Introduced by Rep. Heinz S. Hofschneider, R-Saipan, on Feb. 11, 2008, H.L.I. 16-4 aims to stimulate economic growth and is the latest of similar proposals introduced since 2001 but were never passed.
H.L.I. 16-4 is a proposal to amend the CNMI Constitution and must be approved by at least three-fourths of the members of each house of the Legislature present and voting. It does not require the governor’s approval but it has to be placed on the ballot so that voters can decide whether to ratify or reject it.
In its report to Speaker Arnold I. Palacios, R-Saipan, the House Committee on Natural Resources chaired by Rep. Ramon A. Tebuteb, R-Saipan, recommends that “the full membership of House shall decide upon” H.L.I. 16-4.
According to the committee, the Legislature “has deliberated extensively on the issue of extending private leaseholds over the last eight years. …[T]he idea is not a new one and…the issue remains a topic of heated debate. Of critical concern to opponents of this proposed measure is the protection of lands for future generations of indigenous people. The committee is keenly aware of the highly sensitive nature of this [legislative initiative] and the need to balance the economic as well as traditional and cultural concerns of our people.”
In its report, the committee stated that it held seven public hearings on H.L.I. 16-4 — five on Saipan and one each on Tinian and Rota.
Most of the comments and testimonies received were in favor of the proposal, the committee added.
After holding “lengthy discussions” and reviewing comments and testimonies as well as the previous decisions made by the Legislature, the committee stated that “The difficult task of protecting the people of the commonwealth, while trying to encourage economic development…to improve the lives of our people, is a conundrum that may very well be resolved ultimately by the people.”
Besides Tebuteb, the Aug. 11 committee report was also signed by Reps. Diego T. Benavente, R-Saipan, David M. Apatang, R-Saipan, Raymond D. Palacios, Covenant-Saipan, Vice Speaker Joseph P. Deleon Guerrero, R-Saipan, House Floor Leader Joseph N. Camacho, R-Saipan, and House Minority Leader Oscar M. Babauta, Covenant-Saipan.
Article 12 of the CNMI Constitution states that “The acquisition of permanent and long-term interests in real property within the commonwealth shall be restricted to persons of Northern Marianas descent.”
Public lands can only be leased up to 25 years and renewed for another 15 years while private lands can be leased up to 55 years.
But the Covenant, the U.S. law that made the islands part of America, allows CNMI voters to decide in 2011 whether they want to change the islands’ land alienation rules.
The report stated that supporters of H.L.I. 16-4 cited the following reasons:
• This is an initiative that does not have force and effect until ratified by the voters. Give the people the opportunity to decide.
• The proposal has the support of the entire business community. It is a strategic leap toward economy recovery. It is perhaps the most important policy change needed for tourism enhancement.
• Article 12 created a buyers market where the value of land is limited. Article 12 is protecting the land and not the people.
• After 25 years, the people are mature enough to decide and to vote on this matter.
• The CNMI cannot wait until 2011. The present leasehold of 55 years is amounting to nothing and is not stimulating the economy.
• It will revitalize major investment projects in the CNMI by reviving the real estate market which, in turn, will benefit landowners, real estate brokers, investors as well as facilitate banking and other lending institutions in funding major development loans, mortgages, etc., and enhance business opportunities in the secondary market.
Those opposed to the proposal cited the following reasons:
• Protect the interests of the indigenous people.
• Wait until 2011.
• Land is the local people’s only resource and once protections are removed “we are finished.”
• Land ownership is synonymous with culture and traditions of the local people. “When we lose our land, the Chamorros…would be the saddest of any group within the American political family. We will have lost our identity and certainly our culture and traditions.”
