Thursday, March 31, 2016

ROBERT KLITZKIE, Esq. to MICHAEL J. B. BORJA, DIRECTOR OF LAND MANAGEMENT, MARCH 30, 2016

I normally only share portions of letters along with explanations, however, if you have been following this story, Mr. Klitzkie's letter here needs no explanation and provides us all with a thorough review of the problem. Read and understand. (The official copy with attachments and stamped received by DLM can be found here.)

Robert Klitzkie, Esq.
22 Baki Ct., Yigo, GU 96929
(671) 653-6607


March 30, 2016

Michael J. B. Borja
Director of Land Management as
Ex Officio Registrar of Titles and as
Director of Land Management


Subject: Erroneous certificates of title for parcels:
90-2-R1-RNEW-3
90-2-R1-2-R1-RNEW-R3
90-2-R1-RNEW-1-R/W
90-2-R1-RNEW-2-R/W s


Re:  A plea.


Dear Mr. Borja:


You January 20 letter is attached.  Here’s the key language:


“In a follow-up to your referenced letter, I have consulted with the Department of Land Management’s legal counsel and with the Attorney General of Guam regarding a remedy to correct a certificate of title which a memorial had been entered in error. Based on their advice and in accordance with Title 29, Guam Code Annotated, §29195, a person of interest or the registrar is required to petition the court to correct a certificate of title.


Accordingly, the department, specifically the Ex Officio Registrar of Titles  has prepared and forwarded a petition, and other associated documents, to the Office of the Attorney General of Guam with instructions for the petition to be filed in the Superior Court of Guam in an effort to correct the certificates of title mentioned in your letter.”


You told me the same thing when we met on Thursday,  January 7. You will recall that that appointment had been rescheduled for the original 10:30 AM, Wednesday, January 6 to Thursday morning, January 7. You rescheduled because you had a meeting with the Attorney General at 1:30 on Wednesday.


Your January 20 also closed with, “Once additional information is available regarding the filing of the petition, I will inform you.”
Your January 20 letter ended the first phase of the way you dealt with this matter.  You will recall my letter of December 23 brought to your attention the two colossal blunders by your Deputy Registrar of Titles, Andrew D. Santos. You responded by email the same day. Your open, cooperative, transparent approach to your duties continued till circa February 1.


The second phase. At the beginning of February it became very difficult to reach you by telephone or set up an appointment to discuss the filing of the petition and associated documents, notwithstanding your promise to inform me re the filing of the petition. Even my most basic Sunshine Law was request was blown off


As puzzling as your complete 180 was concerning what you had promised on January 20 was, later events may have provided an explanation.  A quote from a KUAM News story:

“In response, Borja tells KUAM News that this is a civil issue between the two parties of interest, which are DLM and the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole. With the petition, he says one was prepared in draft but it was never submitted, executed or filed in the court because the two parties were able to meet and correct the error together. Borja says this is actually based on guidance from counsel and advice from the AG's Office as well.”


During the second phase when I would come to your office to ask when the petition was would be filed, I was told by the assistant attorney general assigned to you, Kristan Finney, Esq.  “I’ve got to sit down with Jackie and see what she’s got,” or “I’ve got to sit down with Jackie and see what we can work out.”  As of my last meeting with you on February 29 the “sit down” had not occurred.


Ms. Finney finally wrote a note to you on March 15 giving bad advice based on 21 GCA § 29160.  Based on a “sit down” with Jackie Terlaje in March and a memo prepared on March 15 some kind of time machine was employed to explain why the petition you said was prepared on January 20 wasn’t ever prepared! It wasn’t ever forwarded to the Office of the Attorney General of Guam for filing and contradicted the request you made to Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, The Attorney General of Guam, on December 29.  Now that I have  untangled the thread of what you and Ms. Finney did, I must compliment you. The way that the two you sat, with straight faces, through several choruses  of “I’ve got to sit down with Jackie” when responding to my question about filing, knowing that there was nothing to file,  was the kind of performance not seen outside the confines of Hollywood!


A KUAM quote presents another “sit down with Jackie” question.  


“In response, Borja tells KUAM News that this is a civil issue between the two parties of interest, which are DLM and the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole. With the petition, he says one was prepared in draft but it was never submitted, executed or filed in the court because the two parties were able to meet and correct the error together. Borja says this is actually based on guidance from counsel and advice from the AG's Office as well.”


