Move along, nothing to see here
SOME retirees are once again calling for the replacement of the NMI Settlement Fund trustee. Once again, they are saying that the trustee should be “from here,” supposedly to reduce “expenses.”
The point of appointing the current trustee, who is from Guam, is precisely because she’s not “from here.” The NMI Retirement Fund officials, the lawmakers and the governors who oversaw the government’s pension system were all “from here.”
And how did that work out? It resulted in a class-action lawsuit that led to a $779 million judgment as part of a settlement agreement approved by the federal court, which can order the garnishment of funds from the CNMI government.
And now they’re worried about the occasional airfare, hotel and car rental expenses of the trustee?
According to the settlement agreement, “To administer and run the Settlement Fund, the District Court must appoint a ‘Trustee,’ possessing all the powers of a federal equity receiver, to administer and run [the Settlement Fund].’ ” In appointing the current trustee, the federal court stressed “the need to ensure [that] the Trustee is free from any conflicts of interests or potential conflicts of interests….” The federal court can remove and replace the trustee by order, but only “for good cause after a hearing.”
So the current trustee should be removed because she’s not from here and is…free from any conflicts of interests or potential conflicts of interests?
Time to demonstrate leadership
THE retirees have two major concerns: 1) Some of them have been ordered to return overpayments; and 2) They want to continue receiving the 25% benefit that is not required by the settlement agreement, but has been voluntarily paid by the now cash-strapped CNMI government.
The administration and legislative buildings, not the federal court, are the proper venues for the retirees’ advocacy.
Faced with other competing and urgent funding obligations — such as education, public health, and government payroll, among other major spending items — the governor and lawmakers must finally do what they have so far refused to do: make tough choices.
Or not
ZEROING the Legislative Bureau’s budget for operations is not exactly a tough choice to make. (If it were, then it would not have been made.) Among the LB services that will no longer be provided is the livestreaming of legislative sessions and committee meetings, which, thanks to their taxpayer-provided vehicles, lawmakers will continue to attend in air-conditioned chambers and offices on Capital Hill. Livestreaming sessions and meetings allowed people to be informed, in real time, of what their (big) government was doing in their name. Yet, it was the first thing to be scrapped due to a so-called “lack” of funding.
So much for priorities. So much for transparency and restoring trust in the government.
