All along I thought COP was exercising their rights for their option to extend — only to find out that that was not the case.
What they were asking for was an extension which is completely different and I was wrong then to support it the way I did.
I think this extension process sucks since it opens the door for extortion and bribery — the Legislature can extort and the lessee can bribe. Or, just bring in the right people to manipulate the Legislature.
If DPL and the Legislature have the right to reject a request for extension, then we are not capitalizing on our resources. In other words, the first lease ended after 25 years and the improvement becomes the property of the government.
Therefore, the best approach to deal with COP was to place it on the market to the highest bidder.
The governor was right when he said that we need to allow other investors to submit their proposals.
This extension process must be changed for consistency and to avoid impropriety.
In all fairness, the 15 years extension should be decided based on the lessee’s compliance with the terms of the contract.
You cannot be extending a lease and then rejecting others because of the Legislature’s power to do so.
There was a recent extension that was not only extended without a problem but was also given a reduction on their rental because of the bad economy.
This is what I meant by inconsistency. Plus, we are sending the wrong message to the investors. I feel that if not for the two local gentlemen who were part owners of the COP deal together with family and friends supporting them, it will not be approved.
And so the question is, is this what it boils down to — pressure? This is wrong and needs to be changed. Bottom line is, the extension cannot be at the mercy of a sitting legislator.
NICK C. SABLAN
Garapan, Saipan
