Voters will be asked on Article 12

With only months to go before the CNMI could revisit the divisive issue of land alienation restrictions by 2012, Senate President Paul Manglona (Ind-Rota) pre-filed a Senate legislative initiative seeking to ask voters whether they want to continue or repeal Article 12 of the NMI Constitution.

Article 12 restricts ownership of lands to persons of Northern Marianas descent.

If and when Manglona’s Senate Legislative Initiative 17-10 passes the Senate and House and is ratified by voters, it will repeal Article 12’s Sections 1 to 6.

It needs the affirmative vote of three-fourths of the members of each house of the Legislature present and voting, to be presented to the voters.

Section 805 of the Covenant allows the CNMI to revisit its land alienation restrictions 25 years after the termination of the Trusteeship Agreement in 1986. That 25-year period will end this year.

Manglona, in an interview, said this means revisiting the divisive issue will be allowed “starting in 2012,” and not necessarily in 2012 only.

“Article 12 has served its purpose; our people are ready to continue the process of advancing as part of the global marketplace,” Manglona said in his initiative.

This early, some senators and House members are expressing support for the initiative.

Rep. Ray Yumul (R-Saipan) said he will vote on the initiative, and hopes that the question will be presented to voters.

Press secretary Angel Demapan, when asked for comment, said the pre-filing of a legislative initiative on land ownership “is a new development and the administration will look into it before establishing its position.”

Manglona said ending Article 12 is “more than just a temporary economic fix.”

“[It] is a recognition of the fact that we are now a sophisticated people, ready to handle the freedom and responsibility of disposing of our privately held property as we see fit. While we are proud of our tradition and our culture that promotes family and faith over more materialistic concerns, we find that Article 12 unreasonably restricts our people,” Manglona said in his initiative’s findings.

The Senate president presented the views of both those opposed to and supporting Article 12’s repeal.

Those who oppose a repeal see local peoples losing their land and their identity, citing Hawaii and Guam as examples “of what we do not want—native inhabitants living in apartments, landless.”

“Proponents of keeping Article 12 cite a list of horrors like selling property held for generations to buy a new pickup, or some other instant gratification that will soon be worth nothing. They see locals living off minimum wage or government assistance, in government-subsidized apartment houses where tenants, once proud landowners, have nothing to give their children,” the initiative says.

On the other side, those who want a repeal of Article 12 see it as “a relic of the past which keeps native peoples from advancing.”

“Home values, they argue, are repressed by an artificial market where a lack of buyers keeps home prices low. Indeed, they relate, rich locals can afford to buy choice property from poor families in need of cash to live, far less than the property might be worth in a market with competition,” the initiative says.

Those supporting a repeal also cited the near total absence of banks that will loan money to an average homeowner due to the artificially repressed value of property.

Manglona’s initiative also says that homeownership in an open market, buying property with a mortgage, gives families the opportunity to purchase property over time because they could never afford it outright.

“In an open market where there is true competition for real property and home values increase over time, paying off a mortgage creates wealth. Indeed, buying a home with a mortgage can be likened to a large piggy bank, the mortgage holders is forced to save money by paying off a mortgage and over time, a small investment becomes substantial,” the initiative says.

For years, the issue has been drawing opposing views.

Proponents of Article 12’s repeal say the land alienation restriction forces them to dictate to their children who they should marry because those who fall below the 25 percent Chamorro or Carolinian blood requirement cannot own land.

David M. Sablan of the Citizens for Change of Article 12 has said if the blood requirement continues, “by the fifth or sixth generation onward, a large number of Chamorros and Carolinians can no longer own land in the CNMI.”

But Article 12 also considers NMD an adopted child if he or she were adopted under the age of 18, even if that child is of a lineage other than Chamorro or Carolinian; for example, an adopted child could be of pure Chinese or Filipino blood and could automatically inherit land. To many, this is unfair to those who have Chamorro or Carolinian blood, no matter how low the blood percentage is.

Others say a full repeal of Article 12 is not necessary.

Other lawmakers support extending private land leases from 55 years to 99 years.