After several months of back-and-forth between the Department of Public Lands and the office of Rep. Alice Igitol (R-Saipan), the lease renewal for a telecommunications company has yet to be agreed upon even after the expiry of the main 25-year lease.<\/p>\n
Unresolved conflicts between the office of Igitol, who chairs the House Committee on Natural Resources, and DPL Secretary Marianne Teregeyo further delays Pacific Telecom Inc.\u2019s request for a 15-year lease renewal.<\/p>\n
The company, which does business as IT&E, has yet to have its lease extension approved, as Igitol disputes Teregeyo\u2019s decisions surrounding the extension. <\/p>\n
According to a Feb. 13, 2018, letter from Igitol to DPL, the agency\u2019s removal of certain provisions within the contract agreement in favor of PTI could also be amended in favor of those of Northern Marianas descent.<\/p>\n
\u201cGiven this, why does DPL insist on following the terms of the lease strictly on the one hand, while it deletes revenue-generating provisions on the other?\u201d asked Igitol in her letter. In the same letter, she questions how much the Marianas Public Land Trust Fund has \u201clost in terms of revenue\u201d that could have been paid pursuant to the deleted provision.<\/p>\n
In a previous letter dated Jan. 24, 2018, Teregeyo informed Igitol that DPL and PTI amended the June 28, 1990, and Sept. 21, 1990, lease agreements to delete the Gross Receipt Rental provision of the agreements. The amendment relieves PTI of having to pay a specific rate based on their gross receipt rentals based on revenue generated in the leased area. PTI\u2019s property did not affect the revenue stream of PTI.<\/p>\n
In response to Igitol\u2019s Feb. 13, 2018 letter questioning the amendment, Teregeyo clarified in a Feb. 26, 2018, letter that the amendment was done back in 2006.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe original lease included a percentage of BGR component of rent. However, the original lease was amended in 2006 to exclude it. In other words, it was taken out before the lease\u2019s expiration date, which we have clearly and repeatedly explained to you and [the] House legal counsel,\u201d she said, referring to a joint meeting with the House and the Senate early January 2018.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy it was taken out in 2006 is unknown and why it was not reinstated prior to expiration in 2015 is also unknown,\u201d she later stated.<\/p>\n
Teregeyo further explained that Attorney General Edward Manibusan advised the department that the leases as amended is the \u201cdocument to follow\u201d due to the proposed renewals being a continuation of existing leases not to exceed 40 years.<\/p>\n
\u201c\u2026It was partly DPL\u2019s fault for not addressing the extension in 2015\u2014as requested by PTI\u2014prior to the expiration of the lease (as amended),\u201d wrote Teregeyo.<\/p>\n
Teregeyo added in the same letter that she agrees with Igitol that DPL should have performed a study to base the removal of the gross receipt rental provision in the lease agreement. <\/p>\n
\u201c\u2026DPL should have performed such analysis to base its decision to remove the percentage of BGR rent at that time. It did not. Why it was taken out in 2006 is unknown,\u201d Teregeyo wrote to Igitol.<\/p>\n
Igitol again sent a March 6 letter to the DPL secretary in response, reiterating that her actions were based entirely on \u201cwhat I believe is best for our people of Northern Marianas descent.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBefore we enter into another 15-year contract, we all need to do right for our NMDs,\u201d said Igitol, adding that both DPL and her office cannot \u201cignore our responsibility to them to secure the best possible terms for their land leases.\u201d<\/p>\n
Igitol stated that DPL in their Feb. 26, 2018, response to her office did not provide a cost-benefit analysis on the provision\u2019s exclusion.<\/p>\n
\u201cDPL admits that it should have done an analysis. But after failing to do so, DPL still asserts that it is performing its due diligence today. How so?\u201d asked Igitol. \u201cDPL should determine how much will be \u2018waived\u2019 in the proposed 15-year extension before it takes a firm position that this potential revenue stream should be excluded from the next 15-year term,\u201d she continued.<\/p>\n
Igitol told Saipan Tribune in a brief interview that she intends to meet with Manibusan to \u201cfinalize the issue.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
After several months of back-and-forth between the Department of Public Lands and the office of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":22,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[900],"tags":[4790,175,14696,6052],"class_list":["post-271967","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-featured","tag-bgr","tag-dpl","tag-house-committee","tag-pti"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271967","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\/22"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271967"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271967\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271967"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271967"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271967"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}