OPA speaks out

I have been asked to comment on an article that appeared in the July 25, 2011, Saipan Tribune in which the Office of the Public Auditor was accused by the attorney general of leaking a confidential report to the press. Although I believe that such matters are best handled quietly and effectively and I am generally hesitant to make public comments, I believe that a response to this allegation is required.

I take the responsibilities entrusted to OPA very seriously. One of those responsibilities is to maintain certain records in a confidential manner. I have taken, and always will take, all reasonable and necessary steps to ensure that confidential records are maintained confidentially, including dealing severely with any OPA employee or contractor who violates such confidentiality requirements. Indeed, all OPA employees and agents are required to take an oath of confidentiality. Any violation of this oath results in sanctions and in some cases, criminal penalties. Of course, once a confidential record is properly marked, concealed, and distributed outside of OPA, there is no way of policing any redistribution by official recipients.

I strongly suspect that the record that Attorney General Buckingham accuses OPA of leaking to the press was not, in fact, leaked by OPA. No circumstances have been presented to me to indicate any breach of our confidentiality standards. The complained of record was distributed to numerous other CNMI and federal government officials. Moreover, a copy of the report was to be issued in redacted form: http://www.doioig.gov/images/stories/reports/pdf/CNMIARRAManagement%20-%20Public.pdf. Why OPA has been accused of such a leak I do not know or understand.

As to OPA recently retaining a lawyer to represent it in the lawsuit that the attorney general filed against it regarding contract processing issues, this is correct information. We are in the process of routing a contract with the Law Offices of Sean E. Frink to represent the OPA at a discounted hourly rate in the attorney general’s lawsuit. Having to hire an attorney to handle a lawsuit filed by one government official against another is not something that I would like to see government spent money on. Unfortunately, the subject matter of the lawsuit requires outside counsel due to conflicts of interest with existing OPA attorneys. Additionally, arguments made within the lawsuit challenge OPA’s autonomy and thus its ability to serve the public effectively. Unfortunately, defending this lawsuit will cost the public money. We have been waiting for the approval of the Frink firm’s contract by the attorney general and other contract signatories so that OPA can then meet with the attorney general and his attorneys in order to try to settle the lawsuit quickly, hopefully with minimal cost to the CNMI taxpayers. I am hopeful that once we are able to enter into settlement discussions and talk about this lawsuit, the attorney general will realize that he and I do not view the issues involved, and the related solutions, very differently.

As to the other allegations contained in the Saipan Tribune article, I respectfully disagree and urge the attorney general to address any issues with me and the way that my office is run, directly with me, rather than meeting with the press.