Land lease extension back to Senate committee

A Senate bill fresh from the House of Representatives is headed back to the committee level of the Senate for further deliberation as new discoveries were made during House public hearings.

Senate President Arnold I. Palacios (R-Saipan) moved his Senate Bill 20-35 back to the Senate committee level during their Thursday session for further review after the House sent it back to the Senate floor with amendments and to take into consideration comments obtained from a House public hearing on the bill.

Palacios noted that the bill would be sent back to the Senate committee of Resources, Economic Development, and Programs, or REDP, chaired by Sen. Francisco Borja (R-Tinian).

“Because of the testimony in the House public hearing on this particular legislation [and] because of new amendments…[I] wish to refer this back to the REDP committee for further incorporation of those comments and to even entertain the idea of having additional engagement with the…public on this particular legislation.”

Palacios did not mention the specific information that made him refer the bill back to the committee.

Sen. Paul Manglona (Ind-Rota) suggested to Palacios that the Senate could either vote to reject the House amendments before conducting another public hearing during conference committee discussions or conduct a Senate public hearing before discussing the legislation with the House in conference committee.

Palacios said that was one of the reasons that pushed him to refer to the committee level S.B. 20-35.

The bill seeks to extend by an additional 15 years the maximum initial term of public land leases. The initial version of the bill only allowed land leases that has an existing hotel or golf course on it to be included in the extension, however the House amended the bill to include schools and religious organizations into the mix.

The bill initially did not provide the Department of Public Lands the authority to negotiate lease renewals prior to the expiration of a lease agreement. The House amended the bill to authorize DPL to initiate negotiations as early as five years prior to the expiration of the lease agreement. The bill under the House also mandated DPL to come up with a decision prior to the expiration of the lease agreement.

The House did not touch, however, a provision that authorized DPL to negotiate new terms and conditions on a lease agreement without first releasing a request for proposal, or an RFP.

Rep. Donald Barcinas (R-Saipan), the sole legislator that opposed the passage of S.B. 20-35 in the House, voted against the bill due to this provision.

He stated that the RFP process would be in the “best interest of those of Northern Marianas descent.”

He further stated that regular contracts with the CNMI government go through an RFP process. Given the value of land in the NMI, where land mass is already minimal, Barcinas believes that the RFP process is crucial to reaping the most returns out of the lease agreement.