{"id":211465,"date":"2015-09-30T06:06:16","date_gmt":"2015-09-29T20:06:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/?p=211465"},"modified":"2015-09-30T06:06:16","modified_gmt":"2015-09-29T20:06:16","slug":"budget-passes-shutdown-averted","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/budget-passes-shutdown-averted\/","title":{"rendered":"Budget passes; shutdown averted"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Gov.<\/a>
Gov. Eloy S. Inos puts pen to paper to sign his name on a $145-million fiscal year 2016 budget bill, effectively saving the CNMI from a government shutdown today. (OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Tourism money was cut and law enforcers\u2019 salary raises were dropped, among others, in a $145-million budget bill for fiscal year 2016 that Gov. Eloy S. Inos signed into law yesterday afternoon.<\/p>\n

Inos\u2019 signature effectively averted an impending government shutdown if he had not signed a budget bill by today, Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have a budget and I will sign it,\u201d Inos told a crowd of Cabinet heads, lawmakers, and administration officials who gathered at the governor\u2019s conference room at 4pm to await Inos.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

As soon as he signed the budget bill, Inos said, \u201cNo shutdown!,\u201d to applause from the crowd gathered.<\/p>\n

The governor arrived more than a half hour late to read through a draft letter describing his much anticipated budget decision and its line-item vetoes on provisions that the administration deemed unconstitutional or unfair.<\/p>\n

Inos said it was \u201cnot a perfect budget,\u201d but through vetting by the Executive Branch\u2014which he conceded still had some disagreements over the measure\u2014the administration arrived at a balanced budget to avoid a government shutdown.<\/p>\n

Inos said he would approve a majority of the budget but disapprove some of the \u201cproblematic provisions in the administrative provisions of the bill.\u201d<\/p>\n

The House and Senate had modified Inos-directed hotel tax earmarks, effectively cutting $2.5 million from the Marianas Visitors Authority programs to fund other needs. That remained in the budget Inos signed yesterday afternoon.<\/p>\n

The House and Senate also gave 5-percent salary increases for law enforcement personnel but Inos line-item vetoed this provision. For one, the provision did not give similar raises for personnel on Rota and Tinian, and two, the provision did not adequately source funding for the raises, Inos said.<\/p>\n

The vetoed provision mandated that \u201c5 percent of the law enforcement personnel budget appropriations\u201d of various CNMI departments would be \u201callocated to provide for 5-percent salary increase of current law enforcement personnel.\u201d But the provision did not define clearly where this money would come from.<\/p>\n

Administration officials were concerned that this provision would essentially force departments to pull from their existing funds to support the increase.\u00a0That could compromise other funding\u2014for tires or bullets, for instance\u2014officials earlier said.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe find this [provision] to be unfair,\u201d Inos said, referring to it as \u201ccontroversial.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIt does not cover salary increases for law enforcement in the first and second senatorial districts. It only applies to the third senatorial district. So we don\u2019t believe that that\u2019s a fair and equitable to allow for these increases to occur.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cSecondly, it\u2019s not clear how this increase is to be funded,\u201d Inos said. \u201cThere are various scenarios, but in the end, there may not be a salary increase because there is just no funds available or associated [funds available].<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is not to say we will never address this,\u201d Inos added. \u201cThe Legislature should continue to deliberate on this issue.\u201d<\/p>\n

On the \u201credirection of MVA earmarks,\u201d Inos said the Executive Branch found this provision to be \u201cdetrimental to the tourism industry.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cBut,\u201d he said, \u201cwe should take heed on some of the recommendations that the community has, and maybe, we should continue to find new sources of revenue and or improve the economy in such a manner that we can follow the momentum of\u2026the developments these new projects have in store for us.\u201d<\/p>\n

Inos did not specify further on this provision. Officials and reporters wanted to know if MVA earmark cuts stayed or were line-item vetoed. Various officials and lawmakers initially understood Inos to mean that the MVA provision was vetoed, and the MVA money left untouched.<\/p>\n

In an interview, Inos clarified that the provision was left in the bill but \u201cwith comment.\u201d<\/p>\n

Inos emphasized these kind of provisions should provide a clear \u201cnexus\u201d on the use of funds between the program that is modified and the agency or program receiving the funds.<\/p>\n

