May 30, 2003 – The University of the Virgin Islands Bulletin Board issued May 29 has these announcements:
Summer Session Registration Set for June 5 and 6
Summer session registration at UVI will be conducted June 5 and 6 on both campuses. Summer session will run from Monday, June 9, through Wednesday, July 23.
Registration Schedule
St. Thomas – June 5 and 6 (3 p.m. – 7 p.m.)
St. Croix – June 5: M – R (1 p.m. – 4 p.m.); S – Z (4 p.m. – 6 p.m.)
St. Croix – June 6: A – F (1 p.m. – 4 p.m.); G – L (4p.m. – 6 p.m.)
Summer Session Late Registration
St. Thomas – June 9, noon – 6 p.m.
St. Croix – June 9-10, noon – 4 p.m.
UVI Application Deadline for Fall 2003 Classes is May 30
May 30 is the deadline for prospective students to apply for admission to UVI's fall 2003 classes. Undergraduate and graduate applications are being accepted. Individuals should submit an admissions application to the admissions office on either campus. Along with the UVI application, an official high school or college transcript is required. SAT or ACT scores should be included. CXC, GCE or CAPE results are required if applicable.
The application fee is $20. Direct questions to 693-1150 on St. Thomas or to 692-4158 on St. Croix. Information is also available in the "Admissions Pages" of UVI's web site (click on the link at end of notices).
Fall Semester Registration Set August 13-15
Registration for the fall semester on both campuses is scheduled for Aug. 13 -15. The 2003 fall semester begins Aug. 18 and ends Dec. 14.
CES Offers Short Course in Pre-construction Planning
A short course in Pre-construction Planning for Property Owners is being offered by UVI's Cooperative Extension Service (CES). A session is set for 7 to 9 p.m. Tuesday, June 3, in room 133 of the Research and Extension Center on the St. Croix campus. (Sessions were previously held in St. Thomas and St. John.)
The course will focus on how to assess a property's physical conditions and how to develop an effective Earth Change Plan with an eye toward saving valuable topsoil and native habitat while reducing the potential for property damage and pollution. All Virgin Islands residents planning to build a home are encouraged to attend this free course. The course is also appropriate for representatives from community groups, real estate agencies and homeowners associations. To register contact Julie Wright or Dale Morton at 693-1080.
Vickie Winans Headlines May 31 Concert in Sports and Fitness Center
Award-winning gospel recording star Vickie Winans will perform on Saturday, May 31, at the UVI Sports and Fitness Center. Joining Winans for the 8 p.m. show will be nationally known saxophonist Angella Christie. The show, billed as "an unforgettable evening of praise and worship," is being produced by Quality Family Entertainment and Productions. Tickets are available at Army & Navy, Forever Flowers, MIC Christian Book Store, Modern Music, St. John Drug Store and the UVI Bookstore on the St. Thomas campus. For details call 277-6778.
Human Resources Management Seminar Set for June 4 on St. Croix
The UVI Small Business Development Center (SBDC) will be conducting a human resource seminar entitled, "Human Resource Management" from 5:45 to 8 p.m. Wednesday, June 4, at the UVI-SBDC training center located in the Sunshine Mall lower level, St. Croix. For more information and to pre-register, call UVI-SBDC at 692-5270.
SBDC Seminar on Security for Small Businesses Set June 6
UVI's Small Business Development Center will conduct a seminar titled "Security for a Small Business Is More Than a Lock and Key" from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Thursday, June 5, at the SBDC training fcility, at Nisky Center, St. Thomas.
The presenter for the seminar is Ronald F. Roberts, president of Roberts Resources. Topics will include credit card fraud, identity theft, and customer and consumer privacy.
Admission to the seminar is $20. There is a $5 discount for those who pre-register and pay by Wednesday, June 4. Admission for UVI faculty, staff and students is free, although they must pre-register. For more information or to pre-register call 776-3206.
Safe Diving, Hyperbaric Medicine Workshop Set for June 6 on St. Croix
A workshop on safe diving and hyperbaric medicine is scheduled from 1 to 3 p.m. Friday, June 6, in room 303 of the Evan's Center on UVI's St. Croix campus. The workshop is open to the general public. It is targeted toward dive operators, recreational divers and fishermen. Presenters will include representatives from the hyperbaric medicine program at Centro Medico Hospital in Puerto and from the University of Puerto Rico's Sea Grant Program. The workshop is free, but pre-registration is requested. To pre-register or for more information contact UVI marine adviser Marcia Taylor at 692-4046.
Safe Diving, Hyperbaric Medicine Workshop Rescheduled to July 18 on St. Thomas
A workshop on safe diving and hyperbaric medicine will be offered from 4 to 6 p.m. Friday, July 18, at UVI's MacLean Marine Science Center on the St. Thomas campus. This workshop was originally scheduled to take place in May. The workshop is open to the general public, and is targeted toward dive operators, recreational divers and fishermen. Presenters will include representatives from the hyperbaric medicine program at Centro Medico Hospital in Puerto and from the University of Puerto Rico's Sea Grant Program. The workshop is free but pre-registration is requested. For pre-registration or more information contact UVI marine adviser Mayra Suárez-Vélez at 693-1392.
For more on the University of the Virgin Islands, visit the website at www.uvi.edu.

Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

May 29, 2003 – The territory's off-season tourism promotion is called the "USVI Summer Bucket of Savings," according to a release from Martin Public Relations, the government's mainland publicity agency.
Three entities on St. John, 15 resorts and hotels on St. Thomas, and 11 on St. Croix are taking part in the promotion, which offers an additional free night's lodging to travelers booking a minimum four-night stay, $100 to spend as they like and coupon savings worth more than $1,000 at local restaurants, tour businesses and shops.
Room rates start as low as $89 per night, and up to two children under age 18 may stay in the same room for free. "When visitors check-in, they will receive a bucket filled with a $100 American Express Travelers Cheque and a coupon booklet full of savings," the release stated.
The promotion is valid for travel June 15-Sept. 30 booked through a participating tour operator by July 15.
The participating properties are:
St. Thomas — The Anchorage Beach Resort, Best Western Carib Beach Resort, Best Western Emerald Beach Resort, Bolongo Bay Beach Club, Crystal Cove Beach Resort, The Green Iguana Hotel, Holiday Inn Windward Passage, Mafolie Hotel, Marriott Frenchman's Reef Resort, Point Pleasant Resort, Renaissance Grand Beach Resort, Sapphire Village, Sapphire Beach Resort, Secret Harbour Beach Resort and Wyndham Sugar Bay Beach Resort.
St. Croix — Cane Bay Reef Club, Carrington's Inn St. Croix, Chenay Bay Beach Resort, Club St. Croix, Colony Cove Beach Resort, Divi Carina Bay Beach Resort, Frederiksted Hotel, Hibiscus Beach Hotel, Hotel Caravelle, Sand Castle on the Beach and The Waves at Cane Bay.
St. John — Book-It-VI (a villa rental company), The Inn at Tamarind Court and the Westin St. John Resort and Villas.

Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

May 29, 2003 – The territory's off-season tourism promotion is called the "USVI Summer Bucket of Savings," according to a release from Martin Public Relations, the government's mainland publicity agency.
Fifteen resorts and hotels on St. Thomas, 11 on St. Croix and three entities on St. John are taking part in the promotion, which offers an additional free night's lodging to travelers booking a minimum four-night stay, $100 to spend as they like and coupon savings worth more than $1,000 at local restaurants, tour businesses and shops.
Room rates start as low as $89 per night, and up to two children under age 18 may stay in the same room for free. "When visitors check-in, they will receive a bucket filled with a $100 American Express Travelers Cheque and a coupon booklet full of savings," the release stated.
The promotion is valid for travel June 15-Sept. 30 booked through a participating tour operator by July 15.
The participating properties are:
St. Thomas — The Anchorage Beach Resort, Best Western Carib Beach Resort, Best Western Emerald Beach Resort, Bolongo Bay Beach Club, Crystal Cove Beach Resort, The Green Iguana Hotel, Holiday Inn Windward Passage, Mafolie Hotel, Marriott Frenchman's Reef Resort, Point Pleasant Resort, Renaissance Grand Beach Resort, Sapphire Village, Sapphire Beach Resort, Secret Harbour Beach Resort and Wyndham Sugar Bay Beach Resort.
St. Croix — Cane Bay Reef Club, Carrington's Inn St. Croix, Chenay Bay Beach Resort, Club St. Croix, Colony Cove Beach Resort, Divi Carina Bay Beach Resort, Frederiksted Hotel, Hibiscus Beach Hotel, Hotel Caravelle, Sand Castle on the Beach and The Waves at Cane Bay.
St. John — Book-It-VI (a villa rental company), The Inn at Tamarind Court and the Westin St. John Resort and Villas.

Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

Editor's note: The following analysis tracing the evolution of the territory's present tax relationship with Congress and the U.S. Treasury is by Dr. Richard Moore, Ph.D., a V.I. economist/consultant and former chief economist for the V.I. government and director of its Bureau of Economic Research.
May 30, 2003 – Should the recent and apparently unannounced "arrival" of U.S. Treasury officials to "investigate" at least one V.I. taxpayer turn out to be more than just a training exercise for new recruits, a new and ominous chapter in V.I. relations with Congress and the Treasury Department may be unfolding.
For that reason, a short history using just a few examples of the often-contentious, mostly transparent, yet always interactive relationships between the V.I. government and both Congress and the Treasury Department on the use of tax policy to support economic development may shed some light on the complexity of these relationships.
Although much remains to be seen, the last eight years have witnessed a clear structural deterioration in the relationships between the Virgin Islands and these institutions regarding this issue.
Our story begins with Congress 'way back on June 21, 1921, when the need to generate local funding for public services in the newest U.S. possession was most urgent. The Danish West Indies had been purchased from Denmark in 1917 for $25 million to establish a U.S. Navy submarine base; hence, it was natural to assign the Navy to administer the renamed U.S. Virgin Islands. The Naval Service Appropriations Act of 1922 included the following provision creating the "mirror code" regarding taxation:
"The income-tax laws in force in the United States of America and those which may hereafter be enacted shall be held to be likewise in force in the Virgin Islands of the United States, except that the proceeds of such taxes shall be paid into the treasuries of said islands."
Residency and forgiveness
After decades of economic stagnation during the Great Depression and spirited economic growth during World War II, the 1950s were a time of debilitating quiet for the Virgin Islands, with the territory's population falling to its lowest level in modern times — 32,099 in 1960.
However, the 1950s also were a time when the seeds of our tourism industry were germinating, and investment in this industry prompted local use of tax forgiveness to attract investment as an intermittent exercise using neither publicity nor promotion.
At this time, two issues brought the Virgin Islands, Congress and the Treasury Department together: who was to be considered a V.I. resident for tax purposes, and how much freedom the territory should have in using tax forgiveness to attract investment.
Notwithstanding enactment of the Revised Organic Act of 1954, provisions of U.S. law regarding just who is and who is not a bona fide V.I. resident for tax purposes have remained ambiguous. Although I'm aware of several local professionals with standing who have requested clarification and regulations on the residency issue numerous times in the last decade, the Treasury Department has remained strategically silent and has not yet clarified this issue. This differs from the long-standing close cooperation that had generally functioned to resolve such matters whenever they occurred in the past.
In fact, language found in The Tax Reform Act of 1986, section 1274 (c) directs that: "The Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate for applying the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for purposes of determining tax liability incurred to the Virgin Islands."
"Determining tax liability to the Virgin Islands" is a reference to 26 USC Sec. 932, which provides the rules for taxing residents and non-residents of the Virgin Islands and to Sec. 934.
The "Blue Book" for the above act — the explanation of the act provided by staff of Congress's joint committee on taxation — states: "Congress expressed the desire that the Secretary of the Treasury consult as appropriate with officials of the Virgin Islands in formulating regulations for the purposes of determining tax liability incurred to the Virgin Islands."
Clearly, any post-1986 confusion over the determination of tax liability between the U.S. and V.I. governments lay with the Treasury Department's failure to act on this directive. Even with the passage of 17 years, no such consultations have ever taken place and no such regulations exist.
The tax forgiveness issue was ostensibly settled by Congress in 1960 to abate concerns that mischievous application of the practice might occur. With enactment of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 934, formal definitions set out the conditions under which income taxes could be forgiven by the local government. As an aside, there was a costly 25-year distraction, ending in 1986, over residency and income tax obligations derived from misinterpretation of Sec. 28a of the Revised Organic Act. Yet throughout this period the V.I. government and the Treasury Department worked diligently to sort out these jurisdictional tax obligations.
As the last government crop of sugar was harvested in 1964 at Estate Bethlehem on St. Croix, Harvey Alumina and Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp. were preparing to begin production and visitor arrivals by air and on cruise ships were growing at double-digit rates. To clearly and convincingly attract the largest investment in the territory's history, it appeared that accommodations were necessary.
Some taxpayers saw a need for "special" local legislation to accommodate their special circumstances. In 1966, the V.I. attorney general issued an opinion that the V.I. Legislature was not prohibited from enacting local laws granting specific corporations tax exemptions and subsidy benefits otherwise prevented by 48 U.S.C. Sec. 1471. This opinion was overturned by a U.S. Court of Appeals in 1967. However, over the years, it became painfully obvious that special legislation was, in fact, being enacted for individual taxpayers in spite of the above.
In 1983, Congress repealed this section of federal law. At least for the territories, the prohibition against special legislation was lifted.
Currently, more than 30 states prohibit the enactment of special law where general law may suffice. Yet relations between the Virgin Islands and the Treasury Department and Congress clearly warmed to meet an apparent need for the territory to be free of this burden. Whether or not public policy is best served by the result is an entirely different question; what is important is that the parties worked closely together.
Tax takeover/reform, financial services save the day, maybe
Early in the first Reagan administration, the Treasury's assistant secretary for tax policy embarked on a quest for enactment of legislation to end V.I. administration of the mirrored tax code. The objective was to engage U.S. Internal Revenue Service personnel to administer the tax code for all V.I. taxpayers. We would send our tax forms and payments to the IRS with the understanding that all proceeds would be covered over to the V.I. treasury.
Under the leadership of Gov. Juan Luis (1978-86) and in the face of a highly publicized brouhaha, the Treasury Department abandoned this position.
