Hearing on renewing 20-year lease for Vietnam Veterans of America chapter 668 in Mangilao/Manila

The committee held a public hearing Oct. 15, 2025 on Bill 1-73-38, which would authorize renewal of the lease for a portion of Lot 2288-1-1-1 in Mangilao/Manila to Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) Chapter 668 for another 20 years by amending subsection 681.103 of Chapter 68, Title 21, Guam Code Annotated.

Senator Therese T. Terlahi, the bill sponsor, said the property has been used by VVA Chapter 668 since a 2005 law authorized a lease and that the organization "has upgraded the property, improved it, maintained the grounds" and established a memorial and meeting facility that benefits veterans and the wider community.

Mayor Alan R. Nangata (written testimony read into the record) and multiple veterans testified in support. They described a Vietnam Veterans Memorial with concrete structures and a life-sized replica statue, restoration after storm damage, parking and landscaping improvements, and use of the site by veterans' organizations, the Knights of Columbus, Junior ROTC, Coast Guard events, and community workshops on benefits and burial rights.

Joe Borja of the Department of Land Management testified that DLM supports the bill’s intent but raised drafting and implementation concerns: the bill’s title and body refer to "a portion of Lot 2288-1-1," while the parcel described elsewhere is 1,000 square meters; DLM recommended authorizing the lease of the entire lot (rather than "a portion") to avoid ambiguity, noted apparent encroachments onto adjacent government parcel(s), and requested a reversionary clause or other mechanism to return the property to government control if conditions are not met.

VVA members and allied veterans’ witnesses described broad community use of the site, urged renewal for stability and continuity (noting an aging membership), and supported a 20-year term so younger veterans can continue stewardship. Several senators praised the organization’s upkeep of the site and indicated willingness to cosponsor; one senator suggested exploring a permanent conveyance but did not bind the committee to that approach.

DLM noted it could not find a recorded original lease in its files and recommended clarifying the exact parcel(s) to be leased and addressing encroachment and parking issues in the bill's text. Witnesses and senators suggested amending the bill to lease the full 1,000‑square‑meter parcel and to include reversion language, and the sponsor indicated willingness to adjust language consistent with the original intent.

Ending: Committee members said they would work with land management and the sponsor to correct drafting issues; the hearing closed with no committee vote recorded and with an open invitation for written comments within seven days.