top of page
  • Writer's pictureAdmin

Guam AG opposes proposed conversion of recreational facility into solar farm

By Pacific Island Times News Staff

Attorney General Douglas Moylan is opposing a bill that would convert a government property earmarked for a recreational facility into a solar farm.


“When this project was originally conceived, it was intended for community benefit, a location where island residents could recreate at an affordable cost,” Moylan said in opposing Bill 179-37.


“While there is no doubt that Guam needs additional power and that solar power has a perceived benefit to burning fossil fuels, Guam also needs recreational facilities as was the original intent for the use of this property,” he added.


Authored by Sen. Joe San Agustin, Bill 179-37 would direct the Chamorro Land Trust Commission to revise its lease agreement with the operators of what is now the Guam International County Club to facilitate the implementation of a utility-level solar facility with on-site battery storage. 

“We oppose this bill as it removes from our island a much-needed recreational facility available to all, especially our youth. Most disconcerting is that the tenant is attempting to change the use of the government property to profit despite having breached their lease agreement with the government,” Moylan said.


He also argued that solar panels “pose a highly questionable return of investment," citing as an example the solar farm in Inarajan, which he said has been unable to sustain its financial obligations after a change in interest rates. The operator thus needed to renegotiate the contract. 


“Solar energy production requires relatively massive amounts of land in an island community that has little precious land to waste,” Moylan said.


“This land is prime real estate and was designated for public use by our people

and children to develop a skill and serve as a recreational facility also


The attorney general urged senators to assess the proposed solar farm’s viability.


“Factoring in the limited life spans of the solar panels and disposal fees of those panels after about 18 years, its economical viability must be carefully scrutinized

as to having any benefit at this time,” he said.


"Moreover, how it would weather a super typhoon likewise calls into question if this is a legitimate investment from a company already in breach of its existing legal obligations,” he added available for developing tourism,” he added.



bottom of page