In 1984, the second Reagan administration generated strong support for a complete overhaul of the tax code. Luis created a Federal Tax Council and I, as the appointed chair, worked on his behalf with our private sector, the Treasury Department and Congress to resolve the territory's interest in what has come to be known as the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
Early on, the Treasury Department sought to have the mirror code abandoned for both Guam and the Virgin Islands. The Virgin Islands fought hard and successfully to retain the mirror code. Guam, on the other hand, cooperated with the Treasury Department and organized the admin istration of its own code. Within five years, however, the Treasury Department suppressed this ambition and worked with Guam to reinstate the mirror code.
Incidentally, another outcome of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was to create federally sanctioned authority for the Virgin Islands to establish a non-discriminatory income tax system alongside the mirror code. To date, that option has not been exercised.
It was during this period that the Luis administration, with assistance from attorney William Blum, the governor's former legal counsel, and the V.I. Legislature sought to utilize tax reform awareness to expand the territory's application of tax forgiveness to attract new forms of investment.
Up until this time, the existing economic development program had aimed at investment generating the production and export of commodities. With hindsight, cooperation was perfectly timed between the Luis administration and the Legislature with support from the Treasury Department to offer tax forgiveness for firms investing in the territory, creating jobs and exporting designated business services.
The telecommunications boom had not yet begun, the computer was still a toy for geeks and the Internet was still below the horizon. This prescient effort culminated with the Legislature passing and Luis signing into law Act 5224, adding designated business services and, more generally, exempt companies as eligible entities for alternative forms of industrial development program support.
On Dec. 8, 1986, the territory's post-foreign sales corporation financial services era began with the signing of Act 5224. In fact, we negotiated an implementation agreement with the Treasury Department focused on this legislation so as to minimize misinterpretation in the administration of this new industrial development opportunity. It appears that the maintenance and upkeep of this agreement has failed, given the mysterious circumstances in which we now find ourselves.
Post-Hugo deterioration and finger pointing
Succeeding governors have done little to enhance this investment/employment vehicle, aside from a program name change, establishment of a list of fees and penalties, and moderate refinement of definitions, all enacted in 2001. Private-sector business development professionals have created the interest in and the implementation of what has become the strongest — in fact, the only — sector with significant employment growth in recent years.
However, since the late 1980s the collegial relationship of the Virgin Islands with Congress and the Treasury has fallen on hard times.
Following Hurricane Hugo in 1989, the V.I. economy sputtered and fell to deteriorating underperformance, exhibiting little capacity to grow. Yet inflation and growing household needs and expectations remained. This has left growing public expenditure outpacing public-sector revenue growth, financed by tax increases. Well, yes and no. The full $1.5 billion in tax increases are being assessed not on the current generation but on future generations — in the form of long-term debt to be repaid by future taxes.
In the midst of these hard economic times, the Treasury Department and the federal government in general appear to have taken a more stand-offish/interactive approach with the territory. Although interaction continues, the traditional federal personality of supportive encouragement has been replaced by the personality of a watchful disciplinarian.
A long list of threatened interventions precipitated by federal assertions of the Virgin Islands' failure to maintain public trust periodically surface and dominate federal/territorial relations. Aside from the tepid attempt by the Treasury Department to wrest local income-tax administration from the territory in the early 1980s, it is only in the last eight years that the threat of a federal takeover or lost support in so many areas has come to dominate federal/territorial relations.
The list of federally managed/disciplined V.I. programs today includes:
– Occupational health and safety
– Roads and highways
– V.I. Customs
– Public education
– Environmental protection
– Solid waste
– Liquid waste
– V.I. prisons
A new twist of focus involves federal intervention in what are clearly and exclusively local affairs: a District Court effectively manages local property-tax administration and the U.S. Attorney's Office files suit on the awarding of a local contract using local money. The Virgin Islands' defense against growing federal intervention to supplant its management for the territory's own is becoming very expensive.
Three recent events portend more problems
Finally, in the face of growing institutional contention among the Virgin Islands, Congress and the Treasury, three events of the last two weeks may generate a worsening of the downward spiral that defines the territory's overall economic condition.
First, on May 28, President Bush signed into law a bill to reduce federal taxes by $350 billion. This legislation will of course be mirrored in the territory and will likely result in lowered local tax collections. The new law also reduces the federal tax rate on dividends and capital gains to 15 percent, thereby vastly cutting the incentives for certain service-sector businesses to establish in the Virgin Islands.
Second, Gov. Charles W. Turnbull, facing a near $150 million deficit in the current account, saw fit on May 20 to propose the territory's largest increase in taxes and fees in recent memory.
Third, the Treasury Department's "intervention" on St. Croix with Kapok Management LP, also on May 20, shutting down one of the largest of the territory's financial services firms without public comment, has frozen the capacity of this industry to grow and currently holds many would-be investors as if "deer in the headlights."
The financial services industry is now responsible for an estimated one-third of all individual tax revenues collected in the territory, and the proportion is growing. The prospect of losing the economic benefits from this industry, should the discipline be too strong, is frightening.
For 70 of the last 80 years, V.I. tax policy has been managed in an arena of institutions — the territory, Congress and the U.S. Treasury Department — such that they were simultaneously battling and cooperating to stimulate full-capacity economic growth in the Virgin Islands. In the last 10 years, however, a new era has come to define local/federal interaction on tax policy management in which discipline has replaced cooperation, and silence and middle-of-the-night assaults have replaced transparency.
As is always the case in such matters, the big losers in this new, colder environment will be those who cannot defend themselves: children, losing full access to quality educational program support and losing a growing economy to employ them, and the elderly, losing full access to quality programs supporting housing, recreation and health care.

Publisher's note : Like the St. Croix Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

