The Monday News Analysis

Added: 2026-05-26

[00:01:18]Good morning show with Troy Taurus is brought to you by 76 Circle Kew.

[00:01:39]Come on.

[00:02:15]Good morning and a blessed Memorial Day to you. My name is Troy Torres. It is 8:06 a.m. on Monday, May 25, 2026.

[00:02:24]Uh and in honor of all those who have served in the armed forces from the inception of these United States of America, uh and who have uh since passed on. Uh may God bless them all and we thank them of course for their service.

[00:02:44]I was getting my coffee in. Uh today I want to and I know it's a holiday for everybody. Um not a holiday for us. I was telling uh one of my sources this morning I was like you know you hurt Candid. We sleep we take breaks for the Lord and that's it. So there's Easter, there's Christmas. There's what I mean I don't think there's really going to be anything else that we take a a holiday for. I mean, you know, like Holy Week, of course, we always take Holy Week off.

[00:03:13]We take Christmas off. Uh we don't take Thanksg Thanksgiving is a Thursday.

[00:03:18]That's there's there's going to be a Thursday news analysis on Thanksgiving.

[00:03:22]There's going to be an evening show on that day as well. Uh I'll just look bloated and fatter on Thanksgiving unless my coach tells me otherwise. I'm just rambling on now. Uh speak give me a break. Right. This is everybody's having a holiday. Uh I wanted to talk this morning because I've been doing a lot of thinking over the weekend about those tape recordings that we played for you that we all heard together. And there's so many places to go with this Cortech government of Guam Simon Sanchez High School uh investigative series because there's just so much to it and so much that's happening and appearing all at one time. So, I I just I'm trying to make it make sense for me in a moving forward type of fashion. And one of the main themes of all five of the six tapes is this annual appropriation that becomes part of the risk that the developer takes. And the legislature authorized an annual appropriation of up to $16.3 million for the life of the financing of Simon Sanchez High School, which is 30 years, right? Uh that that would be the bond. And when you do the math, that ends up being a lot of money.

[00:04:42]But throughout the course of the recordings, you hear them talking about this $16.3 million and talking about it as though that's the only amount of money that can and should be paid, the cap, the ceiling that the legislature said. And then in order to make the financing fit, the costs, the core tech price tag fit, they start talking about a year 31 and a year 32. Uh throughout the course of this discussion, I want to add that all up for you. Put this into context of what this has meant for the participation or if you will complicity of the government of Guam in all of this. Uh and I think you'll be astounded. I think you will not be happy about how this all plays out uh for us, the taxpayers. And we will start that on the other side of this commercial break.

[00:05:38]Stick with us.

[00:05:40]>> Guam is resilient, but today too many families are being stretched thin. Costs are rising faster than paychecks.

[00:05:48]Neighborhoods don't feel as safe as they should. Healthcare is harder to access.

[00:05:53]And for many, opportunity feels just out of reach. That's not the future we should accept. When Guam has faced its hardest moments, Frank Boss Jr. has been there leading from guiding recovery after super typhoon Pong Wa to serving as Guam's first homeland security adviser to strengthening public safety and emergency preparedness. He's built a career on protecting our people and delivering results when it matters. He understands how to make government respond, act, and serve. Dr. Mario has spent her life expanding opportunity. As a nationally recognized education leader, she has helped thousands of students gain the skills to succeed, whether in the workforce, higher education, or public service. Her work has strengthened Guam's workforce pipeline, supported economic growth, and opened doors for the next generation.

[00:06:45]She knows that investing in people, education, job training, and community health is how we build a stronger island. Together, they bring proven leadership across the issues that matter most. safer communities, a stronger, more prepared government, better access to healthcare, real pathways to good paying jobs, and an economy that works for local families. Not against them.

[00:07:09]They don't just talk about solutions.

[00:07:11]They've delivered them. This election comes down to one question. Who is ready to lead on day one? With the record of service, result, and leadership Guang can trust. Frank Bllo Jr. and Marcotta are ready. Frank Bllo Jr. for governor.

[00:07:26]Dr. Mario Cado for Lieutenant Governor.

[00:07:29]Tested, trusted leaders, ready on day one.

[00:07:37]>> Welcome back to the morning news analysis, the Monday news analysis.

[00:07:42]Let's move forward throughout the contract negotiations that happened during the summer of and and dates here are important uh to remember like the chronology of this isn't is important to remember as we try to discern and as I'm sure the office of public accountability and perhaps even the office of the attorney general trying to discern what happened who participated ated who knew who was aware of the intent and the motives uh and uh what transpires what happens next right so that's that's all I'm I'm I'm I'm certain the chronology matters in all of this right so the first part of the chronology for this conversation is the summer negotiations and in the summer negotiations from meeting one we understand that the uh negotiating team already knew that the price was above what the RFP called for, making the Cortech bid non-responsive from the jump, but instead of declaring it non-responsive, they continue to negotiate. And in the course of the negotiations, everything comes down to the annual lease payments. And you hear over and over Ho Yun, the chairman of Cortex, saying, "Look, it's it's the lease payment that this and you hear Ed Burn fighting back on this part, right?

[00:09:07]He's like, you know, we it it's not as simple as you make it, Mr. Ho. It is how we book this in the in the uh uh in the journals is is we call this something like a debt to own or some lease to own.

[00:09:20]I don't know some accounting stuff, right?

[00:09:24]But Ho Yun keeps coming back to it's the annual payment. It's the annual payment.

[00:09:29]It's the annual payment. and the annual payment they all discuss as though it cannot be lower is a ceiling that the legislature sets at $16.3 million.

[00:09:45]And so I looked it up. When the legislature authorized that, they were authorizing $16.3 million as an annual debt service or lease payment ceiling to the developer.

[00:10:02]And even that part, the financing is not entirely clear because there's this back and forth between is Core going to get the bond or is the government of Guam going to go out and get the bond. That that's that that's also stuff that is not entirely clear, but we'll try to get to we'll try to hammer that stuff out.

[00:10:16]Good morning everyone. Good morning Dr. Nwen. Good morning Lonnie Solless. Good morning Joanne Fullerton. Dr. Wen is uh on top of being one of my doctors, he is also a uh a veteran. Uh and so you know thank you sir for your service. Thank you all of you for your service. Uh Memorial Day of course is not uh for veterans who are alive. It's a memorial of veterans who have since gone. Uh uh but it's still an appropriate time. Uh, every day is an appropriate time to say thank you so much for your service. Good morning, Brennan. Good morning, Angela.

[00:10:48]Uh, good morning to all of you who are watching live. And to those of you who will be watching the replay, I I very much appreciate it. And a blessed Memorial Day to you all. The the legislature set a 16 million $16.3 million annual authorization cap on lease payments.

[00:11:12]If you do the math on that, the legislature was anticipating it was looking at an all-in cost. I'm sorry. It was looking at a and we heard this in the negotiation meetings. You don't see this in the law itself, but in the negotiation meetings, there was a cap of $166 million in financing, of which $143 million was for um construction and the rest of it for uh insurance and maintenance and all that stuff, right? So, but let's just go with the $16.3 million in um annual lease payments, right? And you multiply that by 30 years because the government of Guam is going to pay that over 30 years.

[00:12:10]$489 million. Okay, that's how much the legislature at the cap said we are going to pay the all-in cost of Simon Sanchez High School. the people as we means the people of Guam over a 30-year period, $489 million. That's $143 million in principal costs for the construction and the rest of it is interest. The interest that occurs that compounds uh over those 30 years, right? That's how and the and the and the maximum interest rate that we're going to pay is 8.5%.

[00:12:44]So, they're going to make a lease payment of $489 million, right? Let's do $143 million. Now, I have to ask Eleanor in my chat GP team. Good morning, Eleanor.

[00:13:02]How much would Gov Guam pay if it floated a bond at $143 million?

[00:13:20]for a 30year period at the max is 8.5%.

[00:13:28]At 8.5%.

[00:13:30]What is the allin cost after the 30 years and what is the annual debt service?

[00:13:56]Okay. So, according to the government throughout these negotiation meetings, uh yes, Ryan Nounu, it is half a billion dollars for Simon Sanchez High School at the $16.3 million in annual lease payments. That's incredible, right?

[00:14:12]That's just a crazy amount of money, especially for a small community like ours to be paying. According to the math that chat GPT does for me, uh the annual debt service of a $143 million bond amatized over 30 years at 8.5% interest uh would be $399.2 million or $400 million. So, it'll be over $400 million when you add in uh the fees that the um uh that the underwriter would charge and all that stuff, right? Uh the annual debt service would be $13.3 million.

[00:14:50]Um Michael Synicholas says if the monthly is capped, then the max interest doesn't apply if the cap is met.

[00:15:01]Okay. Okay. So, uh, uh, but at any rate, at 8.5% um, $143 million advertised over 30 years, it comes out to about $400 million.

[00:15:16]All right. So, the bond portion of it is not necessarily what was in contention during these negotiation meetings. the amount the the the all-in amount was never something that was raised as a concern or discussed at least during the recorded portions of these five of six negotiation meetings.

[00:15:40]There was a back and forth between who would float the bond and there was and it's not entirely clear but I think the law is pretty clear that it is and the RFP is pretty clear that the financing would come from the developer side and Mr. Ho was going in to these negotiations very clear-minded that Cortech was going to secure the services of Barclays, the underwriter that's a very big bank, one of the biggest banks in the world. Um, and uh, and has been doing goug bonds for a long time, Barclays. Um, and um, uh, and then receiving the lease payments from the government of Guam. And the lease payments were always discussed in terms of the full $16.3 million. Now throughout the the entirety of the negotiations, you see a uh or you realize that there is um a developing theme of this 30 years of lease payments at $16.3 million a year. That's the 480 That's the $489 million, right?

