CPA suggests changes to proposed marina legislation

Stressing the potential adverse impact it poses to the agency’s financial capabilities, the Commonwealth Ports Authority is opposed to the passage of legislation stopping all paying passengers from boarding at all sea transport facilities other than the Smiling Cove and Outer Cove Marina.

CPA Executive Carlos H. Salas said the ports authority is anticipated to suffer substantial financial losses if the 12th CNMI Legislature would act at passing House Bill 12-250 on its present form.

“[HB12-250] would prohibit commercial tour boat operators and other water-borne vessels from mooring at or taking on passengers at any location other than the Smiling Cove or the Outer Cove Marina,” said Mr. Salas.

He pointed out that should the legislation be enacted into law, it would also prohibit Tinian Dynasty ferries and other existing tour boats at CPA facilities from picking up passengers at the Port of Saipan.

Not even the Pacific Subsea Saipan’s submarine will be spared, as it will not be allowed to get passengers from the CPA-owned Seaplane Ramp while paying passengers may also be prohibited to board at the Echo Dock.

“The irony with this legislation is that it gives CPA the power to enforce the Act at the Smiling Cove Marina and Outer Cove Marina — sites where CPA neither has nor desires jurisdiction,” Mr. Salas explained.

CPA wants the proposed legislation be drafted in a way where the Saipan harbor, the Seaplane Ramp, the Echo Dock and the Sugar Dock will be included within the exclusive sites where passengers may embark and disembark.

The revenue generated from the existing tour boat operators at CPA facilities represents about 19 percent of the total seaport revenues, said Mr. Salas, stressing that the ports authority will not be able to meet the required debt service coverage on the $33 million bond without the fees collected from harbor operations.

“In addition, without the passenger fee, CPA would have to increase wharfage fees on both inbound and outbound cargo to cover operational expenses, an increase which would directly drive up prices of goods shipped into the CNMI,” he emphasized.

At the same time, Mr. Salas is suggesting that HB12-250 ‘s purpose clause be re-drafted in a way that passenger safety is clearly stated as the primary goal for limiting the sites of passenger embarkation and disembarkation.

“In other words, the dock facility must be safe and must be regulated so that accidents will not occur,” he told House public utilities, transportation and communications chair Rep. Rosiky F. Camacho in a letter.

Earlier, boat owners have expressed opposition to the proposed legislation citing adverse impacts it may have on the tourism industry as well as potential traffic congestion both in land and in the lagoon.