Editorial: High-priced lawyer - Thursday, February 28
The Southampton County Board of Supervisors is bringing in the heavy artillery in its fight to keep the Navy from building an outlying landing field in or around the county.
On Monday, the board was unanimous in directing its county administrator to attempt to “combine forces” with the other communities on the service’s short list of preferred locations.
Specifically, Southampton County Administrator Michael Johnson will be asking administrators in Sussex, Surry and Greensville to see if lawmakers there would vote to help pay for a high-profile attorney.
The attorney, Barry P. Steinberg, comes recommended by the Crater Planning District Commission, and brings with him a long resume: A position with the Washington, D.C., law firm Kutak Rock, LLC.; a former chief of the U.S. Army Environmental Law Division; former chief of the U.S. Army Litigation Division at the Pentagon; and a background on national security matters associated with environmental contamination, military personnel, base closures and reuse.
Naturally an impressive resume begets an impressive fee.
Johnson said he expects the counselor to provide his services on retainer, with a rate of $385 per hour for time that goes beyond what is contracted. And there’s no telling how many hours would be involved fighting the U.S. Navy.
The neighboring communities would also benefit in their fight to oppose the Navy’s selection of a landing field. County officials in those locations are also on the record opposing an OLF location within their borders. Unanimous opposition votes, sharply worded letters to state and federal officials, and organized citizens’ groups are one thing. Committing money to pay for a trained and skilled fighter is another.
One thing is clear: Southampton should not bear the financial brunt alone. The supervisors did well is asking for help from their neighbors.
OLF opponents employ cyberspace in fight - Wednesday, February 27
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
FRANKLIN—Without an announced schedule for public hearings and with environmental impact studies just getting under way, much of the fight against the Navy's proposed outlying landing field is taking place online.
Airfield opponents in the rural areas that have been targeted by the Navy have embraced technology as a weapon in their fight, using mass e-mail updates, online petitions and special Web sites dedicated to spreading news about the OLF selection process.
Embracing technology was an early strategy for Statesville resident Lynda Updike, one of the people most responsible for the word-of-mouth campaign of OLF opposition in Southampton County.
Since the beginning of the year, Updike has sent a growing group of email recipients at least 15 digests of OLF-related information gleaned from various Web sites, news sources, phone calls and emails.
Her dial-up Internet provider allows messages to be sent to "only" 100 addresses at a time, she said in a telephone interview Tuesday. She currently sends her regular digests to three different groups, with a total of more than 250 recipients.
And she adds new names to that list nearly every day. Without email, she said, "I'd be standing on the street corner, handing out flyers, I guess."
Updike uses her computer to keep records for the farm that she and her husband operate. She also uses it to keep track of commodities prices. But, she said, putting together the OLF digests has improved her skills in one basic area of computers.
"I've gotten good at cutting and pasting," she quipped.
Online petitions also have proved important to the cause of those working to deny the Navy a location for a new airfield. A petition directed toward Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, which was begun in August by a woman who grew up in the Waverly area during the 1970s, has grown to include more than 1,000 signatures.
That petition, which can be found at http://www.petitiononline.com/1960mapa/petition.html, includes emotional comments from many of those who electronically signed it.
Sarah Parker Christian and her husband, Gary, have sent the governor at least two letters since putting their appeal online last summer. The first, sent in September, included the petition, with 300 signatures. The second one, sent in January, after the Navy had chosen three sites in Southampton, Sussex and Surry for further study, included the petition with about 650 signatures. That number had grown to 1,040 by Tuesday evening.
"It is not just a list of names, but a very personal and profound expression of deep feelings by the people who have lived and worked this land for hundreds of years," the Christians wrote to the governor in January.
"Many have asked you to be true to your word not to force any county to accept the OLF if not wanted by local residents," their letter continued. "We ask you the same, in the name of families who have helped build this nation. Without people like this, there would be no United States of America, and nothing for our pilots to defend."
