To begin with, however, I want to thank the following, in no particular order, for their support:, the Marianas Visitors Association, the Hotel Association of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Saipan Chamber of Commerce, the Northern Marianas Triathlon Federations, the Mt. Tapochou Mountain Bicycle Association, the Marianas Islands Nature Alliance, Beautify CNMI and the over 300 persons who signed the petition against the power poles. If you would like copies of their letters, their views as expressed on their websites, or the petition itself, please let me know. As you can see from this list, our request that the government consider alternatives to installing above ground power poles and to hold public hearings has deep community support which is a far-cry from some detractors who would like to portray those who have expressed these concerns to be a small, rabid group of anti-development “outsiders” who can be written off with a-roll-of-the-eyes.
The concerns expressed by these different groups and individuals are not only for the environment but also for how the project will affect the quality of life here on Saipan for its residents, and critically given these hard-pressed economic times, the CNMI’s bread-and-butter, tourism. As Judge Govendo remarked during the recent hearing, this may be the first time that such groups as the Hotel Association, MVA and the Saipan Chamber have together raised concerns about a development project. Hence, the concerns expressed by all of these groups and individuals about the power poles should not be dismissed lightly.
Similarly, to the charge that this is somehow a mainlander vs. local issue, I refer those skeptics to the petition and note the following family names appear on it:
Ada (2), Aldan, Apatang, Atalig, Benavente, Borja, Calvo (2), Camacho (6), Celis, Chargualaf, Dela Cruz (3), Deleon Guerrero (2), Demapan, Duenas, Fejeran (2), Flores, Hofschneider (4), Kaipat, Limes, Litulumar (2), Lizama, Mendiola (3), Muna, Olopai, Palacios, Rangamar, Reyes, Rosario, Sablan (8), Sanchez, Santos (3), Seman, Songsong, Taitano, Tenorio (2), Torres (2), Villagomez (3).
Next, to those who claim that the recent public hearings before Judge Govendo were one-sided, and that they were denied their right to appear and testify in court, well, it was a public hearing which lasted two days with an intervening weekend and was well publicized by of the CNMI’s media. In addition, the government had more than 10 days to prepare and find witnesses. Indeed, on Friday at the close of business, the government said it may present witnesses to testify on Monday. On that following Monday, none did. But the government certainly had the opportunity to put on witnesses. That it chose not to do so is not the fault of plaintiffs or the court.
As to those who charge that the lawsuit will deprive land owners of power, let’s be very clear about this. The power pole project is 100 percent funded by the federal government. More to the point, the stated purpose of the project is very limited, to supply power to the one new cemetery (the veterans cemetery has its own water and power supply, namely a stand-alone generator).
Also, what is not well known is that a large section of the Marpi area has been designated by the United States Department of Interior as a National Historic Landmark Area — the highest designation available. The people of the CNMI should be proud that the U.S. government has recognized a portion of these beautiful islands as worthy of such a mark of distinction. Importantly, the power poles intrude directly into and onto the National Historic Landmark area of Marpi. Hence our concerns about preserving the historical, cultural and scenic integrity of this area.
Given that very limited purpose of the power pole project, we raised with the government, before filing a lawsuit, our similarly limited concerns: given the small amount of power needed to power a few light bulbs and a water-pump, why put up power-poles, which intrude visibly on the natural beauty of the Marpi cliffs, why not instead consider any of the following alternatives: a stand-alone generator, a portable generator, underground power, solar or wind power etc. (Coincidently, I note that in the newspaper, an expert opined that the CNMI is “ideal for solar, wind production.”)
We tried to resolve this issue without the need for a lawsuit. We offered the government free solar panels that were already on island, the at-cost services of a master-electrician to install the panels and at-cost security monitoring service. We also asked the government to voluntarily agree to a moratorium so there could be public hearings, so that we could hear from the federal government which is not only funding this project but is tasked with preserving the area pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act. But the CNMI government refused each and continued to install the poles.
Relatedly, we referred the government to 28 USC §1492 which offers $2 million a year to the CNMI to carry out projects for the adoption of renewable energy sources, i.e. solar, wind, photovoltaic, wave energy, etc so that electric power is not needed for the cemetery. The statue may be viewed at: http://vlex.com/vid/resources-caribbean-pacific-insular-areas-19258619 and there is a link to the related Energy Assessment Report at: http://www.doi.gov/oia/reports/U.S.%20InsularAreaEnergyAssessmentReport2006.pdf
Couldn’t this money be requested from the Department of the Interior for certain projects including the Marpi cemetery? we asked. We also brought to the government’s attention that there are three renewable energy companies on Saipan who have volunteered to provide renewable energy solutions for the Marpi cemeteries at cost.
The government did not respond.
We also referred the government to a press release from Congressman Kilili Sablan, which requested the CNMI “to prioritize expenditure of the $18.7 million on energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, including retrofitting buildings and financing deployment of renewables.”
We also brought to the government’s attention that the CNMI is required to have 10 percent of its electrical sales must be renewable energy source by Dec. 2010, see P.L. 15-23.
The government chose to ignore us yet again. Instead they proceeded with the installation of the poles at break-neck speed, nearing completion. So, what choice did we have but to file this lawsuit? None.
Finally, to answer the charge that the lawsuit is against development of all kinds, this is absolutely untrue as anyone can see if they read our amended complaint, which is a public document. The lawsuit is not to stop development nor is it to stop power going into Marpi, as some critics allege. Instead, the suit is against unplanned development by the government, that is kept “secret” by the government without public hearings and does not take into account the historical and cultural importance of the National Landmark Historical area as well as its scenic beauty. We believe those concerns can be met and power can be supplied to the cemetery by any of the alternatives we have already suggested.
Thank you.
DAVID G. BANES
Friends of Marpi
