WeVote

Bill

Bill

RCC 9

Para ordenar a la Autoridad para el Redesarrollo de los Terrenos y Facilidades de la Estación Naval Roosevelt Roads, adscrita al Departamento de Desarrollo Económico y Comercio, a ceder al Municipio de Ceiba, la parcela de terreno identificada como “Clean Parcel Two (2); Los Machos Parcel Two (2)” en la Escritura Pública Número 14 del 26 de enero de 2012, titulada “Deed of Ratification and Conversion to Public Instrument of Quitclaim Deed”, suscrita entre Estados Unidos y el Gobierno de Puerto Rico e identificada como “H1 Ceiba Gateway” en el “Development Zones Master Plan” de la Autoridad para el Redesarrollo de los Terrenos y Facilidades de la Estación Naval Roosevelt Roads; para ordenar a otras agencias y entidades gubernamentales tomar medidas necesarias para lograr el redesarrollo de los terrenos de la antigua Estación Naval Roosevelt Roads; y para otros fines relacionados..

2025-2028 Session

Bill orders transfer of Roosevelt Roads naval station parcels to Ceiba municipality and mandates government agencies coordinate redevelopment efforts.

Retirada por su Autor
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · RCC 9

Legislative bill overview

Bill RCC 9 orders the Roosevelt Roads Naval Station Redevelopment Authority (under the Department of Economic Development) to cede two parcels of land ("Clean Parcel Two" and "Los Machos Parcel Two") to the Municipality of Ceiba. The bill also directs other government agencies to take necessary measures to facilitate the redevelopment of the former Roosevelt Roads Naval Station property.

Why is this important

The former Roosevelt Roads Naval Station represents significant real estate and economic development potential for Puerto Rico. Transferring these parcels to Ceiba's municipal control could enable local-driven economic projects, job creation, and infrastructure development in the region. The coordination mandate across government agencies addresses the complexity of converting a major military facility into productive civilian use.

Potential points of contention

  • Municipal capacity vs. regional planning: Whether Ceiba alone has the resources and expertise to develop these parcels effectively, or if broader regional coordination would serve public interests better
  • Accountability and timeline: The bill requires agency action without specifying deadlines, funding mechanisms, or enforcement provisions for the redevelopment mandate
  • Environmental remediation costs: Former military sites often require environmental cleanup; unclear who bears these costs and whether transfer adequately addresses contamination liability

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.