companies would be more willing to issue title policies containing mechanics’ lien endorsements.  Without such endorsements, banks and other lenders are reluctant to provide traditional construction financing to businesses and residents.  The House Substitute incorporates certain provisions (mostly clarifying definitions) of a very similar bill that followed, HB 16-94, introduced by Rep. Justo Quitugua.  All 19 members present voted yes to this bill.  Rep. Joseph Reyes was absent.

House Bill 16-150, on the Managaha Landing Fee, passed in the House

Introduced by Rep. Dave Apatang and six others, this bill proposes to change the Managaha Landing Fee to a Managaha Departure Fee; to strip the Department of Public Lands from its authority to collect such fees and give that responsibility to the Department of Lands and Natural Resources; and to clearly establish the authority of the Saipan and Northern Islands Legislative Delegation to appropriate such funds.  The present law stipulates that such funds shall be used for a performing arts center, the Department of Public Lands, the Commonwealth Museum, youth programs, Indigenous Affairs, and Carolinian Affairs.  According to some veteran legislators, however, those funds have been held essentially hostage by the Dept of Public Lands, pursuant to an Attorney General’s opinion (of which no one had a copy that day) that the Legislature had no right to appropriate those funds  Rep. Hofschneider raised questions about the practical implementation of the law, if departure fees would be collected at various ports around Saipan, rather than collected at the point of arrival on Managaha, but Rep. Quitugua and others said that the departure fee could be collected at Managaha before passengers return to Saipan.  Rep. Hofschneider said the enactment of this bill into law would provide a good test case for the courts to determine who has authority to those funds.

I asked the members not to vote on the bill that day, and said that there was no reason for us to rush the passage of the bill.  I said that if the intent of the legislation was to clarify the Legislature’s position on some rather complex legal and constitutional issues involving public lands and fees associated with public lands, and also to provide a “good test case” for the courts, then these positions should be properly articulated and documented in a committee report, including a response to the AG’s opinion.  I also noted that the bill had never been subject to review by the Natural Resources Committee, nor had comments been officially solicited from the affected agencies.

Nevertheless, the bill passed in the House with 16 members voting yes. The only two members to vote no were Rep. Ed Salas and myself.  Reps. Diego Benavente and Joe Reyes were absent.   

House Bill 16-58, establishing the Higher Education Commission, passed in the House

Introduced by Rep. Justo Quitugua and three others, this bill proposes to establish the Higher Education Commission, pusuant to the passage of House Legislative Initiative 15-1.  The initaitive relieved the Northern Marianas College Board of Regents of licensing responsibilities over post-secondary educational institutions, and created a new Higher Education Commission to take on that responsibility.  The bill requires that members on the commission shall serve in a voluntary capacity and be appointed by the Governor, and subject to confirmation by both the Senate and the House.  Commissioners shall be registered voters, U.S. citizens, possess a Master’s degree from a U.S. accredited college or university, and have at least five years of related work experience.  All 18 members present voted yes to the bill; Reps Diego Benavente and Joe Reyes were absent.

House Bill 16-168, providing for the lateral transfer of Division of Immigration personnel to other agencies, passed in the House

During the morning half of the session on Friday, November 14, the House held a meeting with Division of Immigration Director Mel Grey and his staff to discuss their concerns with respect to the transition from local to federal control of immigration, and the uncertain status of 68 local immigration personnel.  Mr. Grey expressed his dismay at the unresponsiveness of the Department of Homeland Security to his suggestions and repeated requests for information, including inquiries related to the implementation of the transition to federal control, the presence of enforcement personnel on Tinian and Rota, and the hiring preference granted to qualified CNMI residents applying for federal immigration jobs under U.S. Public Law 110-229.  Other concerns expressed involved the future livelihoods of local immigration personnel who might be displaced by the transition, some of whom would be ineligible for federal jobs because they are over the age of 37, some of whom are eligible to retire but unable to do so because of deficient employer contributions, all of whom have families to take care of. 

Many House members assured the immigration staff that they would be taken care of, that there was a bill to provide for their lateral transfers within the CNMI government in the event that they would not be picked up for federal jobs, that would allow them to retain their current salaries and benefits, and that they would also be provided for in the FY 2009 budget bill.  I expressed concern about whether or not the government was even in a position to promise such jobs to the staff, especially considering that virtually every government employee is anxious about future salary cuts or furloughs at this time.  I also requested more information from Mr. Grey about the number of immigration personnel, positions held, the number of years worked, salaries earned, and an indication of whether or not these individuals would qualify for federal immigration jobs.  Later in the hearing one immigration staffer expressed his frustration with both the local and federal governments, complained about some officials’ concern for contract workers, and said that the 68 immigration personnel were all voters and represented 68 local families who also deserved concern.  He also, however, asked if the local government could even afford to guarantee lateral transfers            

Some members asked if the Governor’s lawsuit might have anything to do with the Department of Homeland Security’s lack of responsiveness to the Division of Immigration’s inquiries.  Mr. Grey said that he doubted it, but many of us remained unconvinced.  Rep. Diego Benavente said that the newly-created legislative task force on federalization would formally follow up on the concerns expressed by Mr. Grey and thus far ignored by the federal agencies, and requested copies of Mr. Grey’s correspondence with Homeland Security and others.   

In the afternoon, we took up House Bill 16-168 for action.  I reiterated my concerns about misleading the immigration staff and promising jobs that the government might not be able to afford, and said that there was no reason to rush action on the bill that day, considering that the legislative task force was still gathering information from the Division of Immigration and also considering that the implementation of federalization would not take effect for at least another 7 months.  Rep. Apatang said that I should care about the families of these immigration staff and argued that providing their lateral transfers would have no impact on the government because these positions have already been budgeted for.  I responded that my concerns about the bill had nothing to do with not caring about the staff, but about raising false hopes about what the government could actually afford, and pointed out that we had just adopted a joint committee report on the budget that estimated a $9million shortfall from FY 2008, that the government was presently operating on a deficit, that we owed enormous and mounting debts to the Retirement Fund, that we were liable for numerous judgments against the government, and that we really had little choice anymore in the matter of salary reductions and furloughs.  I also said that I am concerned not only about the immigration staff, but about all government employees who also have every reason to feel anxious during these times of serious fiscal difficulty.  The Speaker interrupted at that point and admonished me to “calm down.” I said that if I become passionate in debate it is because the CNMI is in a very real crisis, and we should, for once, be honest with our people about it and refrain from misleading them. 

Rep. Ed Salas offered an amendment to require that immigration employees should be laterally transferred to positions for which they are qualified.  The amendment was accepted. 

In the end, however, 17 members voted yes to this bill; I was the only member to vote no.  Reps. Diego Benavente and Joseph Reyes were absent. 

House Bill 16-12, HS1, to repeal and reenact the Foreign Retiree Investment Certificate law, placed on calendar

The Commerce and Tourism Committee produced a report recommending the passage of HB 16-12, HS1, and the report was adopted by the House.  I objected to the adoption of the report that day, and noted that the bill had been recalled from Committee and placed on the calendar some months ago, then referred back to the Commerce and Tourism Committee for further review after a substitute bill was introduced.  The Commerce and Tourism Committee, I noted, had not actually met to review the bill, and I also noted deficiencies in the report itself, including a lack of explanation for some key amendments that had been made, such as the proposal to lower the age of foreign “retirees” from 55 to 35.  Rep. Joseph Camacho said that the House had already established that a committee report is considered duly adopted if it is signed by a majority of the committee members, whether or not the committee had met, and said there was no need to rehash old arguments.  His comment, however, did little to address the deficiencies in the report itself.

Nevertheless, the majority of the House members voted to adopt the report.  The bill has now been placed on the bill calendar for action.     

House Bill 16-192, to include Managaha Island in the exemption of tourist areas exempt from the alcoholic beverage prohibition on Election Day

Introduced by Rep. Rosemond Santos and passed on first and final reading that day, this bill amends the recently-passed Public Law 16-18 to include concession stands on Managaha Island in the list of areas exempt from the prohibition on sales of alcohol on Election Day.  That list presently includes airports, hotels, hotel resorts, and golf courses.  Seventeen members voted yes to the bill, I abstained due to a possible conflict of interest, and Reps. Diego Benavente and Joseph Reyes were absent. 

Gov. Communications re certifications of vacant positions of “vital importance”

The CNMI government is operating on a deficit, suffered a shortfall of an estimated $9million at the end of FY 2008, is likely to be held immediately liable for more judgments against the government and debts to the Retirement Fund, is considering salary and personnel reductions, and still, bewilderingly, hiring continues virtually unchecked.  I noted with both great interest and dismay that the Governor has, in the last few weeks certified such positions as “PIO Assistant,” “Mayor’s Departmental Assistant,” “Special Project Assistant,” “Community Development Specialist” for the Governor’s office as vacant and of “vital importance for the efficient delivery of essential public services,” in some cases even waiving the requirement to announce the positions.  Why?

Misc. Communication 16-56, Saipan Chamber of Commerce endorses marine sanctuary in the CNMI

In a letter to Council on Environmental Quality Chairman Mr. James Connaughton, Saipan Chamber of Commerce President Jim Arenowski extended the support of the Chamber board to the effort to work with the CNMI government in order to designate a marine sanctuary in the Northern Mariana Islands.

In his comments on the letter, Rep. Diego Benavente urged for the members to maintain their opposition to the proposed marine national monument and noted recent media reports that had revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney and others had expressed concern about the proposal, and sympathy for the opposition expressed by many of the CNMI’s elected officials with respect to the monument.  He suggested that members draft a resolution to thank the Vice President and reiterate opposition to the proposal; Floor Leader Joseph Camacho said that he was willing to work with Rep. Benavente on such a resolution.

This is to announce that the Senate will be having a session this Thursday, November 6 @ 10am in the Senate Chamber.  Click here for the draft agenda. 

Also, here are the highlights from the House sessions held last Thursday, October 23 and last Friday, October 31 in Rota:

Senate Budget Bill Rejected — Joint Conference Committee Formed

The House members present unanimously voted to reject the Senate’s version of the Fy 2009 budget, in order to go into a joint conference to come up with a compromise bill.  The House members assigned to the joint conference committee were Reps. Vic Hocog, Edwin Aldan, and Justo Quitugua.  The Senate members assigned to the committee were Sens. Maria Pangelinan, Paul Manglona, and Joseph Mendiola.     

Some members objected to the Senate’s action in simply substituting their version of the budget wholesale, and said they felt insulted by Senator Pangelinan’s comments in the media to the effect of, “the Senate has done its job” — which presumably some members interpreted to mean that the House had not.  I did not share my colleagues’ feelings of insult, and expressed appreciation for the enormous work and careful attention to detail that had gone into the Senate’s budget bill.  I had disagreed with the House leadership’s decision to create “lump sum” budgets and to grant exorbitant reprogramming powers to the Governor.  The Senate’s approach, I thought, was more responsible, and essentially set a new standard for governmental budgeting that I hope present and future legislators will follow. 

Particular provisions in the Senate’s bill that I favored included: 1) the elimination of vacant FTEs; 2) specific appropriations for utilities, from which funds cannot be reprogrammed for any other purpose; 3) correction of mathematical errors discovered in the Governor’s budget proposa; 4) the creation of one central government pool for Retirement Fund employer contributions, that would allow government employees who are eligible to retire to do so regardless of the department or agency for which they work — provided, of course, that funding is actually available in that pool; and 5) the effort to shift the Dept of Labor’s focus to assisting citizens and residents in finding employment in the private sector, beginning with assessments of the citizen and foreign national workforce.    

