Lawmakers hear proposal to quarry Lot 5412 to fund Chamorro Land Trust housing projects

The Committee on Land, Environment, Housing, Agriculture, Parks, and Infrastructure held a public hearing July 1 on Bill 7‑38 COR, introduced by Senator Joe S. Augustine, authorizing the Chamorro Land Trust Commission (CLTC) to solicit competitive bids for mass grading and mineral extraction on a portion of Lot 5412 (Manila/Fadien) to produce limestone aggregate for construction and to use proceeds to develop homestead lots.

Sponsor Joe S. Augustine and witnesses from the construction and land‑use sectors described the proposal as a way to convert an inaccessible, underdeveloped parcel into pad‑ready homestead lots while supplying a construction industry that they said needs large volumes of quality limestone. "Prudent planned extraction of aggregate on this lot can result in a landform that can accommodate hundreds of homestead lots," Augustine said, and he and witnesses cited earlier estimates that extraction could generate multi‑million‑dollar revenues to fund surveys, infrastructure and lot preparation.

Panel testimony: - David Herrera (former CLTC commissioner) and land‑use consultant Dan Swavely testified for the bill, describing opportunities to turn steep land into benches that produce saleable aggregate while creating developable lots. Swavely said mass grading and sale of aggregate could finance infrastructure and shorten the timetable for delivering mortgageable homestead lots. - Carlos Camacho (Micronesia Community Development Corporation) recommended a "lifeline rate" (a discounted price) for CLTC leaseholders, qualifying low‑ and moderate‑income homebuilders and certain affordable housing developers so extracted materials could be sold at reduced cost for home construction. - Acting CLTC administrator Joey Cruz told the committee the commission will discuss the bill at its July 17 board meeting and submit formal testimony thereafter.

Questions and concerns from senators focused on oversight and potential impacts. Committee members, led by Vice Chair Chris Duenas and Senators Sabina Perez, Theresa Trelahi and Chris Barnett, pressed witnesses about: - Environmental and health impacts (dust, noise, proximity to aquifer and sinkholes), and whether state and federal permitting and mitigation would be required; witnesses said standard permitting (EPA, GWA, GPA, DPW, historic/archaeological reviews) would apply and that a weigh station/monitoring regime would be part of operations. - Existing lessees and residents on or near Lot 5412; witnesses acknowledged multiple issued leases and said the CLTC would need to address displacement, compensation, buffers and prioritization. - Past problems with extraction oversight (Guam Raceway Park), and OPA recommendations that the CLTC establish standard operating procedures (SOPs) for invoicing and royalty collection and improve monitoring; witnesses and senators cited OPA Report 23‑08 and urged stronger safeguards.

Estimates and technical details discussed at the hearing included: an industry demand figure cited in testimony of roughly 1.5–2.0 million cubic yards of limestone aggregate per year; a historic price cited in testimony of about $2 per cubic yard (witnesses said market prices are higher today and that realistic delivered prices may be several dollars per cubic yard); a BBMR fiscal note described at the hearing estimated up to $1 million per year for CLTC over six years (other earlier estimates recirculated at the hearing suggested several million total but were characterized as preliminary).

The bill includes instructions to limit CLTC commercial leases to no more than 9% of the unassigned CLTC land inventory and to require a competitive solicitation for the Lot 5412 mass‑grading and extraction work. The CLTC and several senators requested clarifying statutory language, minimum bid provisions, detailed environmental and monitoring requirements, and explicit protections for lessees and cultural and natural resources.

Acting CLTC administrator Cruz said the commission will review the bill at its July 17 board meeting and provide formal testimony and suggested amendments. No committee vote or formal action occurred at the hearing; the committee left the record open for additional written submissions.