[00:16:52]$489 million over the 30 years to it would be uh to Cortech and then they start talking about year 31 and year 32 and $16.3 million in each of those years. Now, what is year 31 and year 32?

[00:17:12]It it's it's it's a little confusing because of how it's called, but year 31 is fiscal year 2026, the current fiscal year that we're in. Year 32 is fiscal year 2027, which is the budget process that's happening right now. So throughout you hear in meetings five and six Lester Carlson saying hey look we cannot consider year 31 and year 32 because number one and this is the summer of 2025 is number one a law hasn't been passed yet for the fiscal year 2026 budget like we have to have that law in hand in order to certify that this bond is okay and that's not to mention that we're no nowhere near fiscal year 2027 so we cannot certify this 16.3 in 2026 and 16.3 in 2027. So, let's do this again. Uh 16300 0 * 32 equals a total payment to Cortech of $521,600,000 over a 32-year period. Now, this is what gets very upsetting on top of the price tag, right? About this fiscal year 2026 and fiscal year 2027, um, $16.3 million. And this is how the chronology needs to be taken into consideration here when we talk about what did our leaders know as this was happening right in the summer of 2025.

[00:18:46]If if our leaders in the administration and the legislative branch were not doing something they were not supposed to. If the administration those who knew on the negotiation and the evaluation team did not disclose to senators who the bidder was that they were in negotiations with. remember because the that didn't become public knowledge until I think it was October or November that Cortech was going to be given the award of 2025.

[00:19:25]So if in the summer of pardon me let me just take this back a sec throughout the negotiations you one of the things you heard Lester Carlson say a lot was we're talking to the legislature we're trying one of the first things you heard I'm sorry one of the last things you heard in meeting six and one of the meetings where they're talking about the the year 31 and the year 32 which is fiscical year 26 and fiscal year 27 is um uh Mr. Mr. Ho saying uh you know we and he says it and he laughs so an argument can be made that he's saying it in a joking way but it's still a completely inappropriate thing to say especially in contract negotiations is um looks like I'm going to have to donate more money to these senators so that we can secure the appropriation. He's talking about fiscal year 2027.

[00:20:18]Right. That's probably what he's talking about because in the negotiation meetings in that sixth meeting, it was already August 29, the legislature, I believe, had already passed the budget for fiscal year 2026. It contained a $16.3 million appropriation to the Simon Sanchez High School development lease back payment.

[00:20:40]And it had it was waiting for the governor's sign signature which is why the Lester Carlson was unable to say because it hadn't become law yet. He was unable to say we can count on year 31.

[00:20:55]Here's the thing in the structure of this thing and how it was presented by both the law and the RFP.

[00:21:04]the lease pack the lease back payments do not begin in fiscal year 2026 or fiscal year 2027.

[00:21:11]The law says that and the RFP says, sorry, the RFP says that had this thing started in fiscal year 2026, this year, if there was a groundbreaking in November of 2025, Cortech would have had until November of 2027 to complete Simon Sanchez High School.

[00:21:34]It was a 700 365* 2 whatever that is 730 days or whatever that is to complete Simon Son's high school that was according to the RFP or else there will be liquidated damages and all that stuff right 24 months to complete it that's called the lease period because Cortech is leasing the land uh in in order to do the construction that's where the bond comes in the bridge financing all that stuff the lease back payment begins in year one which would be fiscal year uh 2028 because November 2027, December 2027, that's already fiscal year 2028. Fiscal year 2028 is when the first lease payment would be dropped. And for 30 years, that lease payment of $16.3 million at the cap, or if it was a cheaper price from another company, cheaper than the cap of $16.3 million, would be paid for the life of uh the financing period, the life of the lease back payment. The first two years, the government of Guam was not supposed to be ma be making any payments.

[00:22:43]how this came about.

[00:22:45]And this is where you wonder and I asked Senator Christenius uh by text message this morning whether he want because he he volunteered last week. He said, "I want to go on your show and talk about one of these bills that I did." So, I asked him this morning. It was 7:11 in the morning. It was very late for me to ask, I have to admit. Um, Senator, would you like to talk about this? I don't He has not It's not It hasn't turned to blue yet. He has not read my messages yet asking to uh where I asked him if he can talk about this but I wanted to give him an opportunity to talk about this to understand what he knew at the time and now that he understands what because he's listened to I think the the um the recordings you know does he feel like he and his colleagues were duped by this?

[00:23:28]So, in the summer of 2025, according to those recordings, you heard Leser Carlson say, "I've been working really hard to get these appropriations in.

[00:23:39]I've been telling the senators." You also heard Ho Yun saying, "We got to donate more money. I'm working too." You hear him talking about uh in the very beginning uh his asurances that he can get the additional appropriations. He he feels confident in it. So there's at least an inference that he's working with senators. Of the senators who I have asked this already 14 have come back and said no they have not spoken with uh Ho Yun about Simon Sanchez high school development since uh uh June of last year when the when when Cortech was selected. did not talk to Ho Yun, any of Ho Yun's um uh um emissaries uh or um consultants or any court tech person.

