Tough choices

By MARIA FRICA T. PANGELINAN

It is important for you to know about the process that the legislators went through before the majority of us voted in favor of terminating the Marianas Public Lands Authority and establishing the Department of Public Lands. We were asked to move quickly, but I will not ever agree that our actions were hasty. We legislators are servants of the public. We worked very long and hard to determine what, if any, action might be required or justified. This is what we promised to do when you elected us. I can’t help but think back to the campaign, when all of the candidates, including myself, were talking about being willing to make the tough choices. This was one of them.

The MPLA has been the subject of discussion in the newspapers and on Capitol Hill for many months now. There have been allegations made of excessive salaries and perks, lack of procedures, extravagant spending, nepotism, and more.

As one of your public servants, this was certainly a call to action. The Office of the Public Auditor had been pressed into service, reprioritizing their already hectic schedule to follow up on these allegations. Allegations, however, are not proof. And, audits take time.

There was a real need to respond to the concerns that had been voiced. Your elected officials started their own fact-finding process. We called the public meetings. There were many participants, including the MPLA Board. We held the meetings on Tinian, Rota and Saipan. There are volumes of oral and written testimony.

We sought the advice of legal counsel, and pressed the OPA for answers. We constructed a timeline of the laws governing the Public Lands program since the Constitution was written. We then documented each amendment and law that affected the Public Lands program.

We went to the Office of the Public Auditor, and collected each audit report that had been published about the Public Lands program and overlaid them on the timeline.

We also requested and received input from other government departments and agencies about ramifications and impacts of the Public Lands program in its current, and proposed configurations.

We then consolidated all of the information and testimony to determine if there really was a problem that needed to be addressed.

The results were sobering.

This version of the Public Lands program, the MPLA, has only existed since 2000. The OPA audits date back to 1988.

The audit reports show deficiencies in the program since 1988, when it was an autonomous agency, and when it was a department of the government. The reports list millions of dollars that could have, and should have, been transmitted to the MPLT. Instead, these millions of dollars are gone. We will not get them back.

The other fundamental issue we determined, is the wording of Article XI, Section 4 (f) of the Constitution: “After this Constitution has been in effect for at least 12 years, the Corporation shall be dissolved and its functions shall be transferred to the executive branch of government.”

That is all the Constitution says. The Constitution does not go on to say that after the MPLC becomes part of the Executive Branch, it may then become an autonomous agency.

The Joint Sessions on these issues lasted many hours. None of us, as individual public servants representing various precincts and points of view, got every point we believed important included in the legislation. That is the nature of a democracy.

What we accomplished, however, is important. We halted the actions of the persons against whom the allegations had been made, put the agency into a forum that is public and subject to regulated scrutiny, and we brought the Public Lands program back into line with the Constitution.

Much of the public testimony was in favor of merely replacing the Board. On the surface, that appears logical. Our analysis, however, reveals two fundamental reasons for not following that particular path. First, as yet, there are no completed audits to justify such a move. We must wait for the results of the newly started OPA audits to determine whether any actions on the allegations of misconduct are required. Secondly, it appears, if it is truly the will of the people that the Public Lands program be an autonomous agency, the Constitution must be amended by a vote, of the people.

A change of philosophy is necessary for the survival and progress of the CNMI in the 21st century. Hopefully, we are progressing along this path. Clearly, there are lessons we can learn from the MPLA story.

One good lesson is that it is time put a greater emphasis on honoring those who are willing to sacrifice by answering the call of civic duty, not for monetary gain, but because of their commitment to the betterment of their communities.

The new Department of Public Lands will have an Advisory Board. The Board members are likely to participate because they are motivated by their wish to serve their people. There is no compensation being offered. These five Board members will be appointed, one by each of the four Mayors, and one by the Governor.

I challenge all peoples of NMI descent to read the legislation and qualifications for service on the Advisory Board. If you meet the qualifications, and can commit to the betterment of the Public Lands program, volunteer. Contact the Governor or the Mayors of your respective precincts. Let them know you are available. From the approximately over 16,000 peoples of NMI descent in our Commonwealth, there will be five, certainly more than five, who are willing and able to make this commitment.

We are all part of the democratic process. We are all responsible for its outcome, whether we are private citizens or public servants.

(Pangelinan is a senator in the 15th CNMI Legislature and is chairperson of the Senate Committee on Resources, Economic Development and Programs.)