The $2.5 million from the CNMI\u2019s tourism body goes to the following: $1,802,403 for Department of Public Work streetlights, $200,000 for stationary x-ray machine for the Saipan airport; $225,000 for a container and loose cargo x-ray machine for the seaport; $75,000 for a handheld x-ray scanner for the seaport; and $200,000 for the Mayor of Saipan for cleanup and beautification projects.<\/p>\n

Inos said this provision\u2014which in earlier drafts were amendments to the earmark statute\u2014could open a \u201cwhole new Pandora\u2019s box.\u201d<\/p>\n

The compromise version instead cited the Legislature\u2019s authority in mandating modifications to government corporations. The MVA is listed under this provision in the budget law.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf they can do a $2 million re-direction of funds this year, can they do a three or five million dollars next year?\u201d Inos asked. \u201c\u2026We are saying this should be done very discreetly. The original intent of the tourism and promotion fund was to enhance the tourism industry, to get out in the market and try to get more visitors.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cSo as long as there is a nexus, and in such a manner that it benefits MVA\u201d and the \u201creceiving beneficiary\u2019s\u201d contribution to the tourism industry, Inos said, the Executive Branch believes that the citation of the bill on the use of the MVA funds \u201cmay be acceptable.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cBut again, it can\u2019t be like that every year\u2014year after year after year,\u201d Inos emphasized.<\/p>\n

\u2018Problematic provisions\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Among several others, Inos line-item vetoed provisions to fund a \u201cdrug court,\u201d provisions that gave 100 percent reprogramming authority to the Judiciary and mayors, and a \u201csalary cap exemption\u201d that would allow raises for department heads on Rota and Tinian.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no authorization for the drug court as a program to be able to receive any kind of appropriations,\u201d Inos said. \u201cWe understand that there is currently a bill in the Legislature. \u2026We urge the Legislature to enact that bill and then fund it, and make the program viable.\u201d<\/p>\n

Inos added that the CNMI Attorney General\u2019s advice is that the drug court provision be vetoed \u201cbecause it is contrary to the Constitution that says that appropriations are for programs that have already been authorized.\u201d<\/p>\n

For salary cap exemptions, Inos said salary increases are provided for certain positions and that it was \u201chigh time that they sit back and revisit salary compensation for every employee\u201d in government.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis method of providing salary increases to certain provisions on an ad-hoc basis, especially in an appropriations bill, which has a life of only one fiscal year, is not good policy, \u201c Inos said,<\/p>\n

Inos was referring to the House and Senate \u201ccompromise\u201d provisions that mandated $62,000 annual salary for the special assistant for the Office of Management and Budget, from $54,000; a 5-percent increase for all law enforcement officers; $45,000 for resident department heads for Rota and Tinian, from an annual pay of $36,000; and $45,000 for the deputy commissioners for Rota and Tinian.<\/p>\n

\u201cI urge the members to work together with everyone. If we need to re-commission a salary working group\u2026to really study [the issue] because we know not only the law enforcement folks need the salary increases\u2014just about everyone needs it. There is no justification for not allowing those other employees, especially in the lower echelon not receive any additional compensation.\u201d<\/p>\n

The salary increases were a compromise provision in the recent and contentious budget talks between the chambers of the Legislature.<\/p>\n

\u201cHe\u2019s right,\u201d House Speaker Joseph Deleon Guerrero said of Inos\u2019 wish that compensation be revisited. \u201cWe need to revisit it and update it. The pay scale has been in place long before I came in. There has been a freeze\u2026so nothing has happened since then. The governor is saying we need to revisit that and make it up to date\u201d as cost of living has gone up.<\/p>\n

For his part, Deleon Guerrero said he was \u201crelieved\u201d that they avoided a government shutdown and that the delivery of public service would continue.<\/p>\n

\u201cBut the process is not over,\u201d he said. \u201cNow that the message is going to be sent to the presiding officers of the House and Senate, then there is still a last step to this. What is the House and Senate going to do? Are they going to override it or not? And I can\u2019t answer that \u2019til we look at the budget. The Senate may want to do something, the House may want to\u2026 At this point, it\u2019s premature to say…\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Tourism money was cut and law enforcers\u2019 salary raises were dropped, among others, in a…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":47,"featured_media":211467,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[94],"tags":[20,1414,65,212],"class_list":["post-211465","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-headlines","tag-budget","tag-executive-branch","tag-house","tag-mva"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211465","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/47"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=211465"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211465\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/211467"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211465"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211465"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211465"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}