The following comment was posted by Mr. Clement Yow Mulalap, in the discussion threads relating to his questions to ETG/Mr. Yang Gang. (Source: http://www.facebook.com/groups/404462399564440/permalink/506687616008584/ ,also see here) The comment has pointed out that ETG’s has publicly announced its proposed duration of land lease–99 years, renewable after the first 99-year lease agreement is expired.
According to ETG’s public statement (link), individual Yapese land owners will not be able to negotiate with ETG for a shorter lease duration.
Mr. Yang, I respectfully request, once again, that you respond to the sets of questions I posed to you in this thread—beginning at http://on.fb.me/SKnTWn
—after you (or someone equally authorized by ETG) responded on the Yap ETG Paradise Islands Facebook page to my initial sets of questions. I hope you have had the chance to read and ponder my new questions, Mr. Yang, and I hope to hear from you soon.
In the meantime, I wish to share with the group at large a recent post on the Yap ETG Paradise Islands Facebook page. I have been alerted that Mr. Yang—or someone equally authorized by ETG—posted the following statement on that page (see here: http://on.fb.me/TYjBOM
ETG ‘s investment is long term investment project. ETG only sign the lease agreement with the landowners who want to lease for 99 years. ETG also would like to renew the lease agreement after 99years.
To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that ETG has publicly acknowledged that ETG is interested in signing land leases with private Yapese landowners only if those leases are for 99 years. Not only that, but I believe this is the first public acknowledgement by ETG that ETG wishes to renew its 99-year lease agreements once those initial agreements expire. As Veronica Pinnifen Libian indicates in her comment on the Yap ETG Paradise Islands page (see here: http://on.fb.me/TYugsM
), a number of pro-ETG supporters have stated that private Yapese landowners are free to negotiate shorter land lease durational terms with ETG if they wish to lease land to ETG, but it seems like that will not be the case.
For now, I will refrain from commenting on the environmental, cultural, economic, and social impacts that a strict 99-year land lease arrangement (with a renewal option for 99 years) may have on Yap and her people. In the meantime, I appreciate these public acknowledgements by ETG. This is precisely the sort of technical legal information that I hope to acquire from ETG, and that is why I asked Mr. Yang several times in this thread to provide a copy of a template/sample land lease agreement that ETG intends to present to private Yapese landowners to sign. If that template/sample exists, then it very likely contains a 99-year lease term like the one cited by ETG in the abovementioned statement, and sharing such a template/sample publicly can be very helpful for private Yapese landowners who may be thinking about leasing their land to ETG for ETG’s proposed Project in Yap but who are concerned about all the conflicting information being spread in Yap about ETG’s proposed Project. I again respectfully request Mr. Yang to furnish that template/sample land lease agreement publicly.