In defense of the MPLA

In the March 18, 2005 edition of the Marianas Variety two articles were published which are worthy of clarification. On the left panel of the front page an article entitled “MPLA denies being pressured on Verizon land lease.” Board chairwoman Ana Demapan-Castro was quoted as saying that, “Governor Babauta is not pressuring the MPLA to give the new management of Verizon a “hard time.” This printed statement is a misrepresentation as: 1) the only denial in which the MPLA Board was involved in was that of Verizon’s $17,000 public land lease and 2) Governor Babauta has never suggested to any member of the Board that the MPLA should give Verizon a “hard time.”

The Verizon deal rejection is very simple: Verizon’s annual net income is estimated at several million dollars per annum. They currently pay $17,000 for public land lease per year. The MPLA board, in its capacity as the managers of the people’s land, desire for the lease amount to be increased to the appraised value of $86,000 per year. Negotiations are again under way between the MPLA Commissioner and staff and representatives of Verizon.

On the front page center (Marianas Variety), “Abuses in board members‚ pay, perks,” the Marianas Variety does a disservice to its readers by generalizing all CNMI government boards, its members, its duties, and its policies. It is a fact that each of the five members of the MPLA board expresses themselves and actively contributes in all meetings. The MPLA is a unique and complex organization that deals with many complex issues, and we do so with no less than diligent and extensive research and investigation from the MPLA staff, as well as internal and external experts in land, corporate, and legal issues. The MPLA is tasked with protecting and managing each and every square foot of public lands, above and below ground, of the indigenous people in a way that is entirely different from a “landlord” or a “building manager.”

We are presented with constantly changing issues that require careful deliberation among the board members, staff, and management. Land compensation matters must be reviewed carefully. These matters are presented to the board in the special or regular meetings. Homestead issues, legal counsel reports on matters, division reports, public comments, planning and decision making dialogue are just some of the subjects that will be discussed in a board meeting. The economy also affects the Marianas Public Lands Authority. In the past six months a total of five golf courses and several hotels have changed hands! These are a few examples of the corporate transactions that require in-depth discussion so that the indigenous people of the CNMI will not be shortchanged. The board invites the public to each meeting for their comments and concerns. Deputy commissioners from each district (Saipan, Rota, and Tinian) must report to the board as to the status on issues for their respective islands. MPLA board meeting agenda usually take up one-quarter of a page when published. There are so many issues and each and every one must be carefully discussed. Would the indigenous people of the CNMI desire the board to make an immediate decision once an issue arises? Or would they rather we, as mandated in Article XI of the Constitution, carefully discuss and decide the public land issues for the benefit of the people of the Commonwealth who are of Northern Marianas descent?

Special MPLA board meetings are held to accommodate certain corporate and government deadlines. Article 3 of Public Law 12-71 sets the compensation rate for board members. This was signed into law on Nov. 13, 2001 by Gov. Pedro “Teno” Tenorio. The MPLA board has in the past been wrongfully accused as being “anti-business.” Would the MPLA hold these special and accommodating meetings if we were indeed anti-business? Last year the MPLA did indeed meet a total of seven times from October 2004 to December 2004. If you recall the MPLA, acting in the best interests of the indigenous people of the CNMI, and within its fiduciary responsibilities, carefully analyzed the public comments, application, and business plans of Azmar Inc. to mine on Pagan. In order to arrive at the careful and justifiable decision of denying Azmar its permit to mine, the MPLA board, management, and staff needed to consult with professionals, Azmar representatives and supporters, public opposition to Azmar, as well as to discuss the issue in depth and in detail among themselves and the staff.

In closing, I sincerely hope that this letter reaches the readers and viewers of all the publications that it has been sent to. The public perception of MPLA has been wrongly and severely criticized over the past year and a half. The time has come for the cessation of accusations against the MPLA’s board, management and staff.

Edward C. Arriola, Jr.
PIO, Marianas Public Lands Authority