Some of the concerns about the bill that I cited during the deliberations included:

• The Senate’s proposal to revive austerity Fridays and unpaid holidays, which have proven to be fundamentally unfair and on the whole ineffective, and which serve to breed resentment among employees.  I urged the joint conference committee to consider other cost-cutting measures instead, including cutting perks granted to public officials.  Also, although the Senate’s committee report notes that the Executive Branch has requested a technical assistance grant from the Dept of Interior to conduct an organizational review of the government that will help streamline certain agencies and ultimately cut costs, I said that we should not simply wait for the grant to come in, if it ever does.  At this point, we have no choice: downsizing of the government is inevitable and necessary.  I said that in laying off employees we should give people sufficient notice and consider granting severance packages, including at least three months’ salary, to facilitate their transition out of government and into the private sector.   
• The absence of any clear prohibition in the Senate bill on the use of public funds for the Governor’s lawsuit against federalization, which had been in the House bill; and
• The Senate’s proposal to raise of individual legislators’ operational budgets ($117,000 in the Senate version, up from the House’s proposal of $108,000).

I also asked that the joint conference committee consider in its compromise bill the shortfall in resources that may have occurred by the end of FY 2008, and seek an update on projected revenues for FY 2009, and that public health (the Dept of Public Health, including the hospital and associated clinics); public safety (Dept of Public Safety, Corrections, the Attorney General’s office, etc.), public education (the Public School System and the Northern Marianas College), the Retirement Fund, and CUC are properly prioritized for funding – everything else should be considered secondary and either cut or zero-funded.  I also requested that joint conference committee meetings be open to the public, and that the committee be granted subpoena powers, noting the Senate Committee’s report that numerous agencies had failed to respond to its inquiries.    

At the session on Rota last Friday, Rep. Hocog noted that the joint conference committee hopes to have a compromise bill ready for review by this Friday, November 7. 

Appropriations Bills Passed in the House

1. HB 16-165, SS1 — appropriating $367,000 from the 3rd Senatorial District’s Developers Infrastructure Tax, $86,000 of which would go to parking lots for Kagman High School and Koblerville Elementary; $15,000 of which would go to the rehabilitation of the Kagman II baseball field; $10,000 of which would go to the Veterans Cemetery for improvement and upkeep; $107,000 of which would go to the paving of Tangantangan Road; $104,000 of which would go to the upgrading of water lines in Dandan; and $45,000 of which would go to the paving of the road at Northern Marianas College.  This bill from the Senate proposed a significant increase from the original House proposal (which had appropriated $111,000, and had not included the road paving projects).  

During the discussion I noted that we had earlier in the session rejected the Senate’s version of the budget, that we had still failed to pass a budget for FY 2009, and that we were contemplating painful cuts, including austerity holidays and layoffs.  It seemed incongruous to me to then move on, less than an hour later, to appropriations for mostly pet projects, more than tripling the expenditures that had been originally proposed, and with little time for proper review.  Rep. Hofschneider said that it would be wrong to hold off on worthy projects such as the baseball field rehabilitation, noting that activities such as baseball help keep kids off of drugs — a commonly-cited justification for public funding of baseball that I have heard before in the Legislature, but which does little to explain why we apparently favor baseball above other sports that our children play.  Rep. Hofschneider also pointed out that the Developers Tax funds cannot be used to supplement salaries anyway, at which point I interjected and said that I had never suggested such a thing, but was only urging that we seriously and sensibly prioritize projects funded by the Developers Infrastructure Tax and the poker licensing fees, and that we take the time to review such bills and verify that funds were actually available.  

A visibly-irritated Rep. Apatang then admonished me to “wake up,” and said, among other things, that all of the projects proposed were important to our constituents, that some politicians once elected forget the promises they made and only sit and wait at pavilions waiting for people to show up rather than going to the people directly, and that I should not go on Harry Blalock’s Tuesday radio show just to say that I am “the only legislator working” on the hill.  Although this was hardly the first time that Rep. Apatang had lost his temper on the floor, even I was startled by this latest outburst, and the Speaker finally interrupted and called on Rep. Ray Palacios.  Rep. Palacios remarked that each legislator has projects that are important to him or her, and urged me to offer my own projects for funding for the members to consider.  The Speaker then ended the discussion and called for the roll.  I was the only one to vote no to this bill.  Reps. Frank Dela Cruz and Rosemond Santos were absent.   

2.  HB 16-129, HS1 — to appropriate the Tobacco Control Funds for FY 2009, passed by the House during the Rota session.  The author of the bill, Vice Speaker Joseph Deleon Guerrero, explained that most of the programs listed in the bill are presently dependent on the Tobacco Control Fund, and that bill was based on funding requests and budget proposals from the Dept of Public Health and the Public School System.  $900,000 would go to the Dept of Public Health, for the Diabetes Prevention and Control Program (535,000), the Community Guidance Center’s Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services ($250,000), mammogram film reading and interpretation ($39,000), the purchase of a Network Attached Storage for the Cancer Registry ($1,000), the Cancer Coalition ($50,000), and the Comprehensive Cancer Control Program ($25,000).  $325,000 would to go the Public School System for the development of a comprehensive school health education program, for Project Familia, and for the Teen Talk program.  In addition, $39,000 was set aside for the youth centers on Saipan, and $75,000 each to Rota and Tinian’s Tobacco and Substance Abuse prevention programs at their respective health centers.

I inquired about the status of another bill that had been passed recently from the House, HB 16-120, introduced by Rep. Justo Quitugua, which proposed to fund PSS’s comprehensive coordinated school health education program out of the Tobacco Control Fund, and which now sits in the Senate committee for review.  The Vice Speaker explained that the Senate was anticipating the passage of HB 16-129 and in that event would not act on HB 16-120.  The Vice Speaker also noted that most of the funding that had been originally proposed for the PSS program in HB 16-120 was preserved in HB 16-129 (originally $350,000; now $325,000) and Rep. Quitugua said this amount was acceptable.  The reporting requirement in HB 16-120 had been somewhat more stringent– however, Rep. Quitugua agreed that the bill in its present form should be passed, and added that he would consider possible amendments to suggest to the Senate that might strengthen the reporting requirement. 

All 14 members present voted yes to the bill.       

3.  HB 16-182 — appropriating $250,000 from the interest earned on Commonwealth Development Authority bonds, for perimeter fencing and other infrastructure improvements at Sinapalo Elementary, and $150,000 for new tractors for the Department of Lands and Natural Resources of Rota, introduced by Rep. Vic Hocog during the Rota session.   The funds had originally been appropriated for Rota’s Route 100 paving project; that project has been held up for several years now due to land compensation and endangered species issues. 

I did not object to funding facility improvements for Sinapalo Elementary (the principal had clearly articulated major problems with the school’s facilities during the presentation earlier that day), though I was less clear about the need for brand-new tractors.  My overarching concern about this bill, however, had to do with the source of funding.  During our lunchtime recess, I spoke to officials from both the Dept of Public Works and the Commonwealth Development Authority.  Officials at both agencies confirmed that there was “probably” still money left from the Rota road project, but that they would need additional time to verify the amounts.  Dept of Public Works officials also noted that there might be less than $400,000 available, as certain contract obligations had not yet been closed out.  I brought this to the attention of the members when we reconvened, but Rep. Hocog said that he had received his own assurances from the same agencies that the funding was in fact there in the amounts being proposed for appropriation.  I suggested that the House not act on the bill immediately, and that we take additional time to verify the funding that was actually available for these projects.  Rep. Hocog objected, however, and said that if there were in fact insufficient funds available, he was confident that the Governor would catch the error and not sign the bill into law.  I remarked that we should not wait for the Governor to do what we should be doing ourselves.  In the end, twelve members voted yes; Rep. Salas and I voted no.   

Action on Other Bills (During the Rota Session)

Note: Fourteen members attended the Rota session, including myself.  Absent were Reps. Dave Apatang, Oscar Babauta, Diego Benavente, Heinz Hofschneider, Joe Reyes, and Stanley Torres. 

1.  HB 16-145, HD1 — to mandate that the government prioritize payments of the employer contributions of government employees who are eligible to retire.  This bill was laid on the table until the next session.  The Floor Leader requested that the Health, Education, and Welfare committee consult with the Retirement Fund first on the bill.  

2.  HB 16-135 — to establish a Commonwealth Autism Commission to develop a state plan to guide services for individuals with autism spectrum disorders.  During the discussion, I requested clarification on some provisions of the bill that seemed to be ambiguous, including the appointing authorities for each of the entities that would be represented on the Commission, and reimbursement for reasonable expenses of the Commission (the bill provides that such reimbursement would be “decided equally” among the House, Senate, and Executive Branch).  The Chair of Health, Education, and Welfare committee, Rep. Ralph Torres, requested that the bill be laid on the table until the next session to give the committee additional time to review the bill, and so that the author of the bill, Rep. Hofschneider, could participate in the deliberations.    

3.  HB 16-108  — to restrict the application of disaster emergencies; disaster shall not include “government financial crisis or financial hardship.”  Introduced by Floor Leader Rep. Joseph Camacho in the midst of a series of gubernatorial disaster emergencies declared on the Commonwealth Ports Authority to avert a technical default on a bond indenture agreement.  I had voted against this bill the first time because I thought that it was ambiguously written; the Senate’s offered a minor amendment to the bill that did little to clarify the language of the bill.  Despite my objections to the litany of questionable emergency declarations and clear abuses of power during this governor’s term, I worried about future, more prudent governors being unduly hampered by the restriction in the event of some unforeseen and serious threat to the public welfare that could be caused by financial hardship.  Moreover, if the driving force behind this bill is the belief, bolstered by mounting evidence, that the governor is abusing his power and ruling by executive order, then the Legislature already has other effective avenues available, not least of which is impeachment, that will address the problems raised by the actions of the present governor, without unduly tying the hands of future governors. 

4.  HB 16-187 – to amend Section 7(a)(2) and repeal and reenact Section 7(c) of the Rota Casino Act, introduced by Rep. Vic Hocog that day.  The bill proposes to authorize the Rota Casino Gaming Commission to utilize funds collected from casino licenses and fees as necessary without the restriction, which currently exists, that requires that casinos that are not ready to open at the time of payment of fees, shall have their fees held in escrow by the Commission or until three years have lapsed from the date the license was issued, whichever occurs first.  Rep. Hocog argued that this requirement was an unnecessary and unjustified burden.  The bill also proposed to amend the Rota Casino Act so that it would comply with the existing tax code, specifically relating to the gross revenue surtax and gambling revenue tax.  Currently, the Rota Casino Act imposes a 10% tax on gross gaming revenues, which the House legal counsel explained is inconsistent with the CNMI’s existing tax law.  If the bill is signed into law, Rota’s tax laws relating to casinos would be the same as Tinian’s.  All 14 members present voted yes on this bill.    

House Resolutions Adopted

1.  HJR 16-15, HS1 — introduced by Rep. Joseph Reyes, this joint resolution requests that U.S. Congress cause to establish a U.S. Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic and a Benefit Office, to serve all CNMI veterans and their dependents.

2.  HJR 16-20 — to establish an ad hoc legislative task force on federalization, the members of which will be appointed by the Speaker and the Senate President.