There are indeed two parties involved, “the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole” and
The Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam, a non-profit corporation, as recognized in your letter to Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. of December 29. So while Kristan Finney, Esq. was anxious to “sit down with Jackie” there apparently was no willingness to sit down with the other party, the Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam, a non-profit corporation, which you recognized as a separated entity. Who is counsel for the Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam, a non-profit corporation, and why was he or she not included?


Not only did you nor Ms. Finney not include the Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam, a non-profit corporation, in the “sit downs with Jackie,” had I not attended the performances even I wouldn’t have known who represented the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole as counsel’s name doesn’t appear in any of your or Ms. Finney’s papers or your news releases.


This is ironic because Jackie Terlaje, Esq. identified only orally by Ms. Finney, was involved in the certificate of title fiasco from the beginning. Ms. Terlaje with the assistance of Berth Evangelista ordered the October 30 certificates of title which your deputy registrar issued without the necessary memorial of the Declaration of Deed Restriction which Msgr. David C. Quitugua, the Vicar General, published on the front page of the Umatuna Si Yu’os on November 29.  That was the start of the fiasco. Your deputy registrar then hand wrote in the necessary memorials on December 9.  As was brought your attention in mine of December 15 and recognized in yours of December 29, the memorials were not in favor of the correct party. ( NB there are two.) I have attached a transmittal memo showing that the erroneous certificates were sent to Jackie Terlaje, Esq. on December 15.  So Ms. Terlaje  had the erroneous certificates from December 15 on. More than three months later after going through the “Sit down with Jackie” charade a couple times I learned from your News Release on March 17 that Kristan and Jackie had apparently finally sat down!


For anyone who would attempt to understand the machinations performed  by the several people who have created the mess related to the certificates of title, an understanding of the lexicon apparently used in your office is helpful. To begin with you use the term “Office of Attorney General”  as though it were a synonym for “The “Attorney General of Guam.” This is a very different, even contradictory, meaning from the “Office of  Attorney General” as used in your correspondence.


The Attorney General of Guam is one Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. The Office of Attorney General is an agency of the Government of Guam. Until the passage of PL 29-19 on September 29, 2007 the agency was know as the Department of Law.  Neither the Office of Attorney General nor the Department of Law before it, could give legal opinions or provide legal advice—only lawyers do that.  


Per 48 USC 1421g (d)(1) the Attorney General of Guam is the Chief Legal Officer of the Government of Guam. As you well know, the current Attorney General of Guam is Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq.  it is NOT Kristan Finney, Esq. who is an employee in the Office of Attorney General.  Ms. Finney has provided nothing showing  that Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. has delegated authority to her to act as The Attorney General of Guam.  Nor has Ms. Finney shown any authority to act contrary to the advice provided by The Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq.  to you as set out in your letter to me of January 20.


Your papers seem to be designed to mislead the reader into thinking that the Office of Attorney General is the same as Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. Here’s an example. Your News Release of March 17 is misleading. “The Office of the Attorney General” is mentioned twice as the authority for the deal you cut with a lawyer identified only as “legal counsel of the Archbishop of Agaña.”  At the end of the release the following appears:


“Attachments: Letter from AG, certificates of title”


yet when one scrolls down through the certificates of title one arrives at a short note from Kristan Finney, Esq. not the “AG,” i.e. Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, The Attorney General of Guam.


I am left with impression that The Office of the Attorney General is apparently Kristan Finney, Esq.  Thus while the Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. advised you to petition the court pursuant 21 GCA § 29195 the Office of the Attorney General, Kristan Finney, Esq. advised you that she’d  “work something out with Jackie Terlaje.”  Office of the Attorney General, Kristan Finney, Esq. also advised you that 21 GCA § 29160 describes the mechanism for correcting certificates of title.


Likewise, your news release of March17 says that, “The Department of Land Management worked with the Office of Attorney General to correct recording errors…” Accompanying the news release is a note from Kristan Finney, Esq. describing a mythology employing 21 GCA § 29160 and working with Jackie Terlaje. The note doesn’t even mention the advice that Ms. Finney’s  boss, Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. provided to you advising you to petition the court pursuant to 21 GCA § 29195, nor your letter to Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. of December 29.


Here’s an example from KUAM:


"And that the issues that may be concerning the certificate of title for a particular land, the matter I then took to the attorney general and we discussed how we can approach doing this. Based on the advice of my legal counsel, who is the Attorney General of Guam, we have acted on what is necessary for us to do and we have corrected the situation that is to interest and to the Department of Land Management and for the certificate title holder, and we did it in the proper way that the law allows us to address these kinds of issues. But at no time was the certificate of tile improper or incorrect," he added.  