North Carolina's Citizens Against OLF has a similar petition, found at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/citizens-against-olf/sign.html, with nearly 2,300 signatures as of Tuesday evening.
That petition asks for help in keeping the Navy from locating an OLF in Gates County, N.C. It was posted in September and also includes a space for signers to leave comments.
The latest online offering by OLF opponents is the Web site of Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field, hosted at http://www.novaolf.com/.
The group has organized to "inform, educate and empower" citizens of Southampton, Sussex and Surry counties in their fight against the proposed airfield, according to a welcome message on the group's homepage.
The site, which went live Sunday, is still in development. It is intended to provide "the most current news regarding the Navy's efforts to impose an unnecessary landing facility among the peace and tranquility of some of Virginia's most historically significant and environmentally sensitive land," the message states.
Much of the site remains incomplete, but on Tuesday visitors could find an extensive list of contacts for government officials associated with the OLF issue.
Tony Clark, the chairman of the group, said last week that donors had been glad to help with the expense of buying the domain name and having the site hosted.
Supervisors pursue legal help in OLF fight - Tuesday, February 26
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
COURTLAND—In the legal battles they expect with the U.S. Navy during the next couple of years, Southampton County supervisors do not want to fight alone.
With a unanimous vote Monday, the county’s Board of Supervisors directed its county administrator to attempt to “combine forces” with the other communities on the service’s short list of preferred locations for an outlying landing field.
Southampton County Administrator Michael Johnson said Tuesday he will be working to find out whether boards of supervisors in Sussex, Surry and Greensville are interested in joint legal representation by an attorney recommended by the Crater Planning District Commission.
The CPDC recently introduced administrators of the four counties to a lawyer it has worked with on other legal issues involving the military.
That attorney, Barry P. Steinberg of the Washington, D.C., law firm Kutak Rock, LLC will not come cheap. Johnson said he expects the counselor to provide his services on retainer, with a rate of $385 per hour for time that goes beyond what is contracted.
Johnson said he could not estimate what would be the total cost of Steinberg’s representation because of the nature of the case. The costs, he said, would be paid each month as part of the county’s regular bills from money in the county’s unappropriated general fund. The governing boards in Sussex and Surry were to have discussed hiring the lawyer on Thursday.
Comments
Felice Hancock wrote on Feb 29, 2008 10:14 AM:
"Since the OLF is a regional "situation" effecting several rural counties, it is very cost effective to seek one law firm to represent all. There seems to be at least one meeting going on that excluded us rural counties -- it was held recently at Randy Forbes' office. To quote Forbes office as to what happened: " When our(Forbes) military liaison who represented our office arrived (Randy did not attend), he questioned why Virginia Beach and Chesapeake were there with their state delegation and Sussex and Southampton (as well as Surry I think) were not invited since they are ones being affected by this issue. The state first said they had been, but when we called Sussex and Southampton, officials said they had not. "I appreciate the explanation by Forbes office, and also their questioning the significant fact that rural counties were not asked. Sincerely thank you Mr. Forbes and staff. However, I don't know about any of you -- but this is the reason we need a lawyer (ie, Governor Kaine is looking at the interest of Chesapeake and VA Beach and to heck with the rural areas). We need all the help possible in representing and securing our interest."
Ali wrote on Feb 27, 2008 10:00 AM:
"Could not agree more with Jerry Jordan. Waste of money....but go ahead, deplete your monies and then have no representation because the money wasn't spend wisely!"
Jerry Jordan wrote on Feb 27, 2008 5:29 AM:
"What a complete WASTE of our tax money.. Plus the fact that they "could not estimate what would be the total cost of Steinberg’s representation because of the nature of the case" Sounds to me like a "back-door" deal between council and the lawyers... Southmampton residents need to demand full disclosure over the entire process to ENSURE tax money is spent wisely!!"
