By Cherrie Anne E. Villahermosa
Variety News Staff

A FORMER youth senator has sued the CNMI Scholarship Board, its members and administrators for denying her application.
Roselle Demapan Calvo, through attorney Robert T. Torres, filed a complaint for judicial review of an agency decision against the Scholarship Board by and through its Administrator Merissa Seman and the board members.
Calvo graduated salutatorian at Marianas Baptist Academy in May 2006 and is now studying at New York University.
The Scholarship Board is an independent agency established within the Office of Governor with the purpose of considering applications and awarding scholarships pursuant to the Post Secondary Education Act of 1990.
Seman, according to the complaint, is the administrator who initiated the adverse action against Calvo.
Calvo applied for the CNMI Honor Scholarship Program pursuant to Public Law 14-37. Under this program, awards of up to eight honor scholarships are given to eligible recipients from Saipan based on their scholastic achievement and other requirements.
Sometime in Oct. 2006, Calvo was informed by Seman that she had not been selected for the honor scholarship.
Calvo learned that she had been placed 11th and was not selected.
The complaint stated that “on information and belief, the Scholarship Board considers the applicants on a blind basis with names and other identifiers eliminated so that the applicants were considered only on the weight of their SAT/ACT scores and grade point average calculations.”
The complaint stated that Calvo learned that the board forwarded the list of eligible candidates to the governor for review and approval.
Calvo filed a petition of appeal to the board on Oct. 9, 2006 after learning its decision denying her application for a scholarship.
The board denied Calvo’s appeal on Dec. 5, 2006.
The board also held a meeting on Jan. 9, 2007 attended by Calvo and entertained her appeal and request for reconsideration of the decision.
On Jan. 11, the board, through Seman, issued its decision informing Calvo that while the board recommended that the Scholarship Office study the calculation method further, any change would not affect her status.
The board then denied Calvo’s appeal.
The complaint stated that in giving weighted consideration to each applicant’s SAT/ACT and GPA scores, the Scholarship Board’s decision was arbitrary, biased, capricious, an abuse of discretion and not otherwise in accordance with law.
According to the complaint, the decision to accord percentages only to SAT and GPA was based on the board’s misreading of Public Law 14-37 by applying the findings and purpose provisions instead of the actual amendments that were clearly set out in the legislation itself.
The complaint stated that the improper consideration by the board and Seman that 80 percent of an award determination would be based on an applicant’s cumulative grade point average and 20 percent on an applicant’s SAT or ACT score runs contrary to Calvo’s statutory rights pursuant to Public Law 14-37.
The complaint added that the decision denying Calvo’s application and rejecting her appeal was unwarranted by the facts.
Calvo is requesting an order to set aside and vacate the Scholarship Board’s decision and directing a re-computation and review consistent with the statutory requirements set forth by the Legislature in Public Law 14-37.
She also wants the court to find the board’s rules and regulations contrary to law and void as to the provision compelling weighted consideration limited to applicants GPA and SAT/ACT scores, and to find that Calvo’s application was improperly denied.