Editor's note: The following analysis tracing the evolution of the territory's present tax relationship with Congress and the U.S. Treasury is by Dr. Richard Moore, Ph.D., a V.I. economist/consultant and former chief economist for the V.I. government and director of its Bureau of Economic Research.
May 30, 2003 – Should the recent and apparently unannounced "arrival" of U.S. Treasury officials to "investigate" at least one V.I. taxpayer turn out to be more than just a training exercise for new recruits, a new and ominous chapter in V.I. relations with Congress and the Treasury Department may be unfolding.
For that reason, a short history using just a few examples of the often-contentious, mostly transparent, yet always interactive relationships between the V.I. government and both Congress and the Treasury Department on the use of tax policy to support economic development may shed some light on the complexity of these relationships.
Although much remains to be seen, the last eight years have witnessed a clear structural deterioration in the relationships between the Virgin Islands and these institutions regarding this issue.
Our story begins with Congress 'way back on June 21, 1921, when the need to generate local funding for public services in the newest U.S. possession was most urgent. The Danish West Indies had been purchased from Denmark in 1917 for $25 million to establish a U.S. Navy submarine base; hence, it was natural to assign the Navy to administer the renamed U.S. Virgin Islands. The Naval Service Appropriations Act of 1922 included the following provision creating the "mirror code" regarding taxation:
"The income-tax laws in force in the United States of America and those which may hereafter be enacted shall be held to be likewise in force in the Virgin Islands of the United States, except that the proceeds of such taxes shall be paid into the treasuries of said islands."
Residency and forgiveness
After decades of economic stagnation during the Great Depression and spirited economic growth during World War II, the 1950s were a time of debilitating quiet for the Virgin Islands, with the territory's population falling to its lowest level in modern times — 32,099 in 1960.
However, the 1950s also were a time when the seeds of our tourism industry were germinating, and investment in this industry prompted local use of tax forgiveness to attract investment as an intermittent exercise using neither publicity nor promotion.
At this time, two issues brought the Virgin Islands, Congress and the Treasury Department together: who was to be considered a V.I. resident for tax purposes, and how much freedom the territory should have in using tax forgiveness to attract investment.
Notwithstanding enactment of the Revised Organic Act of 1954, provisions of U.S. law regarding just who is and who is not a bona fide V.I. resident for tax purposes have remained ambiguous. Although I'm aware of several local professionals with standing who have requested clarification and regulations on the residency issue numerous times in the last decade, the Treasury Department has remained strategically silent and has not yet clarified this issue. This differs from the long-standing close cooperation that had generally functioned to resolve such matters whenever they occurred in the past.
In fact, language found in The Tax Reform Act of 1986, section 1274 (c) directs that: "The Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate for applying the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for purposes of determining tax liability incurred to the Virgin Islands."
"Determining tax liability to the Virgin Islands" is a reference to 26 USC Sec. 932, which provides the rules for taxing residents and non-residents of the Virgin Islands and to Sec. 934.
The "Blue Book" for the above act — the explanation of the act provided by staff of Congress's joint committee on taxation — states: "Congress expressed the desire that the Secretary of the Treasury consult as appropriate with officials of the Virgin Islands in formulating regulations for the purposes of determining tax liability incurred to the Virgin Islands."
Clearly, any post-1986 confusion over the determination of tax liability between the U.S. and V.I. governments lay with the Treasury Department's failure to act on this directive. Even with the passage of 17 years, no such consultations have ever taken place and no such regulations exist.
The tax forgiveness issue was ostensibly settled by Congress in 1960 to abate concerns that mischievous application of the practice might occur. With enactment of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 934, formal definitions set out the conditions under which income taxes could be forgiven by the local government. As an aside, there was a costly 25-year distraction, ending in 1986, over residency and income tax obligations derived from misinterpretation of Sec. 28a of the Revised Organic Act. Yet throughout this period the V.I. government and the Treasury Department worked diligently to sort out these jurisdictional tax obligations.
As the last government crop of sugar was harvested in 1964 at Estate Bethlehem on St. Croix, Harvey Alumina and Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp. were preparing to begin production and visitor arrivals by air and on cruise ships were growing at double-digit rates. To clearly and convincingly attract the largest investment in the territory's history, it appeared that accommodations were necessary.
Some taxpayers saw a need for "special" local legislation to accommodate their special circumstances. In 1966, the V.I. attorney general issued an opinion that the V.I. Legislature was not prohibited from enacting local laws granting specific corporations tax exemptions and subsidy benefits otherwise prevented by 48 U.S.C. Sec. 1471. This opinion was overturned by a U.S. Court of Appeals in 1967. However, over the years, it became painfully obvious that special legislation was, in fact, being enacted for individual taxpayers in spite of the above.
In 1983, Congress repealed this section of federal law. At least for the territories, the prohibition against special legislation was lifted.
Currently, more than 30 states prohibit the enactment of special law where general law may suffice. Yet relations between the Virgin Islands and the Treasury Department and Congress clearly warmed to meet an apparent need for the territory to be free of this burden. Whether or not public policy is best served by the result is an entirely different question; what is important is that the parties worked closely together.
Tax takeover/reform, financial services save the day, maybe
Early in the first Reagan administration, the Treasury's assistant secretary for tax policy embarked on a quest for enactment of legislation to end V.I. administration of the mirrored tax code. The objective was to engage U.S. Internal Revenue Service personnel to administer the tax code for all V.I. taxpayers. We would send our tax forms and payments to the IRS with the understanding that all proceeds would be covered over to the V.I. treasury.
Under the leadership of Gov. Juan Luis (1978-86) and in the face of a highly publicized brouhaha, the Treasury Department abandoned this position.
In 1984, the second Reagan administration generated strong support for a complete overhaul of the tax code. Luis created a Federal Tax Council and I, as the appointed chair, worked on his behalf with our private sector, the Treasury Department and Congress to resolve the territory's interest in what has come to be known as the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
Early on, the Treasury Department sought to have the mirror code abandoned for both Guam and the Virgin Islands. The Virgin Islands fought hard and successfully to retain the mirror code. Guam, on the other hand, cooperated with the Treasury Department and organized the admin istration of its own code. Within five years, however, the Treasury Department suppressed this ambition and worked with Guam to reinstate the mirror code.
Incidentally, another outcome of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was to create federally sanctioned authority for the Virgin Islands to establish a non-discriminatory income tax system alongside the mirror code. To date, that option has not been exercised.
It was during this period that the Luis administration, with assistance from attorney William Blum, the governor's former legal counsel, and the V.I. Legislature sought to utilize tax reform awareness to expand the territory's application of tax forgiveness to attract new forms of investment.
Up until this time, the existing economic development program had aimed at investment generating the production and export of commodities. With hindsight, cooperation was perfectly timed between the Luis administration and the Legislature with support from the Treasury Department to offer tax forgiveness for firms investing in the territory, creating jobs and exporting designated business services.
The telecommunications boom had not yet begun, the computer was still a toy for geeks and the Internet was still below the horizon. This prescient effort culminated with the Legislature passing and Luis signing into law Act 5224, adding designated business services and, more generally, exempt companies as eligible entities for alternative forms of industrial development program support.
On Dec. 8, 1986, the territory's post-foreign sales corporation financial services era began with the signing of Act 5224. In fact, we negotiated an implementation agreement with the Treasury Department focused on this legislation so as to minimize misinterpretation in the administration of this new industrial development opportunity. It appears that the maintenance and upkeep of this agreement has failed, given the mysterious circumstances in which we now find ourselves.
Post-Hugo deterioration and finger pointing
Succeeding governors have done little to enhance this investment/employment vehicle, aside from a program name change, establishment of a list of fees and penalties, and moderate refinement of definitions, all enacted in 2001. Private-sector business development professionals have created the interest in and the implementation of what has become the strongest — in fact, the only — sector with significant employment growth in recent years.
However, since the late 1980s the collegial relationship of the Virgin Islands with Congress and the Treasury has fallen on hard times.
Following Hurricane Hugo in 1989, the V.I. economy sputtered and fell to deteriorating underperformance, exhibiting little capacity to grow. Yet inflation and growing household needs and expectations remained. This has left growing public expenditure outpacing public-sector revenue growth, financed by tax increases. Well, yes and no. The full $1.5 billion in tax increases are being assessed not on the current generation but on future generations — in the form of long-term debt to be repaid by future taxes.
In the midst of these hard economic times, the Treasury Department and the federal government in general appear to have taken a more stand-offish/interactive approach with the territory. Although interaction continues, the traditional federal personality of supportive encouragement has been replaced by the personality of a watchful disciplinarian.
A long list of threatened interventions precipitated by federal assertions of the Virgin Islands' failure to maintain public trust periodically surface and dominate federal/territorial relations. Aside from the tepid attempt by the Treasury Department to wrest local income-tax administration from the territory in the early 1980s, it is only in the last eight years that the threat of a federal takeover or lost support in so many areas has come to dominate federal/territorial relations.
The list of federally managed/disciplined V.I. programs today includes:
– Occupational health and safety
– Roads and highways
– V.I. Customs
– Public education
– Environmental protection
– Solid waste
– Liquid waste
– V.I. prisons
A new twist of focus involves federal intervention in what are clearly and exclusively local affairs: a District Court effectively manages local property-tax administration and the U.S. Attorney's Office files suit on the awarding of a local contract using local money. The Virgin Islands' defense against growing federal intervention to supplant its management for the territory's own is becoming very expensive.
Three recent events portend more problems
Finally, in the face of growing institutional contention among the Virgin Islands, Congress and the Treasury, three events of the last two weeks may generate a worsening of the downward spiral that defines the territory's overall economic condition.
First, on May 28, President Bush signed into law a bill to reduce federal taxes by $350 billion. This legislation will of course be mirrored in the territory and will likely result in lowered local tax collections. The new law also reduces the federal tax rate on dividends and capital gains to 15 percent, thereby vastly cutting the incentives for certain service-sector businesses to establish in the Virgin Islands.
Second, Gov. Charles W. Turnbull, facing a near $150 million deficit in the current account, saw fit on May 20 to propose the territory's largest increase in taxes and fees in recent memory.
Third, the Treasury Department's "intervention" on St. Croix with Kapok Management LP, also on May 20, shutting down one of the largest of the territory's financial services firms without public comment, has frozen the capacity of this industry to grow and currently holds many would-be investors as if "deer in the headlights."
The financial services industry is now responsible for an estimated one-third of all individual tax revenues collected in the territory, and the proportion is growing. The prospect of losing the economic benefits from this industry, should the discipline be too strong, is frightening.
For 70 of the last 80 years, V.I. tax policy has been managed in an arena of institutions — the territory, Congress and the U.S. Treasury Department — such that they were simultaneously battling and cooperating to stimulate full-capacity economic growth in the Virgin Islands. In the last 10 years, however, a new era has come to define local/federal interaction on tax policy management in which discipline has replaced cooperation, and silence and middle-of-the-night assaults have replaced transparency.
As is always the case in such matters, the big losers in this new, colder environment will be those who cannot defend themselves: children, losing full access to quality educational program support and losing a growing economy to employ them, and the elderly, losing full access to quality programs supporting housing, recreation and health care.

Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

Editor's note: The following analysis tracing the evolution of the territory's present tax relationship with Congress and the U.S. Treasury is by Dr. Richard Moore, Ph.D., a V.I. economist/consultant and former chief economist for the V.I. government and director of its Bureau of Economic Research.
May 30, 2003 – Should the recent and apparently unannounced "arrival" of U.S. Treasury officials to "investigate" at least one V.I. taxpayer turn out to be more than just a training exercise for new recruits, a new and ominous chapter in V.I. relations with Congress and the Treasury Department may be unfolding.
For that reason, a short history using just a few examples of the often-contentious, mostly transparent, yet always interactive relationships between the V.I. government and both Congress and the Treasury Department on the use of tax policy to support economic development may shed some light on the complexity of these relationships.
Although much remains to be seen, the last eight years have witnessed a clear structural deterioration in the relationships between the Virgin Islands and these institutions regarding this issue.
Our story begins with Congress 'way back on June 21, 1921, when the need to generate local funding for public services in the newest U.S. possession was most urgent. The Danish West Indies had been purchased from Denmark in 1917 for $25 million to establish a U.S. Navy submarine base; hence, it was natural to assign the Navy to administer the renamed U.S. Virgin Islands. The Naval Service Appropriations Act of 1922 included the following provision creating the "mirror code" regarding taxation:
"The income-tax laws in force in the United States of America and those which may hereafter be enacted shall be held to be likewise in force in the Virgin Islands of the United States, except that the proceeds of such taxes shall be paid into the treasuries of said islands."
Residency and forgiveness
After decades of economic stagnation during the Great Depression and spirited economic growth during World War II, the 1950s were a time of debilitating quiet for the Virgin Islands, with the territory's population falling to its lowest level in modern times — 32,099 in 1960.
However, the 1950s also were a time when the seeds of our tourism industry were germinating, and investment in this industry prompted local use of tax forgiveness to attract investment as an intermittent exercise using neither publicity nor promotion.
At this time, two issues brought the Virgin Islands, Congress and the Treasury Department together: who was to be considered a V.I. resident for tax purposes, and how much freedom the territory should have in using tax forgiveness to attract investment.
Notwithstanding enactment of the Revised Organic Act of 1954, provisions of U.S. law regarding just who is and who is not a bona fide V.I. resident for tax purposes have remained ambiguous. Although I'm aware of several local professionals with standing who have requested clarification and regulations on the residency issue numerous times in the last decade, the Treasury Department has remained strategically silent and has not yet clarified this issue. This differs from the long-standing close cooperation that had generally functioned to resolve such matters whenever they occurred in the past.
In fact, language found in The Tax Reform Act of 1986, section 1274 (c) directs that: "The Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate for applying the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for purposes of determining tax liability incurred to the Virgin Islands."
"Determining tax liability to the Virgin Islands" is a reference to 26 USC Sec. 932, which provides the rules for taxing residents and non-residents of the Virgin Islands and to Sec. 934.
The "Blue Book" for the above act — the explanation of the act provided by staff of Congress's joint committee on taxation — states: "Congress expressed the desire that the Secretary of the Treasury consult as appropriate with officials of the Virgin Islands in formulating regulations for the purposes of determining tax liability incurred to the Virgin Islands."
Clearly, any post-1986 confusion over the determination of tax liability between the U.S. and V.I. governments lay with the Treasury Department's failure to act on this directive. Even with the passage of 17 years, no such consultations have ever taken place and no such regulations exist.
The tax forgiveness issue was ostensibly settled by Congress in 1960 to abate concerns that mischievous application of the practice might occur. With enactment of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 934, formal definitions set out the conditions under which income taxes could be forgiven by the local government. As an aside, there was a costly 25-year distraction, ending in 1986, over residency and income tax obligations derived from misinterpretation of Sec. 28a of the Revised Organic Act. Yet throughout this period the V.I. government and the Treasury Department worked diligently to sort out these jurisdictional tax obligations.
As the last government crop of sugar was harvested in 1964 at Estate Bethlehem on St. Croix, Harvey Alumina and Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp. were preparing to begin production and visitor arrivals by air and on cruise ships were growing at double-digit rates. To clearly and convincingly attract the largest investment in the territory's history, it appeared that accommodations were necessary.
Some taxpayers saw a need for "special" local legislation to accommodate their special circumstances. In 1966, the V.I. attorney general issued an opinion that the V.I. Legislature was not prohibited from enacting local laws granting specific corporations tax exemptions and subsidy benefits otherwise prevented by 48 U.S.C. Sec. 1471. This opinion was overturned by a U.S. Court of Appeals in 1967. However, over the years, it became painfully obvious that special legislation was, in fact, being enacted for individual taxpayers in spite of the above.
In 1983, Congress repealed this section of federal law. At least for the territories, the prohibition against special legislation was lifted.
Currently, more than 30 states prohibit the enactment of special law where general law may suffice. Yet relations between the Virgin Islands and the Treasury Department and Congress clearly warmed to meet an apparent need for the territory to be free of this burden. Whether or not public policy is best served by the result is an entirely different question; what is important is that the parties worked closely together.
Tax takeover/reform, financial services save the day, maybe
Early in the first Reagan administration, the Treasury's assistant secretary for tax policy embarked on a quest for enactment of legislation to end V.I. administration of the mirrored tax code. The objective was to engage U.S. Internal Revenue Service personnel to administer the tax code for all V.I. taxpayers. We would send our tax forms and payments to the IRS with the understanding that all proceeds would be covered over to the V.I. treasury.
Under the leadership of Gov. Juan Luis (1978-86) and in the face of a highly publicized brouhaha, the Treasury Department abandoned this position.
In 1984, the second Reagan administration generated strong support for a complete overhaul of the tax code. Luis created a Federal Tax Council and I, as the appointed chair, worked on his behalf with our private sector, the Treasury Department and Congress to resolve the territory's interest in what has come to be known as the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
Early on, the Treasury Department sought to have the mirror code abandoned for both Guam and the Virgin Islands. The Virgin Islands fought hard and successfully to retain the mirror code. Guam, on the other hand, cooperated with the Treasury Department and organized the admin istration of its own code. Within five years, however, the Treasury Department suppressed this ambition and worked with Guam to reinstate the mirror code.
Incidentally, another outcome of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was to create federally sanctioned authority for the Virgin Islands to establish a non-discriminatory income tax system alongside the mirror code. To date, that option has not been exercised.
It was during this period that the Luis administration, with assistance from attorney William Blum, the governor's former legal counsel, and the V.I. Legislature sought to utilize tax reform awareness to expand the territory's application of tax forgiveness to attract new forms of investment.
Up until this time, the existing economic development program had aimed at investment generating the production and export of commodities. With hindsight, cooperation was perfectly timed between the Luis administration and the Legislature with support from the Treasury Department to offer tax forgiveness for firms investing in the territory, creating jobs and exporting designated business services.
The telecommunications boom had not yet begun, the computer was still a toy for geeks and the Internet was still below the horizon. This prescient effort culminated with the Legislature passing and Luis signing into law Act 5224, adding designated business services and, more generally, exempt companies as eligible entities for alternative forms of industrial development program support.
On Dec. 8, 1986, the territory's post-foreign sales corporation financial services era began with the signing of Act 5224. In fact, we negotiated an implementation agreement with the Treasury Department focused on this legislation so as to minimize misinterpretation in the administration of this new industrial development opportunity. It appears that the maintenance and upkeep of this agreement has failed, given the mysterious circumstances in which we now find ourselves.
Post-Hugo deterioration and finger pointing
Succeeding governors have done little to enhance this investment/employment vehicle, aside from a program name change, establishment of a list of fees and penalties, and moderate refinement of definitions, all enacted in 2001. Private-sector business development professionals have created the interest in and the implementation of what has become the strongest — in fact, the only — sector with significant employment growth in recent years.
However, since the late 1980s the collegial relationship of the Virgin Islands with Congress and the Treasury has fallen on hard times.
Following Hurricane Hugo in 1989, the V.I. economy sputtered and fell to deteriorating underperformance, exhibiting little capacity to grow. Yet inflation and growing household needs and expectations remained. This has left growing public expenditure outpacing public-sector revenue growth, financed by tax increases. Well, yes and no. The full $1.5 billion in tax increases are being assessed not on the current generation but on future generations — in the form of long-term debt to be repaid by future taxes.
In the midst of these hard economic times, the Treasury Department and the federal government in general appear to have taken a more stand-offish/interactive approach with the territory. Although interaction continues, the traditional federal personality of supportive encouragement has been replaced by the personality of a watchful disciplinarian.
A long list of threatened interventions precipitated by federal assertions of the Virgin Islands' failure to maintain public trust periodically surface and dominate federal/territorial relations. Aside from the tepid attempt by the Treasury Department to wrest local income-tax administration from the territory in the early 1980s, it is only in the last eight years that the threat of a federal takeover or lost support in so many areas has come to dominate federal/territorial relations.
The list of federally managed/disciplined V.I. programs today includes:
– Occupational health and safety
– Roads and highways
– V.I. Customs
– Public education
– Environmental protection
– Solid waste
– Liquid waste
– V.I. prisons
A new twist of focus involves federal intervention in what are clearly and exclusively local affairs: a District Court effectively manages local property-tax administration and the U.S. Attorney's Office files suit on the awarding of a local contract using local money. The Virgin Islands' defense against growing federal intervention to supplant its management for the territory's own is becoming very expensive.
Three recent events portend more problems
Finally, in the face of growing institutional contention among the Virgin Islands, Congress and the Treasury, three events of the last two weeks may generate a worsening of the downward spiral that defines the territory's overall economic condition.
First, on May 28, President Bush signed into law a bill to reduce federal taxes by $350 billion. This legislation will of course be mirrored in the territory and will likely result in lowered local tax collections. The new law also reduces the federal tax rate on dividends and capital gains to 15 percent, thereby vastly cutting the incentives for certain service-sector businesses to establish in the Virgin Islands.
Second, Gov. Charles W. Turnbull, facing a near $150 million deficit in the current account, saw fit on May 20 to propose the territory's largest increase in taxes and fees in recent memory.
Third, the Treasury Department's "intervention" on St. Croix with Kapok Management LP, also on May 20, shutting down one of the largest of the territory's financial services firms without public comment, has frozen the capacity of this industry to grow and currently holds many would-be investors as if "deer in the headlights."
The financial services industry is now responsible for an estimated one-third of all individual tax revenues collected in the territory, and the proportion is growing. The prospect of losing the economic benefits from this industry, should the discipline be too strong, is frightening.
For 70 of the last 80 years, V.I. tax policy has been managed in an arena of institutions — the territory, Congress and the U.S. Treasury Department — such that they were simultaneously battling and cooperating to stimulate full-capacity economic growth in the Virgin Islands. In the last 10 years, however, a new era has come to define local/federal interaction on tax policy management in which discipline has replaced cooperation, and silence and middle-of-the-night assaults have replaced transparency.
As is always the case in such matters, the big losers in this new, colder environment will be those who cannot defend themselves: children, losing full access to quality educational program support and losing a growing economy to employ them, and the elderly, losing full access to quality programs supporting housing, recreation and health care.

Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

May 30, 2003 – Members of the 25th Legislature are looking at a busy week ahead even though only one committee meeting is scheduled. That one meeting, on Thursday, is of the Finance Committee, and its focus will be wholly on what to do about the territory's fiscal crisis.
Sen. Douglas Canton, majority leader, and Sen. Raymond "Usie" Richards, minority leader, said in a joint release that the two blocs have pledged to work together "to review and assess the merit" of the six bills submitted by governor last week to address the financial crunch.
The 18 pages worth of bills, delivered to the Legislature late on the night of May 20, constituted the agenda of the special session called by Gov. Charles W. Turnbull for May 22. At the end of that 11-hour session, the Senate voted to send all of the measures to the Finance Committee, where they would have been taken up in the first place, had the governor submitted them in the normal manner instead of calling a special session.
"All senators, majority and minority members, are committed to meeting from now through June 5th to discuss, propose and strategize solutions for the critical state of government revenues vis à vis expenditures," Canton said in the release issued Thursday.
Saying that projected budget shortfalls have "reached crisis proportions," he called on his colleagues to "join together to structure a plan which is two-fold — a remedy to quickly address the immediate problem and a review of the government's operations with an eye to averting any such state of disaster in the future."
Richards as leader of the Minority Caucus had tried from January to get Senate President David Jones to call a Committee of the Whole meeting to take testimony from administration financial officials in an effort to learn just how serious the situation was. Richards said in the release that addressing the territory's financial status "requires the participation and working together of all members of the 25th Legislature to plan for our fiscal recovery."
Turnbull's borrow, tax and spend proposals. notable for an absence of reductions in government costs, have been met with hostility the by business community and prominent political leaders, including Delegate Donna M. Christensen and the Finance Committee chair, Sen. Adlah "Foncie" Donastorg. For a summary of what the governor has proposed, see "Outline of bills submitted to special session".

Publisher's note : Like the St. Croix Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

May 30, 2003 – Members of the 25th Legislature are looking at a busy week ahead even though only one committee meeting is scheduled. That one meeting, on Thursday, is of the Finance Committee, and its focus will be wholly on what to do about the territory's fiscal crisis.
Sen. Douglas Canton, majority leader, and Sen. Raymond "Usie" Richards, minority leader, said in a joint release that the two blocs have pledged to work together "to review and assess the merit" of the six bills submitted by governor last week to address the financial crunch.
The 18 pages worth of bills, delivered to the Legislature late on the night of May 20, constituted the agenda of the special session called by Gov. Charles W. Turnbull for May 22. At the end of that 11-hour session, the Senate voted to send all of the measures to the Finance Committee, where they would have been taken up in the first place, had the governor submitted them in the normal manner instead of calling a special session.
"All senators, majority and minority members, are committed to meeting from now through June 5th to discuss, propose and strategize solutions for the critical state of government revenues vis à vis expenditures," Canton said in the release issued Thursday.
Saying that projected budget shortfalls have "reached crisis proportions," he called on his colleagues to "join together to structure a plan which is two-fold — a remedy to quickly address the immediate problem and a review of the government's operations with an eye to averting any such state of disaster in the future."
Richards as leader of the Minority Caucus had tried from January to get Senate President David Jones to call a Committee of the Whole meeting to take testimony from administration financial officials in an effort to learn just how serious the situation was. Richards said in the release that addressing the territory's financial status "requires the participation and working together of all members of the 25th Legislature to plan for our fiscal recovery."
Turnbull's borrow, tax and spend proposals. notable for an absence of reductions in government costs, have been met with hostility the by business community and prominent political leaders, including Delegate Donna M. Christensen and the Finance Committee chair, Sen. Adlah "Foncie" Donastorg. For a summary of what the governor has proposed, see "Outline of bills submitted to special session".

Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

May 30, 2003 – Members of the 25th Legislature are looking at a busy week ahead even though only one committee meeting is scheduled. That one meeting, on Thursday, is of the Finance Committee, and its focus will be wholly on what to do about the territory's fiscal crisis.
Sen. Douglas Canton, majority leader, and Sen. Raymond "Usie" Richards, minority leader, said in a joint release that the two blocs have pledged to work together "to review and assess the merit" of the six bills submitted by governor last week to address the financial crunch.
The 18 pages worth of bills, delivered to the Legislature late on the night of May 20, constituted the agenda of the special session called by Gov. Charles W. Turnbull for May 22. At the end of that 11-hour session, the Senate voted to send all of the measures to the Finance Committee, where they would have been taken up in the first place, had the governor submitted them in the normal manner instead of calling a special session.
"All senators, majority and minority members, are committed to meeting from now through June 5th to discuss, propose and strategize solutions for the critical state of government revenues vis à vis expenditures," Canton said in the release issued Thursday.
Saying that projected budget shortfalls have "reached crisis proportions," he called on his colleagues to "join together to structure a plan which is two-fold — a remedy to quickly address the immediate problem and a review of the government's operations with an eye to averting any such state of disaster in the future."
Richards as leader of the Minority Caucus had tried from January to get Senate President David Jones to call a Committee of the Whole meeting to take testimony from administration financial officials in an effort to learn just how serious the situation was. Richards said in the release that addressing the territory's financial status "requires the participation and working together of all members of the 25th Legislature to plan for our fiscal recovery."
Turnbull's borrow, tax and spend proposals. notable for an absence of reductions in government costs, have been met with hostility the by business community and prominent political leaders, including Delegate Donna M. Christensen and the Finance Committee chair, Sen. Adlah "Foncie" Donastorg. For a summary of what the governor has proposed, see "Outline of bills submitted to special session".

Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.

