Hands off on MPLT funds!

First, I wish to extend my sincere thank you to Rep. Heinze Hofschnieder for taking the time to enlighten the public with legislative initiatives H.L.I. 16-3, 16-4, and 16-8, in the March17, 2008 of John Gonzales’s Talk Show. I tried to call in to share my thoughts on the issue; unfortunately, there were more callers that time and I was not able to get on line.

Nonetheless, I respectfully wanted to share my concerns about H.L.I. 16-3 or the MPLT proposed amendments. My concern is twofold; 1) the use of NMI-descent money, and 2) CUC privatization. I stand to be corrected if I am wrong. Thank you.

Before I touch the issues of concerns, let me publicly pronounce that the idea to rehabilitate or fix CUC’s problem, and to help lower the power rates are noble ideas. This is a public outcry that must be addressed immediately. Unfortunately, I feel that there are still gray areas that have not been openly shared with the public. I wish to share these gray areas with the public, particularly the NMI descent.

On the first issue, I know that the founding fathers of the CNMI Constitution intentionally reserved the MPLT funds strictly to benefit those residing on Saipan, Tinian and Rota who have met the CNMI Constitution’s definition of NMI descent (having one quarter percent, or 25 percent, Carolinian or Chamorro blood).

To use monies belonging to NMI descent to rehabilitate CUC engines is quite not right. I know that it is not right because the stakeholders (customers) for CUC include individuals who are not NMI descent. As such, to spend NMI descent monies on CUC will greatly benefit those individuals who are not NMI descent. This action is wholly contrary to the intent of the CNMI Constitution. This is utterly not right!

On a side note, the California casinos belong to the Indians in the California reservation. Therefore, all monies collected by the casinos are expended for the California Indians only. All other Americans in California, sorry!

Here is my idea of how to use the NMI descent monies from the MPLT funds’ interest. Use the interest of the MPLT funds to compensate those NMI descents whose lands have been taken by the CNMI government for public purpose(s). In this way, the expenditures of only NMI descent monies are expended for NMI descent only! I know that this, in every respect, is wholly right.

On the second issue, CUC privatization has been an ongoing discussion for the last five administrations of the CNMI government. Like my friends on Rota would say “Just do it, Rota,” as such I would say, “Just do it, congressmen and congresswomen.” But please not at the expense of the NMI descent. Most particularly, expending NMI descent monies to rehabilitate or fix CUC engines and then privatize the corporation. This is quite not right!

If my analogy on the use of only NMI descent monies to rehabilitate or fix CUC power plants and then privatize the power plant is incorrect, then I will stand to be corrected and thank you. Here is the issue and my analogy.

The Legislature is proposing to borrow $3 million (D. Amendment to Section 6: (d) of H.L.I No. 16-3) from the interest of the “MPLT funds” as collateral or guaranteed payment to the bank. The $3 million will be used to rehabilitate or fix CUC power plants. When the power plants are rehabilitated, they will be privatized. The NMI descent, through their MPLT funds’ interest, would continue to pay the bank for the loan, even if CUC is already privatized.

Here is what I believe is wrong with this whole idea. The NMI descent and the non-NMI descent will be paying their utility consumption at the same rate to the privately owned power plant. There is no special rate for the NMI descent even if it was their money that rehabilitated CUC. The math here is not quite correct!

My question is, “What is in it for the NMI descent?”

This is my analogy. Jose borrowed money from the bank to buy a car. Jose purchased the car. Jose continues to pay the bank from his own money. Jose gives his sister Maria the car. Maria makes a taxicab business with the car. Jose and Mr. Sum ride on the taxicab and pay the same taxi rate. Where is the beef for Jose? This is not quite right!

I wish to offer this idea as alternative using MPLT funds to rehabilitate or fix CUC before it is privatized:

First, correct or fix the CUC salary problem. Create a justified salary scale for its employees based on qualification(s), position descriptions, and duties and responsibilities. This is simply called “Equal pay for equal work based on merit.”

I would strongly recommend that the Legislature review the requirement of the law that authorized CUC to become a full autonomous agency. It requires that first, CUC must promulgate a salary based scale that it must submit to the Legislature for approval before it can achieve full autonomy. This has not been done. Therefore, CUC pays its employees’ salaries arbitrarily. You know, its like the old saying, “Its not what you know, but who you know.”

CUC, PSS and Ports Authority all have the same law requirements in order that they realize full autonomy from the central government. PSS and Ports Authority have accomplished that provision of law in 1987/8. They are full autonomous agencies of the CNMI Government.

I know that if CUC creates its salary pay scale, and pay its employees accordingly, it would identify huge salary overpayment to its employees. Use the excess from the salary overpayment as collateral to borrow against. I will not be surprised if the excess in the over-the-cap salary is more than $3 million a year.

So please, don’t use the NMI descent money for CUC’S rehabilitation for privatization. Once again, the stakeholder (customers) for CUC is comprised of all people living in the CNMI, and not NMI-descent only. Let’s not fix problems by creating another problem.

MPLT funds is for NMI descent with a quarter Carolinian/Chamorro blood. Pay NMI-descent landowners whose lands were taken by the government for public purpose. It meets the constitutional mandate for use of the MPLT monies.