Editorials: Political impotence - Saturday, February 23
Sebrell resident Tommy Simmons, in a passionate guest column elsewhere on this page, sums up the greatest frustration — and perhaps the biggest challenge — for opponents of a Navy airfield in Southampton County.
Simply put, our community has little political clout with the important players in this process.
Southampton, Sussex and Surry counties were easy choices as potential outlying landing field sites not only because of our rural geography and vast open spaces. Just as important, we're convinced, was our relative impotence at the ballot box.
Think about it.
Gov. Timothy Kaine, who can't seek re-election to his current post but is widely believed to have U.S. Senate ambitions, won't require our votes to make it to Washington.
U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes, who represents this region in Congress, gets most of his votes from points further east. For the same reason that Kaine doesn't need us, neither does U.S. Sen. Jim Webb. That we didn't see much locally, if any, of Webb and former Sen. George Allen during their heated campaign last year speaks volumes about our area's importance in a statewide political race.
Retiring U.S. Sen. John Warner might be a good ally in the sense that he won't be running for office again. The problem is that Warner, like Webb, is a former secretary of the Navy whose allegiance will be to military brass should they decide that Southampton County is the place for a training field.
Our only real allies in the elected arena are state Delegates Roslyn Tyler and Bill Barlow. But with all due respect to our hard-working, sincere legislative delegation, they are bit players in this drama whose protestations will carry little weight at the end of the day.
None of that is to suggest that our citizens should sit quietly and simply let the Navy force something on us that, as Simmons points out, would permanently alter the fabric of this community. But opponents should also realize that no amount of cage-rattling with elected officials in Richmond and Washington is likely to do any good — and, in fact, if carried to the extreme, could do much harm to our cause.
Columnists: A community's heritage is at stake in OLF fight - Saturday, February 23, 2008
By Thomas B. Simmons/Guest Columnist
Editor's note: The following comments are excerpts from a presentation made by Thomas B. Simmons of Sebrell to U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes' administrative assistant, Rick Franklin, during a meeting on Feb. 15.
I appreciate you coming today to hear from some of us opposed to an outlying landing field in our county.
It is very meaningful to me and to our "No OLF" cause for which we are all here for today.
Folks here have heard from neither Congressman Randy Forbes nor Gov. Tim Kaine. We have not seen them in person to be able to tell them that we want no parts of an outlying landing field here.
Furthermore, it is frustrating when we know more about North Carolina's elected officials and their stands and views on the OLF issue than our own state and federally elected officials in the commonwealth.
We feel we have been let down because no elected officials are on our side, and we also fear they're not listening to our opposition. I am 50 years old and I believe this is one of the most serious issues that this county has ever been faced with. I look around here in this room and see people older than myself. I have talked to a few of them, some much older than I am, and one thing that we all agree on: This OLF proposal is the biggest, most difficult issue ever to have confronted Southampton County.
I have a wife and a 9½-year-old son, Briggs Simmons. We all live on our Century Farm in the house where my father and my grandfather were born, and it is also where they lived with my great-grandfather and great-grandmother when they were farming it.
My great-great-grandfather lived there for only a short time before he died soon after he came home sick from his service to this country during the War Between The States.
His widow, my great-great-grandmother, lived to age 89 and she was living there when my father was a young boy, 6 years old. Her father, my great-great-great grandfather, built this house for his grandson while his father was at war. You see, sir, there are others here like me, and we are all so very serious when we say we are against any OLFs. We are proud of our heritage and our county's place in history, and we love the countryside's peace and quiet.
Did it ever occur to you, sir, and to our elected federal officials and to Gov. Kaine and our state legislators as well that these sites chosen here in our county are some of the most historic sites in the region? The "Mason" and "Dory" sites are rich in history because as the Jamestown colonists broke up and moved to Williamsburg and formed our government, which spread eventually to Richmond, so did our people spread in all directions.
