Over 50 percent of MPLA lessees violate agreement

By
|
Posted on Dec 06 2004
Share

More than 50 percent of public land lessees have been in violation of their lease agreement with the Marianas Public Lands Authority, MPLA compliance chief John Gonzales said yesterday.

According to Gonzales, most of the violations involved unauthorized sub-leasing or the use of the lands for purposes other than that stated in the lease agreement.

However, Gonzales said that while MPLA discourages such actions, the blame could not be placed entirely on the lessees. He admitted that Public Lands itself had been lax in enforcing the lease agreements.

“We recognize that both parties have been at fault at some point. We’re trying to change that by taking a more pro-active approach in dealing with our lessees and permitees,” Gonzales said in an interview yesterday. “We’re trying not to be inconsiderate, arrogant enforcers. Instead, we meet halfway with lessees, hear their problems, and try to humanize the situation.”

He said violations could result in automatic termination of the lease agreement. However, the MPLA Compliance Division normally imposes a reasonable fine or allows lessees to simply correct the violation.

For instance, lessees who have entered into sub-lease agreements without MPLA’s consent are allowed to submit a request to ratify the already executed sub-lease contract.

Nevertheless, Gonzales maintained that the MPLA Compliance Division is not letting up in its collection duties.

He noted that MPLA receives no funding from the central government and relies solely on revenues from leases and permits.

“I think that we could realize an expanded revenue stream if we could succeed in our collection efforts and in getting individuals or businesses who are using public lands without authorization to apply for permits,” he said.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.