3.  HR 16-59 — recognizing Kinki Nippon Tourist Co. for winning the prestigious Tour of the Year 2008 award, presented by the JATA Executive Committee

4.  HR 16-60– requesting that the Governor issue a full and detailed report to the Legislature on actions taken and funds used to address the disaster emergencies described in numerous Executive Orders, and to present a plan to the Legislature, including a financial strategy, for addressing the present state of disaster emergency, declared on October 8.  The resolution notes that the situation at CUC appears to be worsening despite nearly three years of the utility being under the direct control of the Governor, that the Governor has failed to present a plan to the Legislature to address the management, operational, and infrastructural challenges facing CUC, that the Governor has also failed to deliver full and detailed reports on the funding that has been diverted to cope with the emergencies, and that the Governor has essentially resorted to rule by executive order, suspending all pertinent statutes and regulations to deal with alleged emergency conditions, with no sign of planning.     

5.  HR 16-61 — recognizing and commending Mr. Kim Prinz, President of the Commonwealth Health Center Volunteer Association for her unitiring dedication and selfless contributions as a CHC volunteer for over 18 years.  

6.  HR 16-62– asking the Commonwealth Development Authority Board to deny granting additional benefits to the existing Qualifying Certificate for Saipan Laulau Development, Inc.  Introduced by Rep. Ray Yumul at the Rota session, the resolution expresses objection to the granting of any additional QC benefits for the Laulau development, as well as objection to the Governor’s personal intervention on behalf of Saipan Laulau Development Inc., in appealing to the CDA Board to reconsider the QC.  The resolution was laid on the table to allow for further review, and Rep. Yumul has since called in the CDA Executive Director and economic analyst for a meeting with legislators to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the QC program generally, and the CDA Board’s on-going efforts to amend its regulations in order to accommodate requests for QC reconsideration.   

Action on Standing Committee Reports (Rota Session)

1.  SCR 16-47 – recommending the filing of HB 16-31 (to promote and allow shooting resort developments); HB 16-52 (to permit a borrower of the Commonwealth Development Authority to assign land compensation due from the government to pay for the balance on the CDA loan); HB 16-95 (liquid fuel tax holiday two days out of every month); and HB 16-94 (to repeal and reenact the mechanics’ lien law).  The members voted to refer this bill back to the Commerce and Tourism committee, and requested that the reports on each bill be separated rather than lumped together.  Rep. Yumul in particular objected to the recommendation to file HB 16-95, which he had introduced, and said that the committee did not adequately justify its recommendation. 

2.  SCR 16-48 – recommending the passage of HB 16-39, repealing and reenacting the mechanics’ lien law, and incorporating certain provisions from a very similar bill, HB 16-94.  This report was adopted.

House Comm. 16-76 – Natural Resources Committee Asks Dept of Public Lands for 10-Yr Financial Report

In a letter dated Oct. 9, 2008, Natural Resources Committee Chair Rep. Ray Tebuteb asked Public Lands Secretary John del Rosario for a complete ten-year financial accounting report, from 1998 to 2008, of all funds received from public lands and the disposition of such funds, including all funds received, the source of such funds, disposition of such funds for each year, amount transferred to the Public Lands Trust pursuant to Article XI of the Constitution, and all amounts held in checking accounts, savings accounts, TCDs, and any other financial account and institution.  The Committee has requested a response from DPL by October 31, 2008. 

***

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

Here are the highlights from the House sessions last week and this week, and some of my comments:

CUC PRIVATIZATION BILL, HB 16-77, HS1, HD6, SD1 BECOMES PL 16-17 THRU VETO OVERRIDE

I voted against the veto override, for several key reasons.  First, as even the proponents of the veto override acknowledged, the bill itself was flawed.  I expressed concerns particularly about:

• The $250million minimum bid requirement for full privatization of CUC, without a professional and independent appraisal of CUC having first been conducted;
• The misguided limitation of the procurement process to bids only, prohibiting Requests for Proposals (to prevent protests, proponents said, but which makes no sense for a procurement that must take into account qualifications and performance, and not only the lowest price offered. Besides, protests prevail when they have merit — i.e., when CUC fails to follow its own procurement regulations); and
• The restoration of the governing board for CUC without any fundamental changes to the structure that was in place for previous boards, including required qualifications, duties, and responsibilities. And certainly the former CUC boards played a huge role in creating the mess with which we are dealing today.    

But where the majority of members felt comfortable overriding the veto with the knowledge that “we can always come back and amend the law,” I strongly felt that we should instead go back to the drawing board to produce a better bill, holding public hearings and taking into account the numerous comments and concerns we had received from the business sector, the Public Auditor, the administration, CUC, and many concerned citizens.  I noted that this would be at least the third attempt to privatize CUC, and that every time that effort has failed the credibility of the government has taken a major blow.  I said that if we are going to embark on the road to privatization again, then this time around we should take every effort to ensure that we do it right.   

I also took exception with the arguments that the proponents of the veto override presented, that the override was necessary in order to prevent the governor from declaring another state of emergency that would justify the issuance of a sole source privatization contract for CUC.  Several members actually suggested that the legislature is helpless to do anything about emergency declarations of the governor, no matter how questionable.  Some even described the governor’s actions as outright abuses of power.  I said that if the issue is a runaway governor who is abusing his power, then we absolutely do have the constitutional authority as legislators to challenge those abuses.  We could pass legislation that explicitly prohibits sole-source full privatization of CUC, for example, or formally investigate the governor’s actions and begin impeachment proceedings.  But overriding the governor’s veto on a flawed privatization bill would not accomplish the objectives of 1) protecting a potentially valuable and critically important public asset, and of 2) holding the governor accountable for abuses of power.        

A few members, including Rep. Frank Dela Cruz and I, also expressed worries about the mixed signals that the veto override might send to the federal government, and particularly the Dept. of Interior, at a time when we are asking for, among other things, technical assistance (including an independent professional assessment of the power plant facilities); federal funding (nearly $4million in the immediate term for the overhaul of two engines — to do the work that DCM had failed to complete); and assistance securing environmental permits for a possible new power plant facility using heavy fuel oil, which is significantly cheaper than the diesel that we currently use.  

Just days before the session, Mr. Nik Pula of the Office of Insular Affairs had met with the legislature to discuss the CNMI’s power issues.  He had noted that this was at least the third attempt by the CNMI government to privatize CUC, and he cautioned against repeating the mistakes of the past.  He had also said that the CNMI’s leaders needed to present a detailed plan to secure federal assistance for power crisis, and he had even suggested that if the legislature pushed through with the veto override, then perhaps the CNMI didn’t really need OIA’s assistance.  Rep. Dela Cruz and I both argued that such statements should give us compelling reason to reconsider overriding the governor’s veto.  But other members, including Vice Speaker Deleon Guerrero, dismissed these concerns, and said he felt confident that OIA would still be willing to assist us even if we did move forward with the override.  Then we went to vote.   

The override passed with a vote of 15-3.  The only House members to vote no to the veto override were Reps. Ed Salas, Frank Dela Cruz, and myself.  The three of us had also voted against the original bill.  Rep. Oscar Babauta abstained.  Rep. Ray Yumul was absent. 

APPROPRIATIONS BILLS PASSED IN THE HOUSE

1.  HB 16-179 – introduced on October 1 and passed by the House on October 2 with a vote of 15-4, the appropriations bill for FY 09 proposed to give lump sum appropriations with maximum reprogramming flexibility to the expenditure authorities.  Numerous amendments were made on the floor, mostly correcting errors and clarifying the administrative provisions of the bill.  A significant (and, I thought, prudent and timely) amendment offered by Rep. Diego Benavente and accepted by a majority of the members was to prohibit the use of public funds for the governor’s lawsuit against federalization; only Rep. Vic Hocog expressed strong opposition to the amendment.  Rep. Oscar Babauta objected to language in the bill that required a joint resolution from the legislature to fill positions certified by expenditure authorities as essential.  Rep. Ed Salas and I objected to the approach of granting lump sum appropriations, rather than working out a detailed budget.  I felt that such an approach to the budget amounted to an abdication of our responsibilities as legislators; Rep. Salas, for his part, observed that the House was proposing to give the governor control of over $75million.  I also expressed concern about the fact that members were given the benefit of little more than one day to review the budget for the entire government, and noted that some errors had already been caught during the deliberations — how many more errors would be caught after the vote? 

The only members to vote no to the bill were Reps. Hocog, Salas, Babauta, and myself. 

2.  HB 16-165– appropriating $111K from the Developers Infrastructure Tax Fund, $86K of which would go towards paving the parking areas of Kagman High and Koblerville Elementary; $15K of which would go toward the rehabilitation of the Kagman baseball field; and $10K of which would go towards the Veterans Cemetery.  During the discussion I noted that the bill had just been introduced the day before, that members had not been given enough time to review the merits of the bill, and requested that we defer action until our session the following week.  The request was voted down by the members.  I was the only one to vote no.

3.  HB 16-171, HS1 – reappropriating $120,000 from fund balances appropriated to Precinct 2 projects under Saipan Local Law 14-11, and granting $20k to Karidat, for the House of Manhoben; $25k to the NMC bookstore for renovations; and $75,906 for a road project in Precinct 1.  The original bill had proposed to reappropriate only $20,000 to Karidat, which had been forced to shut down the youth center after certain key grants had expired and been reduced.  I had supported the original bill, after speaking with the author and also a representative of Karidat, and ascertaining that the source of funding was coming from Precinct 2 and going right back into the same precinct.  That particular House session started late due to a power outage, and I had stepped out of the chamber for a few minutes before the session started and as other members were still filing in.  By the time I had returned the substitute bill had been introduced and placed on the calendar and the roll call vote had started.  I was not informed about the substitute bill when I asked for clarification (I was only told, “the Karidat bill”), and so voted yes to the substitute bill. 

This particular vote bothered my conscience a great deal when I realized what had happened, and I said as much in brief remarks delivered to the House at the following session.  Although my “no” vote would not have changed the outcome (the bill would have passed overwhelmingly anyway), it was still a hard lesson for this freshman legislator.  Though I am always disappointed by the gamesmanship and lack of due diligence that we often demonstrate in the House on appropriations bills, I was also frankly disappointed in myself for letting my guard down and trusting in the information I had been given on a bill that was being voted on.     

VETO OVERRIDE ON SB 16-16, HD1 FAILS TO PASS

Senate Bill 16-16, HD1 proposed to amend the Public Lands Act of 2006 to establish Deputy Secretaries for the Dept of Public Lands for Rota and Tinian.  The deputy secretaries would have been paid for by the DPL, but would be appointed by the mayors and confirmed by the municipal councils, and also removable by the mayors for any reason.  The governor had vetoed this bill because he believed that it conflicted with the constitution.  Only the Dept of Public Lands (formerly the Marianas Public Lands Authority) has the constitutional authority to administer public lands CNMI-wide, and this bill proposed to essentially give some of this authority to the municipal governments.

Enough members agreed with the governor to prevent a veto override.  These members included: Reps. Frank Dela Cruz, Heinz Hofschneider, Ray Palacios, Ed Salas, Stanley Torres, and myself.  I had also voted against the original bill for the same reason.      

OTHER BILLS PASSED IN THE HOUSE

1.  HB 16-176, Health Care Professions Board

Rep. Vic Hocog introduced a bill similar to one that had just been vetoed by the governor for technical errors.  The bill proposes to require the advice and consent of the Senate for appointments to the Health Care Professions Licensing Board.  It passed unanimously in the House.

2.  HB 16-174, Salary Cap for Professionals

This bill had also been vetoed by the governor due to a lack of clarity in the definition of “professionals” for the legislature and judiciary.  We deliberated on the governor’s comments, and also on comments about other ambiguities in the bill.  A similar but clearer version of the bill was introduced by Rep. Hofschneider and the Speaker, and passed by a majority in the House.  Only Rep. Stanley Torres abstained.

3.  HB 16-47, Indoor Smoking Ban

Several public hearings were held on all three islands, and for the most part comments submitted on the bill were very supportive.  The bill was amended on the floor to allow restaurants with attached bars to opt for the exemption from the smoking ban after established dining hours or 10pm, whichever is earlier (the bill had previously exempted only bars, not restaurants with attached bars).  15 members voted yes on the bill including myself; Reps. Hocog and Reyes abstained; Rep. Stanley Torres voted no. 

4.  HB 16-174, Dept of Public Health and Public School System professionals

This bill proposed to allow DPH and PSS certain exemptions under the CNMI labor law to hire noncitizen professionals for positions that are difficult to recruit.  In DPH’s case, the bill would permit the hospital to retain its U.S.-licensed (but non-U.S. citizen) emergency room doctor, and greater flexibility to hire other critically-needed non-U.S. citizen medical professionals including doctors and nurses.  In PSS’s case, the bill would facilitate the recruiting and hiring of non-U.S. citizen special education instructors and foreign language instructors.  All members present voted yes to this bill, including myself.

5.  HB 16-143, Special Judges

This bill proposed to prohibit the appointment to Special Judge of any former judge who was not retained in an election.  I had initially worried, along with a few other members, that the bill was politically motivated.  Rep. Stanley Torres, the author of the bill, argued briefly but persuasively that the will of the people should be respected — and a judge who is not retained in an election should not be considered for Special Judge appointments.  All members present voted yes to the bill, including myself. 

6,  HB 16-66, NMC Board of Regents Autonomy

This bill proposed to grant the NMC Board of Regents greater autonomy in recruiting and hiring the college president, and setting the terms of the contract.  Existing law requires that the initial term of a president’s contract be for two years only; such requirements infringing on the autonomy of the board were identified as a concern by WASC.  Most of the members present voted yes to this bill, including myself; only Rep. Stanley Torres abstained.

JOINT RESOLUTIONS/COMMITTEE REPORT ON FEDERALIZATION

The House adopted two joint resolutions (HJR 16-14 and HJR 16- ) requesting that China and Russia be included in the special visa waiver program for Guam and the CNMI, and requesting that the all of the CNMI’s existing foreign investors (both the perpetual investor permit holders and the long-term business permit holders) be included into the foreign investor transitional program.

The House also adopted a joint committee report, which was adopted at a recent Senate session as well, which recommended against appropriating any public funds for the governor’s lawsuit against federalization, and which further recommended the Legislature’s pro-active cooperation, negotiation, and consultation with the federal agencies as the new immigration regulations are being drafted. 

COMMITTEE REPORTS ADOPTED

• SCR 16-35 – recommending the passage of HB 16-47, to prohibit smoking in all workplaces and public places.  (Note: this bill was passed by a majority of the House members present)
• SCR 16-37 — recommending the filing of House Legislative Initiative 16-5, which proposed to amend section 4 of Article X of the Constitution, to permit borrowing for governent operations
• SCR 16-38 — recommending the filing of HB 16-100, which proposed to designate a public park in Kagman.
• SCR 16-39 — recommeding that the full membership of the House decide on House Legislative Initiative 16-4, which proposes to amend Article XII, Section 3 of the Constitution to change the term permitted for leasing of private lands, from 55 to 75 years (Note:  this initiative has now been placed on the calendar)
• SCR 16-40 — from the Health and Education Committee, recommending the passage of House Bill 16-60, which proposes to remove the surety bond requirement for driver’s education schools.  (Note:  this bill has now been referred to the Committee on Commerce & Tourism, for further review of the insurance provisions)
• SCR 16-41– recommending the passage of HB 16-66, which proposes to provide the Northern Marianas College Board of Regents with full autonomy in hiring and retaining the president of the college (Note: this bill was passed by the House) 
• SCR 16-42 — recommending the passage of HB 16-126, to establish a population-based cancer registry in the CNMI.  (Note:  this initiative has now been placed on the calendar)

ON HARRY BLALOCK’S FOOD FOR THOUGHTWe spent an inordinate amount of time (at least an hour) at one of the sessions talking about Mr. Harry Blalock’s recent radio commentary criticizing the Legislature for its opposition to the proposed marine monument in the Northern Islands.  Rep. Stanley Torres requested that the Legislature formally censure him and write letters to his employer complaining about his harsh remarks; other members agreed and called Mr. Blalock a “disrespectful,” “un-Christian,” and ”un-American,” “outsider.”  I was appalled and said we should expect and welcome criticism in our line of work as legislators – and moreover that we should evaluate whether there might be any merit to the criticism.  I also remarked that some of the criticisms that have been levelled against elected officials include xenophobia (fear of ”outsiders”), intolerance of free speech, and petty vindictiveness, and that our comments and threats only give credence to such criticisms.  Rep. Hofschneider argued that the best way to respond to criticism is to prove the critic wrong — and that if our contention is that we can protect those northern waters better than “outsiders” then we should do it ourselves by law or constitutional amendment.  The Speaker, to his credit, finally put an end to the discussion and said members should accept criticism and try not to be so sensitive.

***

As always, I welcome comments and questions.  I can be reached at 664-8931 or 285-3935.

Thanks very much for reading this far. 

This week the Legislature overwhelmingly passed House Bill 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1, and today sends the bill to the governor.  Eight senators voted yes on the bill, with only Senate President Pete Reyes abstaining.  Sixteen representatives voted yes on the bill, with only Rep. Edward Salas and myself voting against it, and Rep. Stanley Torres abstaining.  Rep. Ray Yumul was absent.  House Bill 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1 was a substitute bill for House Bill 16-79, originally sponsored by Speaker Arnold Palacios, Rep. Heinz Hofschneider, and myself.  The original bill proposed to repeal Public Law 15-94, which rolled back the utility rates to 17 cents/kwh, and return CUC to the rate structure that had been in place before Public Law 15-94 in order to allow CUC to charge rates that would cover the cost of fuel. 

The substitute bill that passed in the Senate two days ago, and in the House yesterday was very different.  Indeed, it was a combination of two bills, HB 16-79 (mentioned above) and HB 16-90, which had proposed to grant the governor and other expenditure authorities unlimited reprogramming authority for lapsed funds in the remainder of the fiscal year, and to borrow from the Retirement Fund in order to subsidize fuel, among other measures.  House Bill 16-90 had passed in the House last week on first and final reading the day it was introduced, with only one “no” vote (mine), and without a committee report. 

The resulting combination bill, House Bill 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1, also came with provisions not found in either the original HB 16-79 or HB 16-90.  The Senate Fiscal Affairs Committee, to its credit, did come out with a report that attempted to justify the passage of the bill, but even that report acknowledged a glaring lack of information about the potential impacts of the proposed legislation.        

If signed into law, House Bill 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1 would:

• Suspend Public Law 15-94 (the rollback of the utility rates) until December 31, 2008 and return CUC to the rate structure that had been established before PL 15-94, until the Public Utilities Commission adopts a new rate structure;
• Grant the governor and other expenditure authorities unlimited reprogramming authority for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2008 to cover budget shortfalls
• Suspend earmarked non-General Fund revenues, except for the Tobacco Control Funds (minus $1.2million to pay for AETNA runoff claims); 50% of the Solid Waste Revolving Fund; the Probation Services Fund; and the Fish and Game Fund;
• Allow CUC to use up to 50% of the residential security deposit funds to pay for fuel expenses during FY 2008, provided that CUC should return the said funds within a three-year period;
• Lower the CNMI government’s Retirement Contribution Rate from 18% to 11% (note: the recommended actuarial rate is approximately 37%) and use 50% of the funds to pay for fuel; grant $80,000 in startup money for the Public Utilities Commission; allow the Public School System and the Northern Marianas College to retain 50% of the funds “freed” up by the lower contribution rate; and give the governor unlimited reprogramming authority for the remaining funds;
• Increase fees for certain government services by not less than 100%.  These fees include drivers’ licenses, firearms licenses and registrations, fingerprinting, police reports, any Dept. of Public Safety public records, and marriage licenses. Half of the revenue generated shall be used to pay for fuel;
• Raise taxes for banks and other financial institutions (repealing 1 CMC Section 1304 in its entirety, and applying the gross business tax instead)
• Allow the Public Utilities Commission to establish interim rates for utilities without a public hearing or public notice, or supporting documents, consideration, discussion or deliberation;
• Deem the Public Utilities Commission duly organized with a quorum of three, and allow the PUC to set rates from here on, even if there are less than three members in the future, due to resignation or removal, and even if there is only one member. 

In my comments today on the floor, I stated that I could not in good conscience support HB 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1 because it is, at its core, an act of fear and poor planning.

While I fully realize the dire straits into which CUC has fallen, we solve neither our immediate nor our long term problems by raising taxes without cutting costs, by borrowing from the Retirement Fund which is teetering on the brink of insolvency because of this government’s continuing failure to pay its debts, or by making the Public Utilities Commission vulnerable to abuse.  I noted that we are actually even worsening our problems by further increasing our liabilities, damaging our credit rating, and impairing our ability to secure financing for critical infrastructure at affordable rates — at a time when we are considering not one, but several proposals, to issue public debt.

I also asked how we could possibly pass this bill without having a full picture of the funds that would be generated and the impacts on public services. 

We did not know, for example, how much money actually exists in CUC’s trust fund for security deposits.  We also could not say with a reasonably straight face, not matter what the bill said, that we actually expected CUC, notorious for its accounting mishaps and auditing nightmares, to use only 50% of the security deposits and return those funds within three years.  

We had not investigated the potential impacts of raising taxes — on banks and other financial institutions, and on all clients of the CNMI government who would have to pay 100% higher fees now to drive, get married, obtain a police report, etc. 

We proposed to borrow, once again, from the Retirement Fund — even after just receiving their very sobering actuarial report last week, knowing that the Fund has been forced to liquidate assets to pay its pensioners, knowing that the central government has not been paying into the Fund  at all, knowing that the Fund cannot afford it, and knowing that the government’s liabilities to the Fund comprise the single largest reason why the government’s financial performance ratings have declined dramatically, hindering our ability to secure bonds at affordable rates, at a time when we are considering issuing public debt to finance a utilities overhaul and to pay off our obligation to the Fund.  When does the bleeding stop?

We did not know the impact that these measures will have on the Marpi landfill, which is already bordering on noncompliance with EPA standards and may be shut down or subject to hefty fines as a result of this bill, if signed into law.  We also did not know the impact of these measures on the public services that depend on the Tobacco Control Fund.   

We also proposed to give $80,000 in startup funding to PUC, not knowing whatever became of the funds that had supposedly remained with the now-defunct Commonwealth Telecommunications Commission.  This question was raised at the House session last week, but it was never resolved.  Even more alarmingly, the bill proposed to allow PUC to set rates without a quorum, even if there is only one commissioner, and without prior public hearing or notice, or any supporting documents, or any discussion or deliberation.  Why, then, even have a PUC?  Is it really that much worse to have an unregulated utility, than to have one or two PUC czars calling the shots under the guise of oversight?

And we proposed, once again, to give the governor and other expenditure authorities unlimited powers to reprogram lapsed funds, retroactive to October 1, 2007, not knowing if they have already exceeded their budget authority, nor even knowing exactly how much money we are talking about, since apparently the most recent data that the Senate Committee had at its disposal when it drafted its report are almost three months old.  Moreover, we tread into dangerous territory when we relinquish our authority to control the government purse.  Suppose the Governor were to use his unlimited reprogramming powers to direct funding towards costly litigation against the federal government, or towards expensive and ambiguous consultancies?  Can any of us honestly say that this would be a prudent use of funds in the best interests of the public, given our serious infrastructural and fiscal woes?  But the bill offers no controls whatsoever to safeguard against waste.  Unlimited power is, well, unlimited.     

I asked at the session, How can we vote on this measure not knowing, really, what we are voting on?  How is this bill a solution?  And I stated that we have not done enough as a body with the solutions that are already staring us in the face.

We know, for instance, that there are unexpended federal funds – tens of millions of dollars available to the CNMI for capital improvements — that could be directed towards CUC, but are not.  Why not? I said that we could certainly do far more than we have thus far to investigate the reasons for this government’s failure to utilize these funds, and make those reasons known to our people, who are asking the very same questions.  I also noted that House Bill 16-77, which would lay down the guidelines for a transparent and legitimate privatization process for CUC, that includes mandates for renewable energy, sits in the House PUTC committee, and that we could act on that bill.  I finally noted that we could do far more to cut costs in all branches of government — that downsizing is inevitable, but we have to have the will and the capacity to be honest with our people when we do so.

I also recalled the Speaker’s inaugural address just four months ago, during which he urged for a new era of policy-making to begin with this legislature.  He said that we must stop with the shortsighted, shoot-from-the-hip strategies that have characterized legislatures of the past.  He also said that we needed a plan.  I agree. 

While we all recognize the urgency of our times, we should not be driven by fear or desperation when we act.  We do indeed need a plan – a sound, cohesive, transparent, and long-term plan that involves the concerted efforts of all the leaders of the Commonwealth.  Such a plan cannot be developed in private, backroom meetings where deals are struck between a handful of members and the governor (which was essentially how HB 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1 was developed).  These meetings are the trademark of old policies and tired politics that have not served our people. 

Such a plan also cannot be developed alone, and I noted that while I was fully cognizant that there is only so much that I can do as one member — and a freshman and independent, at that –  I am nevertheless ready to participate and lend my full support if and when the members of the Legislature and the administration would be ready to change the old ways of doing things and engage in meaningful and measured planning and action. 

In the meantime, however, I said that I could not be complicit in the shortsighted and fear-driven policies that were put forth in the bill we just passed.  I requested that my name be removed from the list of sponsors (all of the original sponsors of HB 16-79 were still listed on this substitute bill), and I ultimately voted no.

The response of other members was, interestingly, not to deny anything that I had said, except for the part about the bill being driven by fear.  It was said that this bill, instead, is driven by “reality” — the reality that CUC is penniless and may run out of fuel and no one wants to be blamed for not taking action if islandwide blackouts occur.  It was also said that because this bill is an appropriations bill, that the governor would have the power to line-item veto parts of the bill that he would find undesirable, and the hope was expressed that he would delete the provisions that the Senate had added that would grant undue powers to the PUC.  

The “reality” I see, however, is that we have been worried about CUC running out of fuel for months and still we do not have a plan; that we continue to strike deals in private backroom meetings rather than tackling the CUC problem openly, transparently, and cooperatively among all the leaders of the CNMI; that we would abruptly raise taxes for banks and essentially raise taxes in the form of doubled government fees without so much as a fiscal impact analysis; that we still have not cut government payroll in any significant way; that we have given the governor unlimited reprogramming authority and have provided no real safeguards against waste; that we have not yet taken action on critical privatization legislation before us; that we have made it possible for the PUC to set rates with a “quorum” of one person; that apparently tens of millions of unspent federal capital improvement funds are sitting in the bank that could be used for utilities but, inexplicably, are not; and that we instead prefer to once again borrow from the Retirement Fund as a band-aid fix, crippling the already-crippled fund even more while still not saving CUC.   

IN OTHER NEWS

Update on House Resolution 16-9

House Resolution 16-9, which proposes to amend the House rules to require at least three business days’ notice, with agendas, for legislative sessions and committee meetings, and to require the posting of legislative records on the official Legislature website for public access, has been sitting on the resolution calendar for nearly a month waiting for action. At yesterday’s session, I asked when the body would be acting on the resolution. 

The Speaker noted that he had asked the Floor Leader, Rep. Joseph Camacho, who also chairs the Ad Hoc Committee on the Rules, to review the proposed amendments and come out with a report.  Floor Leader Camacho stated that his committee did not yet have a report and he asked for more time, as the proposed amendments were “controversial” and would therefore require proper review.  I asked what exactly was so controversial about requiring public notice for legislative meetings, and the Floor Leader’s response was that public notice could be “costly” and also hinder the efforts of the Legislature to address the many pressing problems facing the Commonwealth.  I then responded out that the proposed amendments to the rules did include provisions for waiving public notice in the event of emergencies, and also remarked that there were costs involved in passing legislation without proper review and opportunity for public comment, too.  I then requested that the Speaker issue a deadline for the Ad Hoc Committee on the Rules to come up with a report on the resolution, and he ordered that a report should be issued as soon as possible, but no later than three weeks from yesterday, May 1.  The Floor Leader then made a motion to remove the resolution from the calendar and refer it to his committee, and the motion passed by a majority voice vote.     

It is rather ironic that the “controversy” of yesterday’s session was, not the bill that would borrow from retirees to pay for fuel, raise taxes, give the governor unlimited reprogramming authority, and make a travesty of PUC, but a resolution that simply proposes to give the public full and fair notice of legislative meetings, and online access to legislative records.  Where House Resolution 16-9 has been sitting on the calendar for a month and apparently requires extensive committee review before the body can act on it, House Bill 16-79, SD2, HD2, SS1, by contrast, passed on first and final reading in back-to-back Senate and House sessions, with little to no opportunity for public comment.  

On the Resident Foreign National Status Act, HB 16-86

House Bill 16-86, introduced last week by myself and Reps. Hofschneider, Salas, and Hocog, proposes to amend the CNMI immigration code to add a new permit category of “Resident Foreign National” that would give eligible foreign national workers five-year permits to work at will in the Commonwealth.  The bill is intended to stabilize the CNMI’s workforce, particularly in this transition period between when the federalization bill is expcted to be signed into law (soon) and when the federal immigration regulations are promulgated (a year to 18 months from the date of enactment); to stabilize the business community and relieve the bureaucratic burdens that businesses must undergo with the current system of annual permit applications and renewals; to stabilize families in the Commonwealth whose members include citizens (many of whom are children) and long-term foreign national workers who are restricted to a single employer, unable to transfer jobs without an administrative hearing, and subject to a two-month or six-month periodic exit under current labor law; to promote competition among employers for labor, and thereby encourage higher wages and better working conditions overall for all workers, citizen as well as non-citizen; and to  relieve the administrative and regulatory burdens of the Dept. of Labor.

Some controversy and misunderstanding surround this bill, to be sure.  I am preparing a more extensive statement to explain the purposes of the bill, which should be coming out shortly, and to address the concerns and confusion that have come to the attention of the Legislature.  There should definitely be greater community dialogue about not only the practical, economic issues, but also the social and moral issues that are raised by the bill.  

The bill’s cosponsors and I will be on the Harry Blalock show on Monday at 7am.  It will be a call-in show (235-5064), and all comments and questions are welcome.  

On the gambling bill, HB 16-82

As was reported last week, the House voted overwhelmingly to kill House Bill 16-82, which would have authorized casino gaming at La Fiesta Mall.  I was among the members who voted no on the bill, for the reasons that were cited by several other members on the floor before we cast our votes:  1) the people of Saipan had just voted no on the casino initiative in November 2007 and we should respect their wishes; 2) the Tinian and Rota casino industries should be allowed to develop without the constant uncertainty posed by efforts to legalize casino gaming on Saipan too.   

On the Senate Joint Resolution re the proposed Marianas Trench national monument

I was extremely disappointed by the Legislature’s adoption of the Senate Joint Resolution that asked President Bush to refrain from unilaterally designating the area surrounding the three northernmost islands of the CNMI a national marine monument and further expressed “fervent” opposition to the proposal.  I stated on the floor that I felt it would be premature for us to reject the proposal outright when most of us had not even heard the proposal, when discussion in the community had just begun, and when there were clearly many misperceptions and misunderstandings even among the legislators that had not yet been fully aired and addressed.  I offered amendments that would have removed the clauses that “fervently opposed” the national monument proposal altogether, while retaining the clauses that opposed unilateral designation and that requested more information.  None of the amendments I offered was adopted.  Some members claimed that there was an “urgency” in passing the resolution as soon as possible.  Three members voted no to the resolution: Reps. Hofschneider, Salas, and myself.  

REMINDERS

• The Governor’s State of the Commonwealth and the Resident Representative’s State of the Washington Office Report will be delivered at the Multipurpose Center in Susupe today, Friday, May 2 beginning at 10am.
• The first quarterly public forum on the State of the Legislature will be held next Wednesday, May 7 @ the Multipurpose Center Annex, beginning at 6pm.

The House agenda changed once again on the floor in the Special Session held on Wednesday this week.  The following items were added/deleted:

HOUSE BILLS

• HB 16-84:  to increase funding for the health, education, and welfare of the CNMI people by reducing the salaries of eleted officials.  (Rep. Ralph Torres + others)

HOUSE LOCAL BILLS

• HLB 16-9:  To reappropriate $500,000 from the $1,760,425 under Saipan Local Law 15-5 SHEFA for the payment of salaries of certain government employees (Rep. Dave Apatang)

STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS

• SCR 16-13, from the Judiciary and Governmental Operations Committee, recommending the filing of House Bills 16-25 (to require the advice and consent of the Senate for Medical Professional Licensing Board professionals); 16-34 (to amend the Open Government Act to provide specific statutory authorization for executive sessions to be held for the governing body of an agency to conduct executive deliberations); 16-45 (to amend 4 CMC Section 8158 to allow customers of CUC who succeed in their complaint in court to receive his or her costs and attorney fees); and 16-46 (to require that all statutes and rules and regulations pertaining to CUC be readily available for review by consumers).  REMOVED FROM AGENDA.

HOUSE RESOLUTIONS

• HR 16-13:  requesting the Saipan Zoning Board to change the present zoning classification of Vestcor Commercial Building in which the brewery is located from “Village Commercial” to “Mixed Commercial” for the purposes of reopening the brewery adjacent to Coffee Care.
• HR 16-14:  respectfully requesting the office of the United States Fish and Wildlife to remove and reclassify the Nightingale Reed-Warbler under the endangered species list (Rep. Stanley Torres, Oscar Babauta, Justo Quitugua, )

ACTION TAKEN

• House Resolution 16-14 (see above) was referred to the Standing Committee on Natural Resources.
• House Resolution 16-13 was ADOPTED, with two no votes (Rep. Ed Salas and myself)
• Senate Joint Resolution 16-3, HD 1, to call for a Joint Session of the Legislature to receive  was PASSED BY THE HOUSE
• House Bill 16-3, to amend 4 CMC Section 1301 to earmark Gross Receipts Taxes collected from gambling establishments in the First Senatorial District so they may be appropriated by the Legislative Delegation from the Third Senatorial District was PASSED BY THE HOUSE.
• House Bill 16-79, HD2, SD2, deleted the Senate amendment to suspend for 60 days, rather than repeal, Public Law 15-94 (the rollback of the CUC power rates).  The bill was returned to its original form and SENT BACK TO THE SENATE.   
• House Bill 16-4, the CNMI Government and Public Deposit Safety Act of 2008 was amended to: 1) include a grandfathering provision for banks not in compliance on the effect date of the Act, provided that the bank furnishes and pledges security in the form of U.S. Treasury bills valued at 100% of the deposits, comes into compliance with the Act within 10 years of the effective date, and issues disclosures of public deposits on a quarterly basis; 2) mandate (rather than merely empower) the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Finance to issue regulations to enforce the Act; and 3) expand the types of loans offered to Commonwealth residents to include educational student loans and loans for renewable energy and energy efficiency (as a basis for giving preference to particular banks among those that meet the requirements of the Act).  The bill was PASSED BY THE HOUSE.     

COMMENTS

On the zoning resolution (HR 16-13)

I voted no on the zoning resolution (HR 16-13) for the same reason that I voted no on a similar resolution passed in the last session: I felt that the House was once again exerting inappropriate influence on the Zoning Board to amend the Saipan Zoning Plan on behalf of one particular company, when there is already a process in place that allows people to appeal to the Board to consider amendments to the Plan, and in fact, the Board is already entertaining such requests at this time.  We should respect the laws that we have created and the processes that are in place, and allow agencies to do their jobs. 

On the reed warbler resolution (HR 16-14)

I voted yes to the motion to send the reed warbler resolution (HR 16-14) to the Natural Resources committee for review.  If we had actually taken a vote on the resolution that day, I would have voted no.  I was, to say the least, rather disturbed by the resolution, and asked the Natural Resources committee to consider in its review of the resolution that 1) the nightingale reed warbler is a unique species found only in the Northern Marianas; 2) the warbler is an important part of the CNMI’s natural and cultural heritage; 3) that the protection of endangered species helps to protect, not only the species, but the unique habitats in which they are found; and 4) that the protection of endangered species does not necessarily inhibit development, provided that the required environmental assessments and mitigation plans are properly carried out.  Economic development and environmental protection can coexist, and indeed can complement each other. 

On the amendment to HB 16-79

I voted yes to the motion to delete the Senate amendment to HB 16-79 and return the bill to the Senate in its original form.  The Senate had amended HB 16-79 so that there would only be a 60-day suspension, rather than a repeal, of PL 15-94 (the rollback of the CUC rates to 17 cents/kwh), with the intent of spurring the newly-formed Public Utilities Commission to set a new rate structure. 

There seemed to be a general consensus in the House that it was impractical to expect the PUC to be prepared to set rates within 60 days, but there was some debate on the floor about whether or not we should just pass the bill as it was, knowing that we would have to return to the problem in 60 days to either give the PUC an extension or finally just repeal PL 15-94 as the House had originally intended.  An argument was made that rejecting the Senate amendment would further delay the passage of the bill, and there was an urgency in passing the bill as soon as possible, however imperfect it might be.  I stated that the PUC members were not qualified to set utility rates yet, and needed to undergo intensive training; they were on the waiting list for rate-setting school scheduled in May and November, with no guarantee that they would actually be admitted. Another member noted that the PUC does not even have basic office supplies, or even an office yet.  I said that to pass this bill with the Senate amendment would essentially be setting up the PUC for failure, and if we knew that, we should correct it.  I also said that the Senate had not been aware of these constraints when the amendment was passed.  It was suggested that the House leadership confer with the Senate leadership to request their support for the bill in its original form.  Most of the members agreed, and voted to delete the Senate amendment and return the bill in its original form to the Senate.  The “no” votes included Reps. Diego Benavente and Joseph Reyes.

On HB 16-4 

I eventually voted yes on HB 16-4, as amended, although I shared concerns with other members about the depositing of public funds in banks that are not FDIC-insured.  The amendment to grandfather such banks was a problem for some of us because it raised questions about why public funds were deposited in such banks in the first place if the solvency of the banks would be in jeopardy should these funds be withdrawn.  Proponents of the bill argued that requiring security, setting a reasonable timeframe for compliance, and also requiring public disclosure of government and public corporation deposits would help protect public funds without creating a crisis for banks that presently hold these funds. 

On the push to override the veto on the austerity bill

There was a rather strong push from some members to attempt to override the Governor’s veto on HB 16-83, HD 5 — the austerity bill.  It was argued that overriding the veto was urgent to ensure the delivery of public services, and that the deficiencies of the bill that the Governor had identified could be addressed in subsequent bills.  Other members disagreed, and said that instead a new austerity bill should be drafted that provided a clear expenditure plan with a purpose (say, a fuel subsidy), using any savings realized as a result of the austerity measures, rather than simply handing the Governor a “blank check.”  I remarked that the public outcry over the austerity bill stemmed primarily from the fact that it was fast-tracked through the Legislature without public comment, was fundamentally unfair in that it exempted many individuals (including lawmakers), and did not do enough to cut obvious government fat, such as the perks that many public officials continue to enjoy.

I also said that by now it should be clear that we cannot both protect government payroll and critical public services.  Public services are already falling apart, and still government payroll remains essentially the same.  Indeed, most, if not all, of the employees who were supposed to be furloughed last Friday – ostensibly as a result of the governor’s veto of the austerity bill — were somehow renewed that very day, even as this government can barely pay for fuel to keep the lights on.   

The bottom line is that we have to come to grips with our fiscal reality.  And we have to be honest with our people about the cuts that need to be made.

**

ANNOUNCEMENTS

• The Judiciary and Governmental Operations Committee meeting scheduled for 10am today has been postponed until further notice.
• Click here for the final agenda for the Saipan and Northern Islands Delegation session on Monday, April 21 @ 9:00am.

For questions or comments, I can be reached at 664-8931 or 483-3935, or at this email address.

The House agenda changed once again on the floor during this week’s sessions on March 26 and March 27.  The following items were added:
 

HOUSE BILLS

• HB 16-71: To protect persons soliciting donations along public highways and roads.  (Rep. Joseph Camacho)
• HB 16-72: To create a visitation right for grandparents. (Rep. Joseph Camacho)
• HB 16-73:  To establish an attorney reciprocity program with the Territory of Guam.  (Rep. Victor Hocog)
  HB 16-74  To amend 4 CMC Section 3216 to establish an “inactive status” period for the renewal of certificates or licenses (Rep. Ramon Tebuteb)
• HB 16-75:  To authorize the Dept. of Public Safety to permit private companies to serve bench warrants issued by the CNMI Courts (Rep.Joseph Camacho)
• HB 16-76:  To amend 2 CMC Section 7181 to expand protections for public and private sector building drawings and plans from public disclosures (Rep. Oscar Babauta)
• HB 16-77:  To allow and encourage the CUC to engage the private sector to partner with the Commonwealth to secure reliable utility services at affordable rates (Rep. Heinz Hofschneider)
• HB 16-78:  To amend PL 15-122 to extend coverage under the Commonwealth Employees’ Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 2006 to contract physicians at the Dept. of Public Health and to contract veterinary professionals at the Dept. of Lands and Natural Resources (Rep. Justo Quitugua + 3)
• HB 16-79:  To revise the Commonwealth Utilities Corporation’s rate structure to ensure CUC’s continuing ability to deliver vital utility services (Rep. Arnold Palacios, Rep. Heinz Hofschneider, Rep. Tina Sablan +10)

HOUSE LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES

• HLI 16-15:  to amend Section 12 of Article II of the Constitution to remove the immunity presently enjoyed by legislators from being questioned in any other place regarding statements made in the legislature (Rep. Vic Hocog)

HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS

• Hse.  Comm. 16-24: from Rep. Hofschneider to the Speaker, on the Retirement Fund crisis, and the differences between the Pension Obligation Bond initiative he introduced and the one introduced by Rep. Joseph Deleon Guerrero and others.
• Hse Comm. 16-25:  from Rep. Stanley Torres to the Speaker, on his objection to the confirmation of Ms. Kim King-Hinds to the Public Utilities Commission without a proper hearing, and his resignation as chair from the House Standing Committee on PUTC
• Hse Comm. 16-26:  from Rep. Ray Yumul to the members of the 16th CNMI Legislature, describing the $14.5million shortfall facing the government and recommending several cost-cutting measures
• Hse.  Comm. 16-27:  from Rep. Tina Sablan to the Speaker and members of the House, objecting to the confirmation of Ms. Kim King-Hinds (Remarks on Hinds Nomination)

ACTION TAKEN

• Ms. Kimberlyn King-Hinds was confirmed to the PUC, with 14 yes votes, 5 no votes, and 1 abstention.  The 5 who voted no were Reps. Dave Apatang, Frank Dela Cruz, Heinz Hofschneider, Stanley Torres, and myself; Rep. Justo Quitugua abstained.  The PUC now has a quorum.
• HB 16-79, to repeal PL 15-94 and revise CUC’s rate structure, was placed on the calendar for first and final reading, amended to retain a provision from PL 15-94 that prohibited the changing of rates before the end of the billing cycle, and then passed with 17 yes votes and 1 no vote; two members were absent.
• Standing Committee Reports were adopted:  SCR 16-7:  from the JGO Committee, recommending the passage of HB 16-11, “to amend the Safe Diving Act of 1990, to allow the Dept. of Public Safety enforcement authority and strengthen enforcement of the Safe Diving Act; SCR 16-8:  from the JGO Committee, recommending the passage of HB 16-17, “to repeal 8 CMC Sections 1723-1744 to require the transfer of pertinent documents from the Clerk of Court’s Office to the Health and Vital Statistics Office”; SCR 16-10:  from the Natural Resources Committee, concurring with the recommendation of the JGO Committee to pass HB 16-11; SCR 16-11:  from the PUTC Committee, recommending the passage of HB 16-56, in the form of House Draft 1 “to amend Section 2 of Public Law 15-122, to exempt recipients of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program from paying utility service reconnection fees.”  HB 16-56, HD-1 includes not only low-income recipients of LIHEAP assistance, but also households that have members suffering from debilitating illness.
• HB 16-11, HB 16-17, and HB 16-56 were placed on calendar.

COMMENTS
 
On the confirmation of Ms. King-Hinds to the PUC
The five members who objected to the confirmation of Ms. King-Hinds cited several concerns, all related to questions about whether or not Ms. King-Hinds has a conflict of interest in serving on the PUC.  Some believed that private water bottling companies (such as the one that Ms. King-Hinds manages on Tinian) might be subject to regulation by the PUC.  I was one of the members who held this view.  I submitted my statement (Remarks on Hinds Nomination) and during the discussion on the floor pointed out that private water companies are commonly regulated by public utilities commissions, and the language of our PUC law (as I read it, anyway) did not clearly exclude private water companies from PUC regulation.  Members said that two legal counsels had already indicated their view that private water companies are not subject to PUC regulation; I responded that in both instances we had given the legal counsels only a few minutes to glance at the law and give us off-the-cuff opinions.  I requested that we give the House legal counsel time to research the issue and give us a written legal opinion about whether or not there is in fact a conflict of interest; another member requested an opinion from the Attorney General’s Office as well.  