[00:24:30]All of the all 14 of 15 senators came back and said no, they're not they haven't done any of that. Whether you believe them is that's that's up to you, right? That that's but there's this is what they say. There's only one senator who hasn't responded and that's Senator Tina Muno Barnes.

[00:24:46]Now, in the fiscal year 2026 budget, a provision was slipped in, and I've uh done a whole foyer to Joan Kamacho at the legislature, the executive director, asking for all of the information about all these different amendments. Right.

[00:25:04]So, there was a $16.3 million appropriation in section 8 of the budget that uh goes to Simon Sanchez High School Development.

[00:25:15]It's questionable what the senators knew at the time. If they knew who it was for, if they really knew what it was for, what was going on, if they asked any questions about what was going on, why would we have to appropriate $16.3 million in a fiscal year where the government of Guam, according to the terms of the RFP and the law, was not on the hook for a $16.3 million payment. And then we get to December of 2025 when Senator Chris Duanius introduces a bill that would appropriate $16.3 million for the demolition costs of Simon Sanchez High School. And it's it is prepared for the public in a way that says this is just to speed things up.

[00:26:06]But we know now from listening to the negotiation proceedings that that wasn't a speeding up. That wasn't part of the 166. It was on top of It wasn't part of the 30 years of 16.3 million. It was on top of that was year 32. That much is clear when you listen to the negotiations. Did the legislature know that at the time is a very big question that we need to have answered.

[00:26:34]Did the legislature know that its appropriation for fiscal year 2026 was for year 31 and its appropriation for year for fiscal year 20 or for the 16.3 million for demolition costs was for year number 32. Did they know that they were making this much more expensive?

[00:26:56]And did they know that it was for Cortech?

[00:27:00]On the other side of the commercial, Rick, when I want to play for you, and I've played for you part of this before, but it's worth bringing up again part of the debate on that bill, that secondyear bill, where we heard at least four senators cautioning the legislature like, "Hey, this this doesn't pass the smell test. I just don't know about this. Can we please get these folks in this room to answer some questions? And for whatever reason, the legislature does not, and this is why I wanted Senator Chris Dwing to join us on the line this morning because I I want to give him an opportunity to answer as to what he knew at the time.

[00:27:40]But yeah, anyway, he he hasn't seen my messages yet. We'll get to that on the other side of the commercial break. Uh stick with us.

[00:27:50]Heat up here.

[00:28:20]Happy birthday.

[00:28:55]Welcome back to the show. It is now 8:32 a.m. on Monday, May 25, 2026. It is Memorial Day. And I So, you know, thank you so much for joining me this morning.

[00:29:06]um uh that it it it means a lot to me every time you join me for these shows or you join Mike Synicholas for his show and hopefully others who will be joining to replace me in the evening uh from you know here on out I really need a vacation. That's what I really that's what I really need anyway.

[00:29:26]But it means a lot to me that you're joining me on a holiday. I appreciate that. For those of you watching this live, for those of you who will be watching the replay, thank you. Thank you so much. Um before uh the heading into the break I was talking about you know I was explaining year 31 and year 32 of this bond um not bond the lease payments on Simon Sanchez's high school.

[00:29:51]Now first let me just explain that separate the procurement separate it out from this.

[00:30:01]When the legislature makes an appropriation the money that's being spent from that cannot be illegal by its very nature.

[00:30:09]It's legal. The legislature has made it so. The legislature has plenary authority over the laws of Guam and especially over appropriations. Right?

[00:30:20]The question is, did this scheme violate the procurement?

[00:30:27]Because in the middle of an active procurement, before an award was made, the legislature changed the structure of the financing of the development of Simon Sanchez High School. Because according to everybody, according to the information everybody was presented when DPW announced the RFP back in March of 2025, there were certain guidelines, certain sets, certain rules that everybody had to abide by and then the legislature changed it when it made that first year appropriation for fiscal year 2026. Did the legislature know that though? And then did the legislature further know when it made an additional appropriation for the demolition costs?

[00:31:10]here is so this is a bill that's not necessarily about it is it it does it it does encompass the demolition costs but it changed certain terms on the financing and it's questionable whether I've been told by a reliable source that um this change in language on the financing uh on on the financing federal tools the federal financing tools did not change the um uh uh equity in the procurement.

[00:31:45]Uh and I'm going to go with that. Uh but what I want you to hear is the are the arguments that are made in in totality about changes to the procurement because this these arguments though it wasn't about though um there were some arguments about that whole financing thing more of it was focused on the additional $16.3 million. And so let me go to that. Let me take you to this click. It's from January 28th of 2026. And we're going to listen to this together because it's well worth our time.

[00:32:28]There was uh points of orders that were presented before the chair, before the body, and after review and discussions and working with legal counsel, I'm going to make the ruling that based on all six points of order, um we can proceed with the bill.

[00:32:51]We can proceed with the bill. That is my order.

[00:32:55]>> So, Mr. Mr. Speaker, at this time um I move that bill 235-38 as amended in committee amended on the and further amended on the floor be placed in the third reading file.

[00:33:10]>> Point of order. Point of order.

[00:33:13]>> What's your point of order?

[00:33:14]>> Point of order is that um being that there was an award according to Guan procurement law remedies for procurement awards.

[00:33:24]if the person awarded the contract has not acted fraudulently or in bad faith.

[00:33:29]So it states a contract may be terminated and the person awarded the contract shall be compensated for the actual expenses reasonably incurred under the contract plus a reasonable profit prior to the termination.

[00:33:40]And so I think there are serious implications if we're going to meddle in a a live procurement and um it may require the withdrawal cancellation of a permit. Any remedies after the award can lead to um monetary damages to the government of Guam. At this point we do not know the extent to these monetary damages.

[00:34:05]Um the other thing is according to 9102 GCA, a bill should not be reported out by standing committee of Elturn Guan or placed on a legislative session unless it is accompanied by fiscal note or waiver thereof prepared by the Bureau of Budget and Management Research in coordination with the affected department, agency or appropriate government instrumentality and is complied with the other requirements of this chapter. The fiscal note shall be required for all bills that have an effect upon the revenues or expenditures of any funds of the government of Guam. The waiver of fiscal note shall be required for all bills that do not have an effect upon the revenues or expenditures of any funds in the government of Guam.

[00:34:54]Failure to provide the fiscal note or waiver thereof pursuant to section 9105 of this chapter shall not preclude the standing shall not preclude the standing committee from reporting out to the legisl legislative session any bill as provided in section 9106 of this chapter. So this has monetary implications because it's it's in it's um meddling in with a live procurement.

[00:35:21]Um and so it is not that's my point of order.

[00:35:27]>> Mr. Speaker, can I address the point of order?

[00:35:28]>> No, hang on. I'm going to rule the point of order out of order.

[00:35:31]>> Thank you.

[00:35:32]>> Proceed.

[00:35:33]>> Mr. Speaker, now I move to place um sorry point of point of inquiry. And I asked the reason for uh dismissal of the point of order after clearly stating that it has fiscal impact and this substitute bill which is brand new.

[00:35:48]There is no fiscal note attached to this considering there might be monetary damages.

[00:35:54]>> So what is the reason?

[00:35:55]>> The point of your point of order >> legal we've got to have legal.

[00:35:58]>> I'm I'm waiting to hear the procedial uh concern here.

[00:36:01]>> Yeah, this is the point of order that argument for against the bill. Uh no, this is a point of order because this bill is a new bill. It does not have a fiscal note that's updated to address the concern that it can impact revenues uh or sorry expenditures of the government of Guam. We don't know the full extent considering that after an award is given, should the agency um cancel this bid, the government of Guam has has to pay >> the party. And so we don't know what is the amount and we don't have a fiscal note determining that amount that is going to cost the government of Guam. Is it in the millions of dollars? Are we going to take that millions of dollars away from what's already appropriated?

[00:36:48]So you know really it's it's a it's a a point of order. Mr. Speaker, >> that sounds more like an argument.

[00:36:54]Overru you can proceed.

[00:36:55]>> Mr. Speaker, I now move.

[00:36:57]>> Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order. What's your point of order, ma'am? Um I would ask that the speaker please make rulings on these points of orders first in uh the points of orders are legitimate. For example, if you are ruling that the bill is not materially different, please say so. If you are ruling that it did not violate the open government law, please say so. If you're saying it did not violate the the statute that says we have to have a public hearing, please say so. If you're saying it does not violate the statute that was just pointed out by my colleague regarding uh necess necessity of a fiscal note that it that for some reason it doesn't violate that. Please be specific.

[00:37:43]Otherwise we are we don't know what we're overruling. You're just saying none of those are valid. But you have to make a ruling a finding. It has to be >> that this bill is materially not is not materially different. I did consider all of it and I'm not sure >> that there was a public hearing on the big change in here that there was no violation of the need to go into committee of the hall all of the things that we listed.

[00:38:07]>> I have reviewed and I have considered all six points of order that you have that you have presented and I have ruled that none of this has really I am ruling overruling or not I'm ruling against your points of order.

[00:38:22]>> Proceed.

[00:38:23]>> Mr. Speaker, now I move that we p uh place uh bill 235-38 as amended in committee and further uh amended on the floor into the third reading file. And Mr. Speaker, uh on my opening, I already have described uh all of the pertinent uh areas of the bill. I do not uh need any additional time. So I I ask that you respectfully request to deliberation on the floor and accept placement and third reading file for discussion. on the motion.

[00:38:52]>> I I object to the substitution of the bill. Mr. >> There is an objection. All those in favor of placing moving the bill.

[00:38:59]>> No, I'd like to speak on that motion, Mr. Speaker. It's a motion to substitute the bill, and I'd like to speak on it.

[00:39:05]>> Okay, you can speak on it, ma'am.

[00:39:06]>> Thank you. Again, we had a public hearing on the original bill. I don't think there's going to be any objection to that. I think our rules require us to go into committee of the whole so that we can make sure. But I think that there were certain things said this morning that were actually false. For example, that the brand new section of this bill was recommended by BBMR. There's nothing in the record that indicates that and the director of BBMR denies that. There is also another statement made this morning that GAA has no objection to this. Again, there is no record of that.

[00:39:40]in the committee report at the committee hearing the the director said that was the first time she ever heard of the idea. It was not vetted by her and she said I don't know I haven't reviewed that and there is nothing in our desks or in this committee report that indicates otherwise.

[00:40:00]So, and it's not even clear whether this is absolutely necessary. And we're going through all of this for an amendment that might not be necessary, but very much puts us at risk of interfering with a an award of a procurement. And I feel like this is some kind of backdoor way to do that. We can't tell because we can't get the people here to talk to them about it. It seems like the parties to the procurement haven't had notice of this and uh I'm I'm not understanding why it's so urgent or compelling to substitute this bill when we can move forward with Simon Sanchez today adding that they're going to use the money for these additional expenses and then put put the entire construction again at risk of delay.

[00:40:54]that that's the danger in substituting the bill, especially when it is not necessary.

[00:41:02]If if there's already an award, then that's not necessary.

[00:41:09]If there's a protest, then we are interfering in the middle of that. I haven't seen a decision yet.

[00:41:17]Or are we is that what we're trying to do? I can't help but ask that, Mr. speaker because if this language is harmless then it seems unnecessary and we are forcing a change to the law that authorized the construction of Simon Sanchez while there is an award pending for the construction of Simon Sanchez.

[00:41:45]If that's not in the middle of a procurement, I don't know what is. And I'm just saying the risk is much greater than the benefit of going forward with the original bill that will allow us what the author wants to allow them to use the money to tear down the existing building down too if that wasn't already included. They were moving forward.

[00:42:09]They were announcing and everybody was going to show up for the big grand demolition of the building.

[00:42:17]And are they going to tell us now that they needed this language in order to do that?

[00:42:24]I hope you agree, Mr. Speaker, that that that just not making that much sense. But part but for sure the risk does not outweigh what we can do to move forward. And I really would like to have those people down here to tell us this is not going to interfere with the procurement and that is not what we're doing in this body is trying in purpose to interfere with that procurement. Mr. Speaker, so for those reasons, I object to the substitute bill and I just ask that we go forward with the original bill.

[00:42:57]>> Thank you.

[00:42:59]>> Thank you. Gentleman from >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address uh the comments of the retiring speaker and explain why uh most of those are erroneous.

[00:43:11]>> Point of order, Mr. Speaker, he does not have this opportunity except in his closing on the motion.

[00:43:16]>> You you opened up the floor, Mr. Speaker, for discussion on >> on your motion. On your motion, >> I have to remind the body that we're still in the motion to accept the substitute bill.

[00:43:26]>> Absolutely.

[00:43:28]>> That was his motion. He spoke on it and now I'm speaking on that motion as well.

[00:43:33]This is his bill.

[00:43:34]>> I get I get to speak on on the fact that you're objecting to the motion. You want to speak to it. So, I get to speak to that as well.

[00:43:39]>> You can speak on closing on your motion.

[00:43:42]You made a motion. You have a closing.

[00:43:44]>> I can speak at this point as well. Mr. Speaker, I want to address the points that were made by the retiring speaker. Mr. We'll go ahead and then address them in all in totality. Okay.

[00:44:00]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Gentleman from the from Epipen, you're recognized.

[00:44:07]>> Sus Masia, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to rise and uh speak on the motion to substitute the bill, which I uh vehemently oppose. Uh my dear people of Guam, let me just tell you what's really going on here. First, let's address the rules, which uh my colleagues in the majority uh always seem willing to bend or break when it suits them. This was the bill that was introduced. Okay. Okay. The bill basically allows the use of the $16 million that we appropriated back in the budget for associated pre-development stage expenses like the demolition >> gentleman that he speaks to the chair.

[00:44:41]>> I'm speaking to the motion, sir.

[00:44:43]>> Speaking to the chair.

[00:44:44]>> Okay. Well, I'm talking to the people of Guam, but I'm just going to look at the >> Speak to the Speaker.

[00:44:48]>> I don't Is this the kind of governor you're going to be, Mr. Speaker?

[00:44:51]>> Speak to the chair.

[00:44:53]>> Huh?

[00:44:53]>> Speak to the chair.

[00:44:54]>> Yeah. So, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, the bill was uh that was introduced does exactly what I just told the people of Guam uh it does. But the problem is there was a bait and switch. There was a bait and switch, Mr. Speaker. Uh we came in prepared to discuss this bill which I believe had the support of a majority of members in this body. Uh but it was baited and switched. Now in the public uh and in the author's opening he had cited that the uh amended version included a section that at the suggestion of a Mr. Henry Titano uh who I'm not sure what the affiliation Mr. Titano has with any company that this section would benefit Mr. Speaker.

[00:45:40]Now, just going back to the public hearing, the administrator of the Guam Economic Development Authority, Tina Garcia, who we just confirmed, didn't even want to talk about the amendment because she was worried that it would impact the protest. Didn't even want to talk about it. And she was asked about it by our good colleague from Hoget and Jiggo.

[00:46:02]What about this amendment from Mr. Titano? And she basically said it it may impact the protest, but I don't even want to talk about it, Mr. Speaker.

[00:46:10]And this is why we see delay after delay with Simon Sanchez. They're going to get up and they're going to say, "Oh, we're opposed to the construction of Simon Sanchez." But every time we meddle with this procurement process and insert politics because we're trying to serve the interest of somebody special, it leads to further delays. So if you want to pull a bait and switch on the people of Guam, you want to pull a bait and switch on Simon Son, of course we're going to stand up and fight it. Mr. Speaker, also just want to object to your rulings on these very valid points of order.

[00:46:49]We're talking about violations of the open government law.

[00:46:53]We're talking about violations of laws, violations of our own standing rules.

[00:47:02]And that's not even getting into the merits of this section that was added in the bait and switch.

[00:47:10]We don't know if this is going to interfere with the protest. We don't know if this is going to jeopardize the awarding of the bid. We don't know if this is going to send the construction of Simon Sanchez all the way back to step one. Mr. speaker.

[00:47:24]So if you want to rule up there with an iron fist and throw away accountability and transparency just because it's an election year, that's your prerogative, Mr. Speaker.

[00:47:39]But don't bang the gabble hard when we stand up to get in the way.

[00:47:47]>> Thank you very much, sir.

[00:47:50]Anybody else? There's been an objection.

[00:47:52]Gentle lady from Baraga, you want to add to this?

[00:47:56]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[00:47:58]I rise in full opposition to the substitute bill. This is a clear violation of procurement law.

[00:48:08]in the documents submitted provided by DPW, the response to one of the solicitors or the offerers in regards to financing.

[00:48:23]They respond, "The Macahad Act allows for the new Simon Sanchez High School to be alternatively financed through short-term debt, mortgage, loan, federally guaranteed loan or loan by any instrumentality of the United States of America. If such financing will better serve the needs of the people of Guam subject to the approval of Ellesur and Guhan, any departure from financing authorized in the Macaha act must be better than municipal bonds secured by GA. However, given the need to obtain legislative approval for any alternative financing, this will set the project completion back and will disrupt the schedule set forth in the RFP refer. And it it goes on to refer to attached template. So, there is clearer evidence.

[00:49:13]This substitute bill will set back the rebuild of Simon Sanchez.

[00:49:22]And we all want to help Simon Sanchez get to that finish line.

[00:49:26]This will set it back clear in black and white.

[00:49:32]Not only that, the other violation of procurement law in this particular substitute bill, it states community development financial institutions programs. So it it specifically states that there are only two CDFIs in Guam currently registered.

[00:49:56]One is the community first credit union.

[00:50:00]The other is Core.

[00:50:03]Procurement law clearly states it's a principle of procurement law.

[00:50:13]So in one of the policies and purposes of the procurement law, it shall foster effective broad-based competition within the free enterprise system and provide for increased public confidence and procedures followed by in public procurement and provide safeguards. for the maintenance of a procurement system of quality and integrity.

[00:50:48]So there is evidence here that this substitute bill violates procurement law and not only that it sets back the rebuild of Simon Sanchez, which I am vehemently opposed to. Thank you.

[00:51:04]>> Any other senators on the motion to substitute the bill?

[00:51:10]General lady from Duning, you're recognized.

[00:51:16]>> Sus Masi, Mr. Speaker, and uh good afternoon to my colleagues. I hope you had a good lunch. Get ready to tackle some of the things that we need to do to ensure that we cross our tees and dot our eyes is the most important thing.

[00:51:30]So one of the concerns that I have here because we heard in the public hearing when uh the question was asked by one of our colleagues on on this the particular amendment that was before us the this prior substituted bill um that we could you know she basically GA said that they wanted to wait uh to look at this thoroughly before you know incorporating anything else other than what the bill stated as he oversight chair of GA and because we're coming into this situation making sure that and I'm sure everyone here wants to see Simon Sanchez finally built that was the intention and I'm sure all those people who co-sponsored this bill as well co-sponsored a bill that has been now substituted.

[00:52:22]So it's it's a different animal that we're dealing with. But that being said, as I spoke to Gita, I I had to be to I was told that they could not speak on it because of procurement.

[00:52:41]Now, if they can't speak on something that's in front of us because of procurement issues, then there is something wrong with this legislation here, the substituted version.

[00:52:54]because it has to do with procurement.

[00:52:56]The last thing we want to do is to have the 38th Guam legislature once again, not this legislature but prior legislature, but this 38th Gu legislature to stop the progress of Simon Sanchez.

