Probing use of $250,000

The CNMI seems home to jungle rules in the expenditure of public funds. There’s just sheer attitude of inconsequence and non-accountability how public funds are spent based on legislative appropriation or authority.

For instance, it is rumored that about two years ago the Commonwealth Ports Authority approved some $250,000 for bumpers and bollards for installation at the seaport on Rota.

An employee of CPA in charge of procurement subsequently went to Rota to inspect progress on the project. He was told to forget about it. It is also rumored that upon his return to Saipan he was fired. It’s an interesting development that piques my interest—what was the basis for the termination?

Was there fear he may reveal shift in the use of public funds to other than the planned project? Was there an official termination or was it withdrawn substituted by other considerations including non-disclosure agreement so he doesn’t reveal where CPA misspent the $250K? Isn’t this one of complicity to an illegal activity in the misuse of public funds? It gives credence to the habitual perverse use of public funds without authority and subsequently spent without accountability. No mas!

The board isn’t an elected body, therefore it stands to reason that it isn’t scot free to spend public funds without authority. Spending requires legislative appropriation with specific earmarking for a given public purpose. To do so unilaterally is to violate the concept of separation of powers. Could CPA cite the authority to spend the $250,000?

Was the project announced meeting procurement regulations? Who was the recipient? Or did the board abort the project but allowed funds to be spent elsewhere? Where was it spent? OPA must employ the Open Government Act to probe this issue to the hilt on behalf of taxpayers!

Remember when the settlement fund’s trustee ad litem refused to spend money given the program by the administration because it lacked legislative appropriation? It’s the same principle all over. If there wasn’t any appropriation then you’re in a bind. Get that pal?

Retreat is in order
Through the years, I’ve seen sweeping changes descend on these islands. It includes our joining the U.S. in the 70s. Along the way, a federal court reminded the NMI that the authority on immigration solely rests with our national government.

We seem reluctant to accept the sovereign role of the feds. We think we’re equal in stature, ignoring political subserviency. Call it a pipe dream loaded with useless wishful thinking.

We’ve sued and failed. Guam may be told the same thing. Both must return to its boardroom to reassess how else does it address labor shortage.

Is this an issue to mull over to come to terms with the implied message? In our case there’s no coherent blueprint setting down planned growth that takes into full view USCIS’ requirements. We just want growth to spur more revenue generation. At day’s end we create more jobs for foreigners. This is the unintended consequence of unbridled growth. Does it mean anything to you at all when the number of visitors overwhelms the islands?

And we need not go further than the experience of the Republic of Palau nearby. It had to cut the number of inbound flights from China. This is happening elsewhere too.

Sorry: Damning the lack of meaningful opportunities here for local college graduates, many of whom have returned to Guam, Hawaii and the U.S. mainland where jobs abound. Isn’t the NMI spending millions of dollars in scholarships? Why can’t it spend the same amount to see that returning scholars find coming home meaningful? Is anybody home?

I’ve seen young educated scholars head out, returning to the states where they received their degrees saying there are jobs and continuing education for their professional development. There’s none here! There are just too many loose ends in the way we approach developmental issues. And we think that “biba” resolves it all! Come on! Get real!

•••

The expropriation of the $400K by Biktot Hokog for his relatives’ business is a very sad chapter in our developmental history. What is it in pertinent constitutional provision that you miss? Or is this a case of imposing your own set of jungle rules? Isn’t the NMI a government of laws?

More empty promises
Politicians are notorious for making offers designed to win votes with empty promises. It’s election year and there’s floated the idea to increase wage and salaries once more. But isn’t this federal law? The postponement centered on the ruination of the apparel industry. Now, some are saying the beneficiaries are mostly from without.

Definitely, there are key players who know their profit margins would decrease if the MW is raised to the federal level. Isn’t the MW plus more food stamps the perfect recipe to keep most people here living continuously in abject poverty? Isn’t this hideous collusion to keep their power and profits over the wellbeing of their people? I mean why would you contribute to depowering your people scrambling and literally struggling to make ends meet?

The discussion of this and other collateral issues is far from over. At some point we should ably put the issue into perspective in the interest of meeting the needs of our people with common decency. After all, the poverty we see today isn’t so designed by the multitude as much as the negligence of half-cocked politicians hardly conversant of an issue that requires some formal clue that entails economics.

It’s a difficult issue but one that can no longer be allowed to slide under the table for that rainy day discussion. We will assist bring it into focus up ahead.