And yet another example:


In response, Borja tells KUAM News that this is a civil issue between two parties which are DLM and the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole. With the petition, he says one was prepared in draft but it was never submitted, executed or filed in the court because the two parties were able to meet and correct the error together. Borja says this is actually based on guidance from counsel and advice from the AG's Office as well.


And there’s this.


“…civil issue between the two parties of interest…”  


As described supra there are two parties but neither of them is “DLM.” Again, departments are inanimate fictive entities.  You are the Director. You are responsible. But as the Director of Land Management you are not a party to “a civil issue.”  You are a public officer who has taken an oath which reads in pertinent part:


“…I will well and faithfully support…the laws of Guam, and that I will conscientiously and impartially discharge my duties as an officer of the government of Guam…”


Your characterizing yourself as a party sheds a lot of light on your conduct since the beginning of February.


I now understand why inquiries as to when the papers would be filed were met with a “I’ve got sit down and work things out with Jackie Terlaje” response from your lawyer Kristan Finney, Esq.  There were no papers to file.


An understanding of the lexicon apparently used in your office is helpful. To begin with the “Attorney Genera of Guam” has a very different, even contradictory, meaning from the “Office of  Attorney General.”  The Attorney General of Guam is one Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. The Office of the Attorney General is apparently Kristan Finney, Esq.  


Thus while the Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson advised you to petition the court pursuant 21 GCA § 29195 the Office of the Attorney General, Kristan Finney, Esq. advised you to “work something out with Jackie Terlaje.” Likewise, your news release of March17 says that, “The Department of Land Management worked with the Office of Attorney General to correct recording errors…”


Accompanying the news release is a note from Kristan Finney, Esq. describing a mythology employing 21 GCA § 29160 and working with Jackie Terlaje. The note doesn’t even mention the advice that her boss, the Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Esq. provided to you advising you to petition the court pursuant to 21 GCA § 29195.


Here’s what you represented to me as the advice of The Attorney General of Guam:


“In a follow-up to your referenced letter, I have consulted with the Department of Land Management’s legal counsel and with the Attorney General of Guam regarding a remedy to correct a certificate of title which a memorial had been entered in error. Based on their advice and in accordance with Title 29, Guam Code Annotated, §29195, a person of interest or the registrar is required to petition the court to correct a certificate of title.


Accordingly, the department, specifically the Ex Officio Registrar of Titles  has prepared and forwarded a petition, and other associated documents, to the Office of the Attorney General of Guam with instructions for the petition to be filed in the Superior Court of Guam in an effort to correct the certificates of title mentioned in your letter.”


In order to begin the process of restoring lost credibility on your watch, I respectfully request, nay, plead with you to file a petition with the Superior Court pursuant to 21 GCA 29165.


Finally, I offer a Maxim of Jurisprudence from our law.


20 GCA § 15111. He who can and does not forbid that which is done on his behalf is deemed to have bidden it.


Respectfully submitted,

Robert Klitzkie

cc: Governor of Guam, Attorney General of Guam

5 comments:

  1. Great letter Mr. Kiltzkie. Let's see now what the AG, the governor, Mr. Borja, the "trained" wanna be lawyer Jackie and Ms. Finney have to say in reply. Oh and let's not forget brother tony or Quitugua the knuckleheads baffoons.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A very powerful letter! Thank you Bob!! May God bless you and your efforts to seek the truth and fight for what is right.

    ReplyDelete
  3. See Bob go. Go Bob Go! Your picking up speed Bob! Mr. Borja, if you need me to explain further just see one of my previous comments.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Attorney Bob Kiltzkie just hit the ball and it is in the hands of Mr. Borja and the Attorney General Of Guam for their next move.
    Mr. Borja, to safe yourself you must acknowledge all errors done and get this corrected the LEGAL WAY not the NEO WAY.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr. Mike Borja, Mr. Klitzkie has used your own statements to put you into a corner (the image of a cornered rat comes to mind). Your Neo friends (?) will not come to your rescue. They cannot lie their way out of what you said to save you. They would rather throw you under the bus to save themselves.
    Then, and only then, although too late, you will find who your friends really are.

    The only way out is to tell the whole truth. Guam is still a forgiving island. Just don't abuse our patience or take us for granted.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch