No par: Real ways to identify and eliminate corruption

By Vince Taijeron Akimoto and Jordan Lawrence E. Pauluhn

Many Guamanians complain about corruption within the government of Guam. Former Sen. Joanne Brown once hung campaign signs simply stating: “End Corruption Now.” Yet, the average citizen rarely knows what corruption actually looks like.

In truth, corruption masquerades as fun, excitement, and progress. That’s because corruption requires control of your money. Corruption hides behind ribbon-cutting ceremonies, glossy press releases, capital improvement projects, and friendly smiles. It resembles our pari pari culture. It may look “nice,” but it takes from the poor to enrich the wealthy, exacerbating our K-shaped economy.

Corruption occurs when the decisions and contracts are hidden from public view, and the system fails to hold wrongdoers accountable. We are often reluctant to call it out—or perhaps are unable to recognize it—because its face belongs to a family member or friend.

Dr. Akimoto champions the inafa’maolek spirit, but frequently reminds his attorney co-author that this means working together for the island’s betterment. It is not a free pass for those exploiting Guam’s hospitality.

Guam must get serious about combatting corruption. The current attorney general barely knows what it is. If the worst corruption he finds is that former acting GRTA director Richard Ybanez did not attend college, he’s not looking hard enough. (Richard even expects to graduate with honors this semester).

Let us examine recent suspect governmental actions and suggest concrete solutions, focusing on education, healthcare, and procurement.

Case study No. 1: Education and procurement failures

Prior to news of cancellation, the construction of a new Simon Sanchez High School campus was heavily bogged down by procurement protests. The Legislature even considered exempting the $160+ million project from procurement laws entirely. However, the procurement record reveals cut corners. The procurement was solicited via a Request for Proposal (RFP), which required the evaluation of offers without price consideration. A fair price is negotiated after a contractor is selected. Instead, the Department of Public Works (DPW) improperly requested prices alongside initial bids.

If DPW intended to consider prices upfront, it should have issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB), which is automatically awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Assuming the “losing” bid was the lowest and met technical specifications, it should have won.

Furthermore, DPW failed to produce a complete, contemporaneous procurement record. These basic procedural failures caused ongoing legal delays.

Both construction bids also carried procurement red flags. The “winning” bid exceeded the statutory cap, while the “losing” bid was nearly half the price. Excessively high bids can indicate bias and contract steering. Conversely, artificially low bids are often attempts to secure a contract to later bill for “unanticipated” overages, ultimately exceeding competitors’ original quotes. Both are unfair, anti-competitive practices.

Because adults failed to follow the rules, the new campus is stalled. The SSHS funds earmarked this year will likely be diverted to avoid budgetary “lapses”, forcing students to endure another year without an adequate facility. (Maybe an Adequate Education Act lawsuit is in order.)

Solution 1: The government must enforce compliance. Agencies frequently seek shortcuts; the easiest path is following the law as written. To help the Governor, Attorney General, and Public Auditor fulfill their mandates, each agency should be assigned an attorney from the Attorney General’s Office or another agency to provide technical support. Further, agency heads must be required to complete the Guam Community College procurement training at the start of every administration or term of office.

Case study Np. 2: Open government law notices

Recent reports reveal Guam Memorial Hospital's Board of Trustees met multiple times on an “emergency” basis in closed, executive sessions with its attorney. The Board recently scheduled another closed-door session.

These meetings were justified by an acting CEO signing an emergency certification to bypass the standard five-day public notice requirement. Yet, the hospital failed to identify the actual emergency—a fundamental precondition for this extraordinary power to waive public notice.

Furthermore, Title 5 GCA § 8111 dictates that holding an attorney-client privileged meeting requires “threatened or pending litigation,” defined as litigation “reasonably expected” to occur.

While agencies and attorneys should receive some latitude, that vanishes when they publicly admit no such litigation exists. The Pacific Daily News reported hospital attorney Joseph McDonald testified before the Legislature on August 13. In his testimony, he confirmed that despite “many lawsuits against the hospital,” the secret session did not relate to them. He merely stated the hidden matter “could” lead to litigation.

This justification fails the legal standard. Almost any issue “could” lead to litigation; that does not mean a lawsuit is reasonably anticipated. If the legislative testimony is true, the matter is likely an operational or risk management “emergency” not qualifying for the threatened or pending litigation exception. Agencies can abuse attorney meetings to hide non-legal, embarrassing issues from public view.

No one disputes the hard work of GMHA’s doctors, nurses, and staff. They and the public deserve to know the real issues occurring within the hospital, especially "emergency" conditions.

Solution 2: Agencies seeking an “emergency” exemption from the Open Government law and procurement law should be required to publicly file written certifications identifying the exact emergency. The Legislature should require the Attorney General to provide regular Open Government Law (OGL) and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) training for new agency heads (this used to occur without a legal mandate). Finally, a serious Attorney General must actively investigate OGL violations. Corruption persists in secrecy. Transparency is the best disinfectant.

Case study No.3: Sole-source contract abuse

Guam suffers from severe abuses in awarding sole-source contracts, which are meant to be awarded only when there is genuinely only one vendor offering a good or service. Instead, agencies routinely use this method to bypass standard procurement when the process feels “too hard.” Combined with Guam’s notoriously poor contract management, abuse potential multiplies.

For the attorney co-author, glaring examples stand out. The hotel contract for the Attorney General’s stalled Dignity Project was awarded via sole source. The Tropical Palm Hotel is obviously not Guam’s only hotel. Even if a competitive process ultimately yields one bid, competition is required. Similar issues arose for Public Health during the leasing of COVID-19 quarantine hotels.

The doctor co-author points to lucrative hospital physician contracts unjustified by billings and collections. The public acute-care facility runs an expensive outpatient clinic, paying millions to doctors, many of whom hold secondary jobs. For example, the current CEO is paid as a full-time executive while holding a multi-six-figure physician contract awarded without competition. Informal reports suggest that her patients rarely see her and are instead treated by an advanced practice nurse.

These lucrative contracts for public money are routinely awarded from the government’s $1.5 billion budget, while no one can seem to find $20 million to pay for repairs to GMH’s aging central power panel, which has already led to multiple fires. Dr. Akimoto has repeatedly declared this a moral failure of the leadership.

Even if some of these contracts are technically legal, Guam bleeds millions through sole-source awards without real transparency or competitive bidding. This is a glaring red flag for systemic corruption.

Solution 3: Ultimately, as any auditor knows, an organization’s people are the best internal control. As such, independent checks and balances enhance competition. Sole source or any contract awarded without competition should require the approval of and verification by the Procurement Counsel. While the law already requires agencies to publish notices of these contracts and review their effectiveness, the Attorney General and Public Auditor must enforce these mandates.

Ultimately, corruption hides comfortably behind a $1.5 billion General Fund budget while our schools remain unbuilt, our roads unpaved, decisions happen behind closed doors, the public hospital’s electrical panels remain unrepaired, and the homeless are left on the streets. Corruption hides behind our friends and our pars.

Dr. Vincent Taijeron Akimoto is a family medicine doctor on Guam. Jordan Lawrence Evangelista Pauluhn, J.D. is an attorney on Guam and 2026 candidate for attorney general.

Subscribe to

our digital

monthly issue