Editor's note: The Source newspapers will publish available information about Virgin Islanders on military duty in the Middle East and across the world.
Please e-mail information about yourself or any family member serving to source@viaccess.net. Provide the individual's full name, age, rank, service branch or organization, home island, immediate family members in the Virgin Islands, brief description of education and training, and, if possible, a description of where the person is based or has been deployed. We welcome photos.
Army Capt. Helen Thomas / St. Croix
May 30, 2003 — Army Captain Helen A. (Lake) Thomas, FC Commanding, reports by e-mail that she is presently serving as a commander in the U.S. Army at Camp Casey, Korea. She has been in the Army for 13 years. Thomas has a bachelor's degree in finance and a master's in human resource development.
Thomas, born in Christiansted and a 1984 graduate of Central High School, is the daughter of Edmund Lake and the late Ireta Lake. and sister of Omah Otto, all of Campo Rico, St. Croix.
Navy Seaman Marcus A. Lee / St. Croix
May 28, 2003 (Fleet News) — Navy Seaman Marcus A. Lee, son of Joanna Leon of Frederiksted, recently returned from the Mediterranean Sea and Arabian Gulf while assigned to Sea Control Squadron 22. The unit was embarked aboard the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman, homeported in Norfolk, Va.
Lee was one of more than 8,000 Atlantic Fleet Sailors and Marines assigned to the ships and squadrons of the USS Harry S. Truman Carrier Battle Group who participated in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. Aviators flew 1,280 sorties off the deck of USS Harry S. Truman, accumulating more than 5,700 flight hours and expending more than one million pounds of ordnance.
Based at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Fla., Lee's squadron flies the S-3B Viking, a multi-purpose jet aircraft capable of long-range surveillance of shipping, air-to-air refueling, locating and destroying enemy submarines, and other missions as required.
Navy Chief Petty Officer Robert E. Lake / St. Croix
May 28, 2003 (Fleet News) — Navy Chief Petty Officer Robert E. Lake, son of Delores E. Lake of Christiansted, recently returned from a six-month deployment to the Mediterranean Sea and Arabian Gulf while assigned to the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman, homeported in Norfolk, Va.
Lake joined the Navy in September 1979.
Marine Corps Sgt. Ezekiel Turpin / St. Thomas
May 27, 2003 (Fleet News) — Marine Corps Sgt. Ezekiel S. Turpin, son of Monica Turpin of St. Thomas and Robert Turpin of Prescott, Ariz., recently returned from a deployment to the Arabian Gulf while assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 323, based at Miramar, Calif. The squadron was embarked aboard the aircraft carrier USS Constellation, which is homeported in San Diego, Calif.
Turpin was one of more than 8,000 Pacific Fleet Marines and Sailors aboard the ships of the USS Constellation Carrier Battle Group. Aviators flew 1,300 sorties off USS Constellation's flight deck, accumulating more than 4,000 flight hours and expending more than one million pounds of ordnance. Turpin's squadron flies the F/A-18C Hornet, a twin-engine supersonic strike fighter which features an all-weather intercept and ground attack capability.
Turpin, a 1993 graduate of Prescott High School, joined the Marine Corps in March 1999.
Navy Seaman Louise Hanley / St. Croix
May 23, 2003 (Fleet Home Town News) — Navy Seaman Louise C. Hanley, daughter of Alfred and Wendell Hanley of Frederiksted, recently made a port visit to Manama, Bahrain, while on a six-month deployment to the Western Pacific and Arabian Gulf while assigned to the amphibious assault ship USS Tarawa, homeported in San Diego.
Hanley is one of more than 4,000 Pacific Fleet Sailors and Marines aboard the ships of the Tarawa Amphibious Ready Group. Prior to the port visit, she was part of a coalition amphibious force that participated in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Sailors and Marines aboard Hanley's ship had the opportunity to shop, go sightseeing, and enjoy the local culture and cuisine.
USS Tarawa supports amphibious operations using landing craft air cushions which are specially designed hovercraft to deliver vehicles and equipment. The ship also has conventional landing craft and helicopters, and is equipped with medical facilities staffed by Navy doctors, dentists, nurses and corpsmen.
Hanley is a 2000 graduate of Freewill Baptist High School of Frederiksted. She joined the Navy in August 2001.
Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Steve A. Hodge / St. Thomas
May 23, 2003 (Fleet News) — Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Steve A. Hodge, son of Ola M. Hodge of St. Thomas, recently made a port visit to Manama, Bahrain while on a six-month deployment to the Western Pacific and Arabian Gulf while assigned to the amphibious assault ship USS Tarawa.
Hodge is one of more than 4,000 Pacific Fleet Sailors and Marines aboard the ships of the Tarawa Amphibious Ready Group. Prior to the port visit, he was part of a coalition amphibious force that participated in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Hodge also enjoyed the same shore leave as Hanley, above.
Hodge joined the Navy in January 1990.
Army Pvt. Nicky Titre / St. Thomas
May 19, 2003 (Army & Air Force Hometown News) — Army Pvt. Nicky V. Titre. A 1996 graduate of Charlotte Amalie High School has graduated from the utilities equipment repairer advanced individual training course at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, Md.
Titre learned to perform maintenance, test, repair, adjust, and inspect gasoline engine systems, utility equipment and special purpose support systems, including: bottle cleaning/ charging stations, air conditioning electrical and vapor systems, refrigeration unit electrical systems, portable heater fuel/ electrical systems, and fire extinguisher rechargers and valves.
Titre is the brother of Jennifer V. Gabriel of St. Thomas.
Navy Airman Apprentice Benjamin J. Dudley / St. Thomas
May 15, 2003(Fleet News) — Navy Airman Apprentice Benjamin J. Dudley, son of
Adriane J. Dudley of St. Thomas, recently completed U.S. Navy basic training at Recruit Training Command, Great Lakes, Ill.
During the eight-week program, Dudley completed a variety of training on naval customs, first aid, fire fighting, water safety and survival, and shipboard and aircraft safety. An emphasis was also placed on physical fitness.
The capstone event of boot camp is the "Battle Stations" exercise.
Army Pvt. Angie A. Estien / St. Croix
May 13, 2003 (Army & Air Force Hometown News) — Army Pvt. Angie A. Estien, daughter of Lidia Quinones of St. Croix, has graduated from basic combat training at Fort Jackson, Columbia, S.C.
During the nine weeks of training, Estien studied the Army mission, history, tradition and core values, physical fitness, and received instruction and practice in basic combat skills, military weapons, chemical warfare and bayonet training, drill and ceremony, marching, rifle marksmanship, armed and unarmed combat, map reading, field tactics, military courtesy, military justice system, basic first aid, foot marches, and field training exercises.
Navy Seaman Recruit Sherlow Brooks / St. Thomas
May 13, 2003(Fleet News) — Navy Seaman Recruit Sherlow R. Brooks, son of Doreth B. Gumbs of St. Thomas, recently completed U.S. Navy basic training at Recruit Training Command, Great Lakes, Ill.
During the eight-week program, Brooks completed a variety of training on naval customs, first aid, fire fighting, water safety and survival, and shipboard and aircraft safety. An emphasis was also placed on physical fitness. The capstone event of boot camp is the "Battle Stations" exercise.
Navy Senior Chief Leroy Anthony James / St. Croix
May 8, 2003 – LeRoy Anthony James of 142 Strawberry Hill has een promoted to th e rank of Dental Technician Senior Chief. He is currently stationed aboard the USS BlueRidge, homeport Yokosuka, Japan.
He is the husband of Merlene C. James (formerly DeWindt). He has two son: DuJuan, 11, and Brandon, 9. Just wanted everyone to share in our happiness and his success in the United States Navy. (E-mail received from Leroy A. James.)
Marine Corps Pfc. Karl C. A. Brodie / St. Thomas
May 7, 2003 (Fleet Home Town News) – Marine Corps Pfc. Karl C. A. Brodie, a 2001 graduate of Ivanna Eudora Kean High School, is currently deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom while assigned to the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, based in Camp Lejeune, N.C. Brodie is one of more than 4,000 Pacific Fleet Sailors and Marines who deployed aboard the ships of the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group.
The majority of Marines and Sailors in Brodie's unit have safely returned to the ships of the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group from Mosul, Iraq, as Operation Iraqi Freedom continues to transition to humanitarian missions.
Brodie's unit is an expeditionary intervention force with the ability to rapidly organize for combat operations in virtually any environment. MEUs are divided into an infantry battalion, aircraft squadron, support group and command element. With this combination, Brodie's unit supplies and sustains itself for quick mission accomplishment and for clearing the way for follow-on forces.
Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Ivan McClean Jr. / St. Thomas
May 5, 2003 (Fleet Home Town News) — Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Ivan McClean Jr., son of Joan C. McClean and Ivan McClean Sr. of St. Thomas recently reported for duty at Naval Air Facility, Key West, Fla.
McClean joined the Navy in March 1998.
Editor's note: For military news prior to May 2003, see earlier articles in the People section.

Publisher's note : Like the St. Croix Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.