S.D., Military Leaders Praise Base Decision

It was common sense--from economic and national security standpoints--that ultimately persuaded a blue-ribbon federal panel to spare two San Diego-based military training installations exultant area lawmakers, business leaders and military commanders said Sunday.

The Naval Training Center had been targeted for closure and the Marine Corps Recruit Depot considered for reduced operations.

“Once you got to the bottom of it, and studied it, the obvious correct conclusion was not to shut the bases,” said Mayor Maureen O’Connor, who lobbied hard against the potential closure, as did chief executives other areas nationwide where military facilities were threatened. “The whole community is obviously going to be very pleased.”

On Sunday, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission--the national panel examining the shutdown issue--voted unanimously against closure or change of mission at the two San Diego bases, both located northwest of downtown San Diego, near Lindbergh Field.

The intense anti-shutdown campaign that emerged in San Diego and other affected communities underscores the almost-symbiotic emotional and economic ties that many regions of the county have forged with military bases.

There were decidedly mixed emotions in Long Beach, where the commission’s recommendation would close the Long Beach Naval Station--home base to more than 29,000 enlisted personnel--but would retain its sister shipyard.

And, in northern California, the panel’s recommendation to close Ft. Ord in Seaside prompted predictions of economic doom in Monterey County, as well as talk of how to initiate an environmental cleanup of the base, which is on the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund list.

With nearly 15,000 military and 7,000 civilian employees generating $700 million a year, Ft. Ord is the county’s third-largest industry, behind agriculture and tourism.

“We are a one-company town,” said Edith Johnsen, mayor of Marina, a town of 26,000 near Ft. Ord, whose population may plummet by half with the shutdown. “It’s going to be tough. We have a lot of mom-and-pop stores.”

Also tabbed for shutdown in Northern California is the Sacramento Army Depot.

In the case of San Diego, it was clear that economics played a major role in the commission’s decision: Officials estimated that shutting down the installations and relocating their tasks elsewhere would likely cost in excess of $1 billion, considerably more than any savings associated with ceasing or modifying operations. Panel members also expressed concern about potential harm to national training efforts, although several noted critically that both San Diego facilities possessed limited room for expansion. Commissioners recommended an additional reevaluation of the Naval center in two years.

But the San Diego facilities also benefited from the so-called “co-location” argument: That it is beneficial to situate training centers in proximity to large military populations, such as that found in the San Diego region, with its huge Navy and Marine presence.

“We know that family separation is a major reason why people leave the armed services, and here there’s more of an opportunity for families to remain together,” noted U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Coronado), who was on hand at a gleeful Marine depot when the commission’s much-anticipated decision was announced.

Also present was U.S. Rep. Randall (Duke) Cunningham (R-San Diego), himself a former Navy flier, who commented, “It was the right decision as well as the just decision.”

The two San Diego facilities each provided basic training for 20,000 recruits last year; the Navy center also provided advanced training to another 23,000 personnel.

Each year, according to estimates, the two threatened facilities in San Diego contribute more than $300 million to the regional economy, including payroll and expenditures by personnel and their families. Lawmakers and others were not anxious to see any part of that economic input evaporate, particularly in the midst of a national recession.

Although Long Beach officials had lobbied hard to save both facilities, many had realized weeks ago that the base probably could not be saved and had focused their attention on making sure the shipyard would be salvaged.

“We know this has a serious impact on the housing market and the merchants in this town,” said Long Beach city Councilman Tom, Clark, who predicted the loss of the naval station would deal a $300-million blow to the local economy.

Apart from the sheer costs of any shutdown or “realignment” of the two San Diego facilities, proponents of the installations’ continued existence have argued that the training and other services provided is essential--even at a time when the Pentagon budget is shrinking.

“It (a shutdown) didn’t make sense based on operational needs, and it didn’t make sense based on the economics,” said Col. Regan R. Wright, chief of staff at the Marine depot, who was ecstatic Sunday following the news from Washington. “We never should have been on the list in the first place,” Wright said during an interview at the Marine complex, whose Spanish Colonial Revival-style buildings train half of all Marine recruits nationwide each year.

Col. Wright rejected suggestions that the prestigious depot’s role could be duplicated at Camp Pendleton in northern San Diego County, thus saving on the existing expenses associated with transporting recruits to training sites Pendleton. “If we move to Pendleton,” Wright said, “we wouldn’t make a better Marine than we make now.”

There was particular satisfaction within the San Diego business community, especially among industries potentially vulnerable to the impacts of a reduced military presence.

“It’s good news for all San Diego,” said Al Reese, vice president of the Diego Convention & Visitors Bureau, who noted that the region’s huge military presence draws thousands of visitors annually, including friends and family of sailors and Marines.

The commission had included the two facilities last month on a list of 17 nationwide targeted for potential closure.

Overall, according to an estimate by U.S. Rep. Bill Lowery (R-San Diego), Pentagon expenditures--including payroll and procurement--pump almost $10 billion into the San Diego area’s economy, constituting about one-fifth of the gross regional product.

However, Lowery, like others opposed to the base closing, said that cost-effectiveness and national security concerns--not the impact on the area economy--persuaded the federal commission to spare the San Diego facilities.

“I don’t think we want the Department of Defense to be a public works project,” Lowery said.

Nonetheless, there was considerable relief among merchants who do business with the military community.

“With the number of jobs that San Diego is losing in all industries . . . we just can’t stand any more job losses,” Mark Grosvenor, chief executive of a San Diego-based hotel management group that includes 14 hotels, including a 207-room Grosvenor Inn, less than one mile from the naval training center.

Along with the financial impact come other intangible--though no less important--losses in a community that prides itself on having long provided a home for the Navy.

The 48-year-old Long Beach shipyard, staffed almost entirely by civilians, is a place where people come to work at 17 and stay until they retire, a close-knit community where fathers work side by side with their sons and daughters--who in turn would like to see their sons and daughters carry on the tradition.

Times staff writers Sheryl Stolberg in Los Angeles and Kristina Lindgren in Orange County contributed to this report.