Other members felt that the conflict of interest stemmed from the fact that Ms. King-Hinds’ water company does business with CUC.  They said that her company purchases water from CUC, treats it, and then sells it to the public.  One member recalled that the USEPA and CUC had recently given the Legislature a presentation on the stipulated order that is about to be issued to address CUC’s chronic water and wastewater violations, and that this order is likely going to require a raising of the water rates.  How would Ms. King-Hinds make a decision involving an increase in rates that will directly affect her cost of doing business?  (Moreover, how would any of us know since none of us had ever asked her?) 

The majority of members disagreed and felt it would be unnecessary to delay Ms. King-Hinds’ confirmation any longer, while we waited for a written legal opinion, and others pointed out that if in fact a conflict of interest existed, that Ms. King-Hinds could always recuse herself from decisions that could potentially involve her company.  I objected and said that it should be important to us to get the PUC off on the right foot — particularly since this would be the regulatory body overseeing a utilities corporation that has been fraught with mismanagement and improprieties for so many years.  Why taint the PUC with either the fact or the appearance of a conflict of interest right from the beginning?   

Nonetheless, there was a motion to end debate and vote on Ms. King-Hinds’ nomination, and she was confirmed.  It should be noted that the five members who voted against her confirmation included the Chair of the House PUTC committee, Rep. Stanley Torres (who resigned from the chairmanship that day in part because of what he perceived as pressure from the leadership to rubberstamp Ms. King-Hinds’ nomination); the Chair of the Saipan delegation PUTC committee (myself); and two former PUTC chairs (Rep. Frank Dela Cruz, who was one of the authors of the law that created the PUC, and Rep. Hofschneider). 

On HB 16-79

Of all the co-sponsors of HB 16-79, Speaker Palacios is probably the easiest target for criticism because he was the author of PL 15-94, the public law that rolled back CUC’s rates to 17 cents/kwh.  Speaker Palacios has already been accused of pandering for votes and then promptly forgetting the needs of the people once elected.  These accusations are extremely unfair and simplistic.  We can imagine that the sincerest of intentions were behind PL 15-94 — particularly, the desire to give relief to our community, which has been suffering under exorbitant utility rates and a mismanaged utilities corporation.  I think it is fair to say that we all share that desire in the Legislature.  The mistake was in passing PL 15-94 without first ensuring that funding would be available to cover the shortfall that it created.  Subsequent efforts to identify such funding ultimately failed.  

The legislative process is such that Representative Palacios did not act alone and was not solely responsible for the passage of PL 15-94. That law could not have passed without the overwhelming support of the members of both chambers of the 15th Legislature — enough support to override the Governor’s veto, in fact.  The failure to identify a subsidy to cover the shortfall created by PL 15-94 was therefore not just one person’s failure, but the failure of all the members of the 15th as well as the 16th legislature.
 

Leadership is not about never making any mistakes, but about recognizing when mistakes have been made, when even the best of intentions fall short of feasibility — and then being willing to take corrective action.  Nearly all the members of the House recognized that PL 15-94 needed to be repealed in the absence of any subsidy to cover the full cost of fuel; few seemed willing to take the initiative to introduce the repealer.  (Indeed, I heard more than one member in the House say that they would be willing to support the repealer, but would not put their names on it because that would be “political suicide.”)  The Speaker took that initiative and introduced a bill to repeal a law that he himself had authored.  It was not an easy decision, and the humility and courage of that decision demonstrates his capacity for leadership — the kind of leadership we need more of in the CNMI.  
 

On another note, the Legislature has deservedly received a great deal of flak for passing and repealing laws with astonishing rapidity.  I have objected to that practice myself, and have also objected to the chronic suspensions of rules that permit bills to be fast-tracked.  And so it was a difficult thing for me, just on principle, to be one of the main authors of a bill to quickly repeal a law that had been passed just months before when a) the bill had not been prefiled and there was no public notice of when it would be officially introduced (with the exception of an email I had sent out that day when my co-authors and I were ready to introduce it); and b) I knew that the bill was going to be placed on calendar that day and would likely pass on first and final reading.  
 

Although the Open Government Act does not currently apply to the Legislature, I try to act as if it does.  And it is worth noting that the Open Government Act permits the waiving of public notice requirements in emergency situations when delays caused by such notice would increase the likelihood of injury to life or property.  I strongly believed that the $1million dollars/month shortfall created by PL 15-94, and the resulting inability of CUC to purchase sufficient supplies of fuel for the month, which in turn exacerbated its already failing ability to provide utility services, created an emergency situation, and warranted the waiving of public notice for the bill to repeal PL 15-94.    
 

Finally, as I stated on the floor this week, I think that most people recognize the necessity of repealing Pl 15-94, and would be resigned to continuing to pay rates that reflect the true cost of fuel if they could be assured that there was some light at the end of the tunnel.  And there are some signs of that light as we are all seriously considering concrete measures to provide relief and reliable utilities to the people of the CNMI — most notably in the initiatives introduced by Rep. Hofschneider to allow borrowing for the overhaul of utilities and his bill that sets down guidelines for the privatization of CUC, including requirements for renewable energy; in the bill introduced by Rep. Ralph Torres and others that would provide some measure of relief to low-income households and families with members having debilitating illnesses; in the introduction of a bill by Rep. Joseph Camacho that would improve transparency at CUC by mandating the ready availability of all pertinent statutes, rules and regulations for customers; in the establishment of a quorum for the Public Utilities Commission; in the long-term energy plan initiated by the Saipan delegation’s PUTC; and in the shift in public sentiment towards privatization of CUC and improvements in the management of our utilities.         
 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

1. I have prefiled a resolution to amend the House rules to require full and fair public notice of sessions and committee meetings, and improve access to the public records of the Legislature.  Click here for a copy of that resolution.  
2. The House Standing Committee on Natural Resources is conducting public hearings on Apr 2 and 3 on House Legislative Initiatives 16-3 (amending sections 3-6 of Article XI in the Constitution), 16-4 (changing the term permitted for private property leases under Article XII), and 16-8 (allowing each senatorial district to make its own decisions on land alienation laws); and on Apr 9 and 10 on House Legislative Initiative 16-5 (amending Article IV, Section 5 of the Constitution).  Click here for the full announcement.
3. The House Committee on Judiciary and Governmental Operations is having a committee meeting on March 31 @ 10am to review the following bills and initiatives:
   • HB 16-29: to provide for the efficient winding-up of large-scale businesses in the CNMI
   • HB 16-34: to amend the Open Government Act to provide specific statutory authorization for Executive Sessions
   • HB 16-38: to repeal Section 3 of Public Law 13-1, and to repeal and reenact Chapters 1-3 of Part 1, Division 8, Title 1 of the Commonwealth Code (reforming the Civil Service Act)
   • HB 16-40: to amend the Northern Mariana Islands Election Law
   • HB 16-44: to amend the definition of “alien” under Title 3 of the Commonwealth Code
   • HB 16-46: to require that all statutes, rules, and regulations pertaining to CUC be readily available for review by customers
   • HB 16-62: to amend 1 CMC Section 7205 to add a penalty provision for the failure to enact a budget by Sept. 1
   • HLI 16-6: to amend the Constitution to require the adoption of an annual budget
   • HLI 16-7: to improve the efficiency and accountability of the Legislative branch
   • HLI 16-10: to amend Article IV, Section 5 of the Constitution to authorize the election of the chief justice and presiding judge by a majority of the justices and judges, respectively
   • HLI 16-11:to prohibit the withdrawal of any funds from the General Fund except by appropriations made by law
4. The Saipan and Northern Islands delegation’s PUTC committee is having a committee meeting on April 2 at 2pm to continue discussions of the Saipan Energy Plan and to further discuss conducting public hearings on key utilities-related legislation.

Reminder: all bills and initiatives introduced in the House can be accessed at the Floor Leader’s website, www.camachocnmi.com . 
 
Thank you and have a good week.  
 

The agenda for the House session on Wednesday, March 12 was amended once again on the floor.  The following items were added to the agenda:
 

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

• House Bill 16-61:  To authorize bond or other financing not to exceed $20 million for the payment of land compensation claims (Rep. Joseph Reyes)
• House Bill 16-62:  To amend 1 CMC Section 7205 by adding a new subsection (c) to add a penalty provision for the failure to enat a budget by September 1 (Rep. Diego Benavente + 3)
• House Bill 16-63:  To authorize the Dept. of Public Lands to make funds available to be used in the establishment of a Northern Marianas Descent educational assistance program (Rep. Ralph Torres + 2)

STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS

• S.C.R. 16-7: the Judiciary and Governmental Operations (JGO) committee recommended the passage of H.B. 16-11, to allow the Department of Public Safety enforcement authority, and to strengthen enforcement of the Safe Diving Act.
• S.C.R. 16-8:  the JGO committee recommended the passage of H.B. 16-17, to repeal 8 CMC Sections 1723 thru 1744 and to require the transfer of documents pertaining to birth registrations and issuances of birth certificates from the Clerk of Court to the Health and Vital Statistics Office.
• S.C.R.16-9: The Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) committee and the JGO committee recommended the passage of House Bill 16-30, House Draft 1, to repeal and reenact 1 CMC Section 8248 (b), as amended by Public Law 15-81, to make certain licensed medical, legal, accounting, and other technical professionals exempt from the salary cap of $50,000, and professionals within the legislative and judicial branches eligible for an annual salary cap of up to $60,000, and to repeal 1 CMC Section 1272, which prohibited any employee within the Legislature from earning more than the salary of a legislator.  

BILL CALENDAR

• Two bills were withdrawn from the calendar, H.B. 16-27 (to reappropriate $1.5million from the Office of the Public Auditor’s surplus funds in Fiscal Year 2007 for the paymet of CUC’s non-fuel costs) and H.B. 16-33 (to exempt CUC and NMC from the obligation of all agencies to pay one percent of their annual budgets to the Office of the Public Auditor), following statements submitted by the OPA recommending that the bills not be passed in their present form.  The “surplus” of $1.5million is not a surplus of actual cash available, but only a paper surplus, as many agencies owe OPA.  OPA also recommended a three-year suspension of the one-percent obligation for CUC, but not for NMC. 
• Two bills were added to the calendar: HB 16-55 (to make driving without a license in immediate possession a civil offense, rather than a misdemeanor); and HB 16-30, House Draft 1 (see standing committee report, 16-9, above).