Many of them are Southampton County's earliest, most famous ancestors; they came here and settled in this region where the counties of Sussex, Surry and Southampton all come together.
This particular region is rich in history, and its place has been marked in the formation of our county. Most of the oldest plantations in Virginia might be gone by now, but some of them here in Southampton County still bear proof of their existence.
All that is left are their burial sites. Some are marked and some unmarked, but none has been forgotten by any of us. Some of Virginia's earliest ancestors lived here and are buried here in the proposed site called Dory. My great-great-grandmother, Martha Sue Sunn Sebrell Briggs, is buried in a marked grave at Silverton beside her husband, William Stith Briggs, and sister Lucy Davis and her husband, E. A. Davis, at the bottom right eastern corner of this proposed OLF.
It boggles my mind to think that our governor would propose a landing strip in such a sanctuary as I've described to you, one so rich not only in our earliest Colonial history, sir, but rich too in its place in Virginia's agricultural history.
At one time we called this area the Peanut Belt. Last year also we watched as Gov. Kaine went across the state promoting agriculture through farm conservation programs, and he again seemed to relish giving out farmers' awards and incentives to promote Virginia agriculture. One would think he was on agriculture's side.
Some of the richest farmland in this commonwealth is right here in Southampton County. In this particular region of the county, the "Dory" site, has some of the most productive soils on Century Farms that are still raising peanuts, corn, cotton, soybeans and wheat, and we have farmers who are honored with record production yield certificates and plaques to back up this statistic.
So therefore you should see why it boggles the mind to no end, and I am worried that we're being sent mixed signals down here in Southampton from up there in Richmond at Gov. Kaine's office.
We are very proud, sir, of our heritage here in Southampton County.
THOMAS B. 'TOMMY' SIMMONS is a Sebrell resident. His e-mail address is sandyrunmkt@wmconnect.com.
Congressman: Let OLF process work - Wednesday, February 20, 2008
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
COURTLAND—In town Tuesday for a meeting with Southampton County representatives, U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., reiterated his desire that unwilling localities not be forced to host an outlying landing field for the Navy.
Forbes declined, however, to attempt to intervene in the Navy's process of choosing a site prior to the service actually doing so.
"I don't think you should tell somebody you're not going to the prom with them before you get invited to the prom," he said in an interview in a conference room at the Southampton County Office Center Tuesday afternoon.
Forbes said it would be "highly inappropriate" for him to tell the Navy to back off of its investigations into three Virginia sites that are among five on the service's short list of potential locations for an auxiliary training airstrip for jet pilots.
"If we go down and tell the Navy, 'You can't even talk to people, and you can't even conduct investigations,' I think that would be highly inappropriate for us," he said. "That would make us look like the guy who was saying the sky was falling."
Two of the 30,000-acre Virginia sites would affect property in Southampton and Sussex counties, and a vocal group of opponents, Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field, has called on the congressman to make a strong statement in support of their cause. "When can we count on knowing whether our elected representative sides with his constituents in this part of his district or with his constituents in the other part?" asked Tony Clark, chairman of the newly organized group, during a meeting last week with Forbes' representative, Rick Franklin.
On Tuesday, Forbes was careful to point out that he doesn't see his support for one portion of his district to be exclusive of the other.
"No one in Chesapeake has told me, 'Yeah, let's dump on Southampton, let's dump on (Fort) Pickett,' or anywhere else," he said. "I've never had a person ask me to hurt some other locality to help them."
Forbes encouraged opponents to let the Navy know about their concerns with the Virginia sites and about their ideas for alternatives during the public input sessions that will be part of the Navy's 30-month environmental study, required by the National Environmental Policy Act. He also encouraged localities to try to keep an open mind about the Navy's proposals.
"Then, at the end of the day, if a locality decides that they don't want it, then I think that decision should be honored," he said. "We ought to listen before we make a decision."
He said he expects the Navy to conduct "fair, honest" hearings on the proposal.
