Transcript Defense Economic Impact Summary

Military Base Preservation and Retention
State Comparative Efforts
Since the 2005 BRAC round a number of states have instituted
military base preservation programs
Note: this comes from a US DoD website
2
States with active Base Retention/Expansion
strategies typically involve a series of strategies
Home life
Support
Encroachment
Cost Offsets
 Relocation assistance
 School transition assistance
 Homestead exemptions for active duty, deployed
personnel
 Zoning rules
 Land acquisition
 Joint land use planning
 Capital construction funding
 Base operating cost assistance
3
States with cost offset programs to promote retention / expansion










Alabama - $6 million
Arizona – revolving fund $4.825 million
Connecticut - $50 million funded through economic development bond fund
New Mexico - $600k
Texas - $250 million bond fund
Georgia – unfunded but case by case appropriations
Massachusetts - $251 million contingent on base expansion announcement
Florida - ~ $4 million per year through annual appropriation
Pennsylvania - $5 million per year through annual appropriations
RI - unfunded
4
Capital expenditure cost offsets are funded
using a variety of mechanisms
Illustration
Bond Funds
 Connecticut
 Texas
 Oklahoma
Appropriations
 Florida
Other
 South Carolina
South Carolina has
been using a
partnership model
with conservation
organizations to
manage base
encroachment
issues
5
Connecticut and Florida for a combination of
competitive reasons as well as undersea
warfare capability serve as examples of best
practices
6
Connecticut expenditures on Sub Base Groton
Connecticut’s efforts to date have been on upgrading buildings and training
capabilities at the sub base
 2011: $3.2 million for Submarine Training Galley & Submarine Bridge
training facility expansion
 2010: $7.65 million – 9ksft “dive locker” building refurbishment & base
boiler replacement
Source: NP analysis of news reports
7
Florida has spent nearly $10 million since 2008
on base infrastructure improvements
Source: NP analysis Florida Defense Alliance
8
Florida – FY 2010-2011 Defense Infrastructure
Grant Appropriations Project List
Applicant
Defense
City of Jacksonville
Military installation
Project
Recommended award
Encroachment Protection for OLF Whitehouse
$200,000.00
Camp Blanding Joint Training Center
Emergency Operations Center Situational
Awareness Suite
$400,000.00
Eglin Air Force Base, Duke Field, Hulburt Field
Shoal River treatment plant/reservoir and
buffering initiative
$500,000.00
Cape Canaveral Air Force Base
Launch Complex 46 Communications System
Refurbishment
$500,000.00
Avon Park Air Force Range
Encroachment Prevention and Sustainability of
Avon Park Air Force Range
$500,000.00
Naval Support Activity Orlando and tenant units
FEDSUN IV
$346,000.00
U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Clearwater
Fairchild Drive Access
$150,000.00
Naval Air Station Whiting Field
Joint Land Use Plan Acquisition Funding
$404,000.00
Camp Blanding Joint Training Center
Mission Critical Roadway Restoration
$450,000.00
Naval Air Station Pensacola
Avon Park Air Force Range
Area “A” & APZ Density Reduction
Noise Study
$500,000.00
$165,000.00
Naval Station Mayport
Repair Somers Road
$200,000.00
Hulburt Field
Hulburt Field Joint Water Reuse, Phase II
$500,000.00
MacDill Air Force Base
Himes Avenue Water Main Replacement
Total
$185,000.00
$5,000,000.00
Infrastructure Grants:Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Clay County Development Authority
Okaloosa County
Economic Development Commission
of Florida’s Space Coast
Highlands County
Orange County Research and
Development Authority
Pinellas County
Santa Rosa County
Clay County Development Authority
Escambia County
Highlands County
City of Jacksonville
City of Fort Walton Beach
City of Tampa
Source: NP analysis Florida Defense Alliance
9
Takeaways for RI
Base retention has evolved into a highly competitive,
resource driven activity at the state level
Several states that have facilities or capabilities that overlap or complement
RI naval operations spend several million dollars annually since the last
BRAC round to offset capital costs
It is unclear what, if any, role state funding of military installation
projects may have on base closure or expansion prospects
However, RI should be mindful that as with any economic development
“deal”, ultimately state resources may be required as part of a
competitive response against states with a funding track record and
substantial committed resources
10