National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006--Resumed
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006--Resumed -- (Senate - November 07, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise in support today of thi s amendm ent offered by my colleague from Maine and myself to the fiscal year 2006 Defense/ Authorization Bill.
Our amendment focuses on one goa l, to provide the communities that are losing bases through the BRAC another opportunity to control their future redevelopment, recovery, and economic well-being.
The ``no-cost conveyance'' amendment that we have proposed would modify the BRAC Act to give the affected communities the ``right of first refusal'' with respect to the transfer of property on the base. Specifically, it would require that when making determinations concerning the transfer of property at a base, the Secretary of Defense must first offer that property to the community through its redevelopment authority. If the redevelopment authority accepts, the Secretary is required to transfer the property to the community at no cost.
This legislation provides for an important exception in the case of national security, in order to allow the Secretary to transfer the property to a military service or other entity within the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard, or the Department of Homeland Security, if such action is necessary in the national security interest of the United States.
I support this amendment because I know personally what the true impact of a devastating base closure can cause to a close-knit community. I grew up just 10 miles from the now-closed Loring Air Force Base. After the base shut its doors in 1994, tens of thousands of people left northern Maine and moved away because of the limited opportunities available to them once the Air Force left town.
Given the rural area of the former Air Force base, the fact that the base was eventually transferred to the community at no cost was critically important to spurring economic growth in an area that had just been devastated by the loss of thousands of jobs overnight.
The collateral damage of the base's closure went far beyond active duty military personnel and their families. It also affected many small business owners who were forced to close their businesses and leave the area permanently. When a base closes, the need to attract new economic development is even more difficult and compounded by the fact that supporting professionals have already left the area. The resulting job losses and their impact on the local economy further highlight the need for providing the option of no-cost conveyance at a time when many areas can ill-afford to spend millions of dollars to purchase vacant buildings.
Much like a decade ago, the Midcoast region of Maine is now suffering the same devastating fate through the closure of the last active duty airfield north of New Jersey, the Brunswick Naval Air Station. Not only will this region lose 2,667 active duty personnel, 5,704 Navy family members, 715 civilian jobs, and an additional 1,300 drilling reservists who contribute to the local economy each month , but also the community will have to pay the Department of Defense fair market value for the base's property.
Communities affected by a large base closure are already reeling from the economic loss of the military as its neighbor, and to add the hardship of forcing the same community to pay the Department for vacating the area is essentially a ``double closure.''
This amendment is not just to assist a base closing in my home State of Maine, but it is to help all bases affected across the country. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and in doing so support the communities nationwide that are experiencing the far-reaching ramifications of closure or realignment due to the recent base closing round by the Department of Defense.
http://thomas.loc.gov/