Fund member sues Fund, acting administrator

A member of the NMI Retirement Fund has sued the Fund and its acting administrator, Esther S. Ada, for their alleged refusal to produce public documents that he requested last month.

Jesus I. Taisague is suing the Fund and Ada for violation of the Open Government Meetings and Records Act for allegedly failing to respond properly and provide the documents for inspection.

Saipan Tribune tried but failed to obtain comments from Ada on Friday.

Taisague, through counsel Ramon K. Quichocho, asked the Superior Court to compel the Fund and Ada to make all his requested documents available for inspection within 48 hours of the court’s order.

Taisague also wants the court to declare the defendants in violation of his rights under the OGA.

Quichocho asked the court to instruct the defendants or any person under their control to “not transfer, alter, destroy, or otherwise dispose of the public records sought to be inspected and examined” by plaintiff.

Taisague urged the court to make his case a priority over other cases in the trial court and set it for an immediate hearing. The plaintiff demanded court costs and attorney’s fees.

According to Quichocho in the complaint, the defendants “are playing games and are wasting precious time and resources to try to hide public documents from Taisague.”

Quichocho said that, on March 12, 2012, Taisague, through counsel, sent an OGA request to the Fund for various public records.

The lawyer said the requested public records refer to documents between the Fund and Wilshire Consulting Associates relating to any version of Senate Bill 17-43 and Public Law 17-51.

Quichocho said the other requested public records are documents pertaining to any contract negotiations between the Fund and Wilshire after the repeal of P.L. 17-51 and before the enactment of P.L. 17-51.

Other requested documents include receipts, invoices, purchase orders, checks, and records for any services, goods, made to any vendor in excess of $5,000 per transaction.

Quichocho said that, on March 22, 2012, the Fund, through Ada, responded by offering to make certain “copies” of documents available for inspection on March 23, 2012 at 9am.

The lawyer said that on March 23, Taisague inspected the sanitized “copies” of certain documents. “No original documents or files, however, were provided for inspection,” Quichocho said.

Quichocho said that, on March 30, 2012, the Fund, through Ada, responded to Taisague’s notice of intent to sue by continuing to refuse to produce public records.

“Because of an approximately $15 million loss, recently, due to their breaches of fiduciary duties, and because there are potentially lots of ugly skeletons being hid[den] in the Fund closet[s], the defendants’ determination to unlawfully hide public records and claim that public records are not ‘public records’ within the scope of the OGA is cancerous,” Quichocho said.