ACTION TAKEN

1.  Two standing committee reports were adopted:

• H.C.R. 16-6: the JGO committee recommended the appointment of Kimberly King-Hinds to serve as member of the Public Utilities Commission representing Tinian)
• H.C.R. 16-9: the HEW committee recommended the passage of HB 16-30, see above

2.  Four bills were passed on First and Final Reading:

• H.B. 16-1, with a floor amendment: to amend the Commonwealth Code to take into account the Rota Casino Initiative recently enacted by the voters of the First Senatorial District, amended to require that the Mayor of Rota shall submit a budget for approval by the Rota Municipal Council, which shall thereafter transmit the budget with any amendments to the Rota Legislative Delegation.
• H.B. 16-7:  to include the electrical system upgrade for the Tinian Junior and Senior High School under the funding appropriated under Public Law 12-69
• H.B. 16-30, House Draft 1:  to provide for flexibility, parity, and accountability in the compensation paid to licensed professionals employed by the government in order to attract and retain qualified and dedicated professionals
• H.B. 16-55: to amend 9 CMC Section 2201, to make driving without a license a civil offense, rather than a misdemeanor, due to the nature of the offense, the lack of a victim, and the cost to the courts in appointing attorneys to represent persons charged under this section

*** 

ON THE BILLS THAT PASSED

I voted yes on all four bills that were passed on Wednesday.  Most of these bills struck me as relatively innocuous and straightforward. There was some contention on the floor about HB 16-30, and some members argued that it would be wrong to add to the list of professional categories exempted from the salary cap, and moreover, to raise the salary cap that applies to professionals within the legislature and judiciary, especially in light of the CNMI’s fiscal situation.  Part of the argument against the bill was that the claim that it was drafted specifically for one person (the pharmacist at CHC).  This claim was disputed by other members, and it was noted that that the bill was drafted for the institution of the hospital, not for any one particular person, and not only for the position of pharmacist, but also other positions (psychiatrists, psychologists, clinical social workers, etc.) that are difficult to recruit for, and retain.  It was also noted that professionals within the legislature and judiciary (legal counsels, clerks, etc.) have been, and continue to be, paid within the proposed $60k salary cap (and in the case of the legislature’s professionals, above the salaries of legislators), and that this has been allowed under prior appropriation acts.   

It was further stated on the floor, however, that there will continue to be a need to reexamine and update the payscales for the government, to ensure that salaries are commensurate with qualifications and position descriptions, and that there is parity within the branches of government with respect to salaries paid to qualified professionals holding similar positions.      

On another note, the frequency with which we suspend the rules in the House (early recalls of bills from committee, placing bills on calendar the day they are introduced, passing on first and final reading, etc.) continues to disturb me.  I have asked, and will continue to ask, for justification as to the necessity of fast-tracking particular bills rather than allowing them to go through the process that is in place to allow for careful deliberation of bills.  Rules are only good insofar as they are actually enforced.  I continue to believe that honoring and enforcing the rules that we have adopted in the House would improve, and not impede, the legislative process.        

ON THE PUC CONFIRMATION PROCESS

The nomination of Ms. Kimberlyn King-Hinds to the Public Utilities Commission was a topic of discussion during the session.  The JGO committee presented a report recommending that she be confirmed.  Documentation was also provided that day that indicated that her drug test results had been received.  Although the results were not disclosed on the floor for obvious confidentiality reasons, it was said that members who wanted to review the results could meet with the committee chairs.

There was then a motion on the floor to adopt the committee report.  I requested that the members consider calling Ms. King-Hinds in for a hearing before adopting the committee report and accepting her nomination.  It was clarified that the motion was to adopt the report, not to accept Ms. King-Hinds’ nomination, and it was further stated that Ms. King-Hinds could not be confirmed anyway until the PUTC committee had also reported out.  The JGO report was adopted and the PUTC committee was then ordered to submit its report by Monday, March 17.  I asked again if there could at least be an opportunity for members to meet with Ms. King-Hinds and interview her to determine that she would indeed be suitable for the position; it was said that that decision would be left to the two committees, JGO and PUTC, that had been assigned to review her nomination.  The JGO committee chair said that she and the majority of the committee members were satisfied that Ms. King-Hinds’ nomination papers were complete and legally sufficient, but said that this did not preclude the PUTC committee from doing a more extensive review of her nomination.  The PUTC committee chair was not present at the session at the time, but the vice-chair said the committee would likely request to file its report recommending confirmation jointly with JGO.    

It seemed to me that there was a rather perplexing reluctance among my colleagues to schedule a confirmation hearing for Ms. King-Hinds.  I do not believe the other two already-confirmed PUC members were called in for hearings either.  I understand that Ms. King Hinds was confirmed by the Senate before she even took her drug test.  The House JGO committee came out with a report recommending her nomination after she took her drug test, but before the results had been received, and there was no committee meeting to discuss her nomination.  As far as I know, the House PUTC committee has also not met to discuss Ms. King-Hinds’ nomination.

I understand the urgency that members feel in appointing a third member to the PUC in a timely manner.  I feel the same urgency.  A third member means that there would then be a quorum and the commission can finally get to work.  However, considering the dire straits into which our public utilities have fallen, it would seem to me that carefully considering the backgrounds, qualifications, and capabilities of all nominees would be just as important to ensuring the integrity and effectiveness of the Public Utilities Commission as establishing a quorum.  Resumes, statements of financial interest, and drug test results are only part of the picture we should be considering. 

I would like to stress that I have absolutely no axe to grind with Ms. King-Hinds.  For me, this is simply about taking our jobs as legislators and the job of a public utilities commissioner seriously enough to care about exercising due diligence in the review of any PUC nomination.  After the session, I called Ms. King-Hinds to request that she come in for a meeting this week, and she agreed.  A date and time should be confirmed by Monday.  All members will be invited to attend.  I have also requested that we hold off on taking a vote to confirm Ms. King-Hinds until members have had at least the opportunity to exercise due diligence in reviewing her nomination.    

***

As always, I welcome comments and questions.  I can be reached at this email, or by phone at 664-8931 or 483-3935.

The agenda for yesterday’s House session was amended once again on the floor.  Bills, initiatives, resolutions, and communications that were introduced on the floor that had not been prefiled and noted in the agenda I had sent out via email just before the session (February 11, 2008) include:
 
HOUSE BILLS

• House Bill 16-23:  To appropriate $2,158,129.51 for the payment of claims incurred prior to privatization of the CNMI Government Group Health and Life Insurance Trust Fund, and for other purposes (Reps. Yumul, Tebuteb, Camacho, Quitugua, Santos, etc.) – ADOPTED
• House Bill 16-24: To implement Article XI, Section 6 Reporting by the Board of Marianas Public Land Trust, by requiring a certified annual report under penalty of perjury to the presiding officers of the legislature and the governor on all information required to be reported under Section 6, including but not limited to interest accrued on trust proceeds that is transferred to the general fund (Rep. Hocog)
• House Bill 16-25: To require the advice and consent of the Senate for appointees to the Medical Professional Licensing Board (Rep. Hocog)
• House Bill 16-26:  To amend 3 CMC Section 1311 to change the general qualifications of future members of NMC’s Board of REgents; to amend 3 CMC Section 1316 to provide for improved financial oversight of NMC; and for other purposes (Rep. Stanley Torres)

HOUSE LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES

• House Legislative Initiative 16-3:  To amend Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of Article XI of the Constitution of the NMI, to update the Constitution to reflect the dissolution of the Marianas Public Land Corporation and the creation of the Dept. of Public Lands (Rep. Hofschneider); and to establish a DPL Operations Fund, to be maintained by the Department of Finance, to be used to cover DPL’s reasonable expenses, and to reserve at least $2 million for appropriation each fiscal year for the payment of debt service (Rep. Hofschneider) 
• House Legislative Initiative 16-4: To amend Article XII, Section 3 of the Constitution of the NMI in order to change the term permitted for transfer of a leasehold interest in private lands to up to 75 years.   (Rep. Hofschneider)
• House Legislative Initiative 16-5: To amend Section 4 of Article X of the Constitution of the NMI to authorize public indebtedness for operating expenses of the Commonwealth government (Rep. Hofschneider)

HOUSE LOCAL BILLS

• House Local Bill 16-3:  To reappropriate section 2(a) of Saipan Local Law 14-31 and section 2(f) of Saipan Local Law 15-12, to fund the completion of various ongoing road paving and drainage improvement projects and other public facilities improvements in election district 4 (Rep. Quitugua).
• House Local Bill 16-4:  To appropriate $98,000 from the local license fees for pachinko slot machines and poker machines in the 2nd Senatorial District to fund the Tinian Municipal Scholarship Program (Rep. Aldan)

HOUSE RESOLUTIONS

• House Resolution 16-6:  To move Rep. Rosemond Santos’ parking spot to enlarge the accessible parking area (Rep. Stanley Torres)
• House Resolution 16-7:  To congratulate the Rotary Club of Saipan on its 40th anniversary (Rep. Ed Salas)

HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS

• House Communications 16-15, 16-16, & 16-17:  Privileged speeches of Rep. Stanley Torres, questioning the activities of the NMC President and the DPS Commissioner; calling on the Governor to remove the Attorney General; and expressing concern about the status of the Legislative Bureau’s reorganization.

The House voted to suspend the rules and passed House Bill 16-23 on first and final reading.  The House also passed all the resolutions except for HR 16-6 (the parking area resolution).  I objected several times yesterday to the efforts to fast-track both the bill and the resolutions. 
 
With respect to the HB 16-23, which proposed to appropriate over two million dollars to address unpaid insurance claims (and thereby avoid the termination of insurance coverage for government employees), I objected to the motion to place the bill on the calendar to adopt that day on the grounds that I (and probably other legislators) had not even had a chance to read the bill beforehand, and I wanted more information.  That slowed down the process somewhat, but not much.  We went into recess during the discussion of HB 16-23, and documents from the Retirement Fund were provided attesting to the facts stated in the bill as well as the urgency of addressing the unpaid claims.  When the session resumed Ways and Means chair Rep. Ray Yumul confirmed that the source of funds for the appropriation would be MPLT interest payments into the General Fund that had been identified and reported to the Legislature on January 28, 2008. 
 
I objected also to the adoption of resolutions that none of us had had a chance to read.  The motion to adopt carried, however, and one resolution was even adopted while I was still reading it.  The parking lot resolution was withdrawn at the request of several legislators, including myself, for lack of information about its necessity (i.e., we didn’t know for a fact whether or not the Legislature’s parking lot was actually not in compliance with accessibility requirements). 
 
I ultimately ended up voting yes on the appropriations bill, and endorsed the resolutions to commend the Rotary Club, two local teachers, etc.  But the more important point that I wish to raise is that I am convinced more than ever that the way in which we conduct business in the Legislature is in serious need of reform, and that we do a grave disservice to our constitutents when we fail to exercise due diligence in properly prioritizing, drafting, reviewing, discussing, and adopting legislative action.  Obviously I cannot realize these reforms all by myself — the effort to improve transparency and set priorities in the Legislature will need the sincere commitment of all my colleagues, as well as support from the citizens of this Commonwealth.  I will expand on these thoughts in a separate letter.
 
In other news

• My weekly press conference will be held this Wednesday at 10am in my office.  I’d like to share some thoughts on the budget process, provide updates on CUC and the need for a strategic plan, discuss the policies governing the Legislative Bureau, and discuss in more detail some observations of the way business is conducted in the Legislature, and suggestions for improvement.  All legislators are invited to attend.
• The Health, Education, and Welfare Committee has announced that it is meeting on Wednesday, February 13 at 2pm in the House chamber to discuss NMC accreditation issues; and again on Friday, February 15 at 9:30am to discuss CHC.  The chair of the committee is Rep. Ralph Torres.  His office may be reached at 664-8903 for more information.

CLICK HERE for email addresses of all our legislators.

CLICK HERE for telephone numbers of all our legislators.

Thanks very much, and please feel free to contact me for questions, comments, or advice.