The Effects of Military Base Closures on Local Communities: A Short-Term Perspective


Book Description

Amid the decline in defense spending following the end of the Cold War, military base closures have prompted some of the most vocal public concerns. Public expectations of the impact often verge on the apocalyptic, and economic forecasts of the local effects seem to bolster such fears. While many studies have been done on the closure and revitalization process, little new work has been done on the immediate economic impacts of base closures since the wave of closures after the Vietnam War. This study examined the experience of the communities surrounding three of the largest bases closed in California since 1988. The bases were selected due to their large presence in the local community and to the fact that the communities were sufficiently isolated geographically that the effects could be expected to be both severe and measurable. The study used a case-study approach to examine the impact on nearby communities of three base closures: George Air Force Base (AFB), located in San Bernardino County, which closed in December 1992; Fort Ord, located in Monterey County, which closed in September 1994; Castle Air Force Base, located in Merced County, which was slated for closure in 1995 and from which 65 percent of its uniformed personnel had been vacated by October 1994. To assess the impact of base closures on local communities, the study used nine measures-two centering on changes in population, four on changes in employment, and three on changes in the housing market. The study investigated how the closures impacted the size of the total population in nearby communities and the size of those communities' school enrollments. It looked at the size of neighboring communities' labor forces, their unemployment rates, their taxable retail sales, and their municipal revenues.







Salvaging Community


Book Description

American communities face serious challenges when military bases close. But affected municipalities and metro regions are not doomed. Taking a long-term, flexible, and incremental approach, Michael Touchton and Amanda J. Ashley make strong recommendations for collaborative models of governance that can improve defense conversion dramatically and ensure benefits, even for low-resource municipalities. Communities can't control their economic situation or geographic location, but, as Salvaging Community shows, communities can control how they govern conversion processes geared toward redevelopment and reinvention. In Salvaging Community, Touchton and Ashley undertake a comprehensive evaluation of how such communities redevelop former bases following the Department of Defense's Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process. To do so, they developed the first national database on military redevelopment and combine quantitative national analyses with three, in-depth case studies in California. Salvaging Community thus fills the void in knowledge surrounding redevelopment of bases and the disparate outcomes that affect communities after BRAC. The data presented in Salvaging Community points toward effective strategies for collaborative governance that address the present-day needs of municipal officials, economic development agencies, and non-profit organizations working in post-BRAC communities. Defense conversion is not just about jobs or economic rebound, Touchton and Ashley argue. Emphasizing inclusion and sustainability in redevelopment promotes rejuvenated communities and creates places where people want to live. As localities and regions deal with the legacy of the post-Cold War base closings and anticipate new closures in the future, Salvaging Community presents a timely and constructive approach to both economic and community development at the close of the military-industrial era.




Military Bases


Book Description

Focuses on lessons learned from four rounds of base realignments and closures (BRACs) held in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995. Addresses the applicability of these lessons to future BRACs as related to savings, costs, and economic impact; legislative actions needed to authorize future BRAC rounds; and what improvements would be needed in the Department of Defense's process for identifying bases for realignment and closure. Charts and tables.










Military Base Closures


Book Description

Approximately 13 years ago, in December 1988, the first military base closure commission recommended the closing and realignment of 145 US domestic bases and facilities. This action was the consequence of the Department of Defense's broad reevaluation of its mission in conjunction with the weakening and ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. There was little need, according to the Pentagon, to continue to retain the vast Cold War-era infrastructure. Funds saved from closing down under-utilised bases, DOD further noted, could be used to enhance development of new weapons and improved readiness. Three additional rounds followed the 1988 round of infrastructure reductions in 1991, 1993, and 1995. Since then, no further rounds of base closures and realignments have been authorised by Congress, despite repeated requests from the Department of Defense in recent years for two additional rounds. The reasons for congressional resistance are two-fold. First, there is concern over a likely backlash from constituents living in or near military installations. Second, many Members of Congress remain wary about a repetition of the perceived political intrusion by the Clinton Administration that occurred in regard to the 1995 recommendations to close Kelly and McClellan air force bases. This book reveals the tension in the military facilities that may yet again be up for closure. Also discussed are the issues members of Congress feel need be answered before conducting a new round of base closures, when the national security environment is uncertain.







Sustainable Regeneration of Former Military Sites


Book Description

Sustainable Regeneration of Former Military Sites is the first book to analyze a profound land use change happening all over the world: the search for sustainable futures for property formerly dedicated to national defense now becoming redundant, disposed of and redeveloped. The new military necessity for rapid flexible response requires quite different physical resources from the massive fixed positions of the Cold War, with huge tracts of land and buildings looking for new uses. The transition from military to civilian life for these complex, contaminated, isolated, heritage laden and often contested sites in locations ranging from urban to remote is far from easy. There is very little systematic analysis of what follows base closures, leaving communities, governments, developers, and planners experimenting with untested land use configurations, partnership structures, and financing strategies. With twelve case studies drawn from different countries, many written by those involved, Sustainable Regeneration of Former Military Sites enables the diverse stakeholders in these projects to discover unique opportunities for reuse and learn from others’ experiences of successful regeneration.




Military base closures progress in completing actions from prior realignments and closures.


Book Description

Through base realignment and closure rounds in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995, the Department of Defense expected to significantly reduce its domestic infrastructure and provide needed dollars for high-priority programs such as modernization. With the conclusion of the 6-year implementation period of the last round in fiscal year 2001, the department has closed or realigned hundreds of bases, has generated savings from these actions, and is in the process of transferring unneeded base property to other users. At the same time, the communities surrounding the former defense bases continue the lengthy process of recovery from the economic impact of the closure process. Our last comprehensive report on the implementation of base closure decisions was issued in December 1998. In that report, we concluded that the closure process was generating substantial savings (although the savings estimates were imprecise), most former base property had not yet been transferred to other users, and most communities surrounding closed bases were faring well economically in relation to key national economic indicators. In a July 2001 report and August 2001 testimony, we updated our closure implementation data and reaffirmed the primary results of our prior work.