Commissioners Vow to Be Fair on Base Closures

Two members of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission vowed independence and fairness Monday as they assessed two San Diego military bases for closure or realignment.

“Politics will not enter into this,” Commissioner Howard Calloway promised a skeptical crowd of 1,100 that groaned in disbelief during a public hearing at the Marine Corps Recruit Depot.

In what local business and political leaders described as an effective campaign, Calloway and Commissioner Robert Stuart Jr. listened to briefings, toured the Naval Training Center and MCRD, then heard several more hours of public testimony by selected speakers. The local officials touted cost-effectiveness and the facilities’ proximity to the Pacific Fleet.

As the military trims down by 25%, the bipartisan commission will choose which bases should be shut or realigned, meaning a change in their mission. During the last three days in June, the seven-member commission will pound out a list that will be submitted to Congress on July 1.

Since past commissions had been criticized for neither asking local leaders nor visiting the bases whose fates were threatened, commissioners this spring toured facilities being considered for closure.

The San Diego facilities were placed on the list earlier this month--which Calloway attributes to the fact that the Navy had not adequately explained the importance of NTC and MCRD when the Pentagon submitted its own list of candidates for closure in April. That list slated the Orlando NTC--not the San Diego NTC--for closure.

With a reduced Navy, analysts have decided that the nation no longer needs all three of its training facilities, in San Diego, Great Lakes, Ill., and Orlando, Fla. Earlier this month, the commission removed the Great Lakes facility from the hit list--pitting San Diego against Orlando, each trying to preserve its own NTC.

“Orlando said, ‘Here’s why we think we should not be closed,’ ” said Calloway, speaking at a news conference before the hearing. And the city’s argument apparently was convincing enough that the commission decided further investigation is needed.

“From Day 1, I have cautioned everyone not to assume that their installation is safe just because it is not included in the Pentagon’s report,” Calloway said. “We will not rubber-stamp the Pentagon’s recommendations.”

One of the strongest arguments against keeping San Diego’s NTC open is its proximity to the city and the possibility that it will not be able to expand, said Calloway and Stuart, who declined to discuss how they would vote.

“Orlando has very strong points. Orlando has a very, very good school and opportunities to expand,” Calloway said. “San Diego does not have as much room for expansion. . . . There’s a general feeling that (San Diego’s) NTC is just tightly put in a big, fast-growing city.”

But local leaders countered during testimony that the military is an integral part of the community, and that the facilities could easily expand to accommodate more trainees.

“The military is part of this community, they are family and we are going to fight for our family,” Mayor Maureen O’Connor said.

When asked by Calloway if the city would appreciate the use of the NTC and MCRD land to expand Lindbergh Field, O’Connor responded: “We are going to move the airport. . . . If you want more land for the military, you shall receive it. I guarantee it.”

Throughout the afternoon, an enthusiastic crowd cheered when speakers touted the city’s fondness for the Marine Corps and Navy.

While presenting facts about fleet readiness and the cost effectiveness of running the local bases, local leaders also raised the issue of “co-location,” or the fact that the training bases are right next to the Pacific Fleet’s largest West Coast concentration of ships and facilities.

“Today, a Naval officer or enlisted person comes home to San Diego after spending six months at sea. He is looking forward to seeing his wife again, playing with the kids and enjoying his home,” said Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Coronado).

Since 1,000 instructors teach at NTC and 8,000 others attend advanced schools, a number of local Navy personnel do not have to leave the area. The Navy calls this “homesteading.”

Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham (R-San Diego) pointed out that, when most Navy personnel resign, they cite family separation and frequent moves as their reasons. But, with homesteading, families can remain intact. And, with a reduced Navy, officials will want to retain their best personnel by offering good “quality of life” conditions, Cunningham said.

This issue seemed to make an impression on the two visiting commissioners, who also spoke one-on-one before the hearing to officers and enlisted personnel.

“Co-location . . . that was a case that had not been done,” Calloway said.

During testimony, local leaders stressed the benefits of having the fleet so close to the training facilities.

Homesteading also is more cost-effective for the taxpayer, Hunter said. Because San Diego’s NTC is close to the fleet, the Navy saves more than $6 million in temporary assignment costs annually. The Navy also saves $3 million in travel expenses because basic-training graduates can attend their advanced course at NTC without moving, he said.

Much of Monday’s testimony centered on the fate of NTC rather than MCRD, which is slated for realignment, which could mean moving its training up to Camp Pendleton or to Parris Island, S.C.

But Rep. Bill Lowery pointed out that moving training to Parris Island would require almost $400 million in construction costs, and moving to the Oceanside base would cost almost $500 million.

“We are going to find trouble finding those funds,” Lowery said.