[00:53:16]I'm pretty sure we all agree, even those who signed up on this legislation, the original bill that was put in front of us, there was no controversy. There was no issues done made about it. I think we all agreed upon that.

[00:53:36]I do know that once the procurement uh the uh uh protest has been completed, we can easily come back to this body and make changes.

[00:53:50]But why do you want to jeopardize again Simon Sanchez by putting this substituted version that's obviously has some issues to it.

[00:54:07]We can always come back, colleagues, move forward with the original bill so that there is no issues that's going to delay it even longer. And if we have to come back and be redundant by incorporating community development, CDFI, the EB5, all those things that were just put in here in the second draft, which even legalists said is already included in the law. The current law allows for these inclusions. the contractor. And the current law says the contractor may use an alternative method of financing including but not limited to, comma, a short-term debt, mortgage loan, federally granted loan, or a loan by an instrumentality of the United States of America.

[00:55:09]And then you put it including but not limited to again that's that's the inclusion now. you're you're you're being redundant because the first part which is currently in law already covers that section.

[00:55:28]I have no problem with the first bill that was heard in the public hearing room.

[00:55:36]But there is an issue here.

[00:55:40]And when you have GA who can't speak on it because of a procurement and when you have some people from Adaloop who are saying hey we're good with section 8 but you know 58 is not ours.

[00:55:58]It makes you wonder, is somebody setting this body up?

[00:56:08]So, let's do our due diligence.

[00:56:12]Put a bill that was originally introduced through.

[00:56:16]Once a procurement is done and we don't jeopardize what's going on right now, we can come back to this body, incorporate additional in uh additional tasks, additional, you know, funding sources if you want, but don't be the senator that delays it again and causes an issue.

[00:56:42]We've waited too long for Simon Sanchez to be built.

[00:56:48]And I can tell you right now, taking the original one is not going to delay it.

[00:56:56]Taking the original bill that was introduced and heard in the public hearing is not going to delay it.

[00:57:02]This >> So I think Senator Tella Tigui came closest to calling it out.

[00:57:10]Let me just reverse here and so when she says, you know, is this are we being set up here? That's what I mean by that. But when she says the original language talking about the $16.3 million appropriation is not going to set it back. I think she might be wrong. And I think that it's because she it's pretty clear pretty clear from this from this this is January 28 2026 a conditional award I think was made to uh core cortech was already known as the developer who was chosen by the administration to develop Simon Sanchez High School. There was it was already known that there was a protest. It was already known that there is an appeal to the OPA by January 28, 2026.

[00:58:08]What's not known by this date is what was said in the negotiation meetings that didn't become known until last week.

[00:58:18]But it is pretty clear that Telot Taidigui, Sabina Perez, Chris Barnett, and Theres Turlahi were unaware of this what exactly 16.3 million in section 8 and 16.3 million in this new bill accomplished. And that was year 31 and year 32. An additional 32.6 6 million in costs to the people of Guam.

[00:58:56]I I have a theory.

[00:58:59]I don't think the other senators knew either. I don't I think they were sold a bag of tricks.

[00:59:06]And that is the value of these negotiation meetings. And as the OPA parses this out and maybe even the attorney general, who knows? You may I mean he was he was one of the people called to the committee of the whole when the governor had that hey let's rush or the lieutenant governor was like hey let's rush and let's let's grant this award and let's move forward with the development and the legislature was like whoa hold on let's call all these people they called the attorney general and the AG was there and on the advice of the AG and legal counsel according to what was said when the legislature decided to table the matter uh no one was going to punk. So, there's something you have to believe, right? That there's something going on that that it almost sounds like the AG is looking into this, right? Whether on the civil side or the criminal side, I don't know. But certainly the OPA, right? And the OPA, I suppose when they come out with their decision and their report, we'll find out more according to the research that they do. The those are the numbers people, right? But I think that it is clear that at least these four senators senators did not know. Theresi was the only person who ended up voting against this whole thing by the way. Um and I I I believe that the other senators didn't know either.

[01:00:34]Um, and it makes me curious why Senator Tina Muna Barnes still has not answered my questions as to communications with Cortech since June of 2025. For Candid News, I am Troy Torres. I'll see you tonight for the Troy Torres show or for the reality check with Michael Synicholas. Whichever one, uh, I just have to check with Mike whether he is going to be prepared for a show tonight.

[01:00:57]But anyway, until then, until 7:30 p.m.

[01:01:00]for the evening show, God bless you and have a great day. Okay. Blessed Memorial Day to you all.

[01:01:40]You asked, we delivered. Guam AutoSpot is extending our overstock selloff with the hottest deals on island, like our 2025 GMC Canyon with $4,000 off. Or slide into a brand new Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross starting at just $2495.

[01:01:55]September is your chance to drive big and save even bigger. Visit us today or get preapproved online at guamospot.com or call 478 auto. Guam AutoSpot, where the savings never stop.

[01:02:21]>> Good stuff's hitting the spot. Check your senator.