"If the hearings aren't fair or people don't have an opportunity to present (their) cases, that is a different situation," he added. "But so far nobody suggests the hearings won't be fair."
Southampton County Administrator Michael Johnson came away with a positive feeling after he and supervisors Dallas O. Jones (Drewryville) and Walter L. Young Jr. (Franklin) met with Forbes and his aides Tuesday afternoon.
"At this point, we're searching for advocates for our position," Johnson said following that meeting. "I think he will support us if Virginia sites are chosen."
Comments
Lee Clarke wrote on Feb 21, 2008 11:36 PM:
"Forbes said to let the Navy make a choice first. Once they make a choice its too late to stop them. The Choice is Made. The best time to stop a runaway Train is before it runs away."
Lee H. wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:24 PM:
"I think that Forbes is taking a non-stand on this concern. Many of us in the county have done our homework from observing the offers made by the Navy in North Carolina. Heck, the original offer by the Navy was to let them come into Southampton County without any inducemetns since the OLF would bring employment (like five positions to mow the grass in the landing strip area?!?!? Construction jobs would be temporary and likely filled by out-of- county firms.) One big difference between VA and North Carolina is that the folks of North Carolina had the support of their elected officials. When Forbes advises us to "wait" ... is it because he is uninformed or has he made his decision? If we do not have facts gathered before the public hearings, then it will be too late to form an opinion. I think Forbes is not interested in our rural interests."
Helen Harrell wrote on Feb 20, 2008 3:26 PM:
Rep. Forbes said, "I don't think you should tell somebody you're not going to the prom with them before you get invited to the prom," he said in an interview in a conference room at the Southampton County Office Center Tuesday afternoon."The Navy did tell us that they will pick one of us to drag to the prom with them. We need to inform the Navy we don't want to go to the prom with them.
Editorial: A voice of consistency - Tuesday, February 19, 2008
In this fever-pitched battle over selecting a site for a Navy outlying landing field, it’s been difficult to find a voice we could trust.
And while we might not like the way the decision ultimately falls, at least U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-4th) has remained consistent.
On Tuesday in an exclusive interview with The Tidewater News, Forbes maintained his stand.
Forbes said it would be “highly inappropriate” for him to tell the Navy to back off of its investigations into three Virginia sites that are among five on the service’s short list of potential locations for an auxiliary training airstrip for jet pilots.
While anti-OLF zealots might consider the stance too soft, Forbes has provided thoughtful reason, and has stuck to it.
Few others in the process can make that claim.
Comments
John Bishop wrote on Feb 25, 2008 12:30 PM:
"Lynda, Lee, I don't think the OLF is the major concern of Southampton. Seems all over Southampton there are new housing developments and industry parks going up helping to reduce the "country" feel. Maybe you should speed your time fighting that instead of worrying about the OLF. But at the current rate, housing developments will probably keep the Navy from chosing the area for its OLF."
lee h. wrote on Feb 21, 2008 3:26 PM:
"Maybe, Forbes could offer positive suggestions instead of his consistant stand of "wait and see" who gets to be forced to dance at the prom -- such as, stick to the original plan and deal between VA Beach/Chesapeake and the Navy?The dance card of the rural community is full and can't afford to give anymore to urban encroachment."
Lynda Updike wrote on Feb 21, 2008 6:55 AM:
"Mr Forbes' analogy of asking someone to the prom is not complete. It omits the part that the "askee" can make sure that the "asker" knows before asking that the "askee" is not interested. We need to be doing the same thing with the Navy."
Letters to the Editor: Auxiliary field at Fentress would work as an OLF - Tuesday, February 19, 2008
To the Editor:
On Feb. 17 we drove down to take a look at Naval Auxiliary Landing Field Fentress in Chesapeake.
We drove down Mt. Pleasant Road to Fentress Airfield Road. We drove south on Fentress Airfield Road approximately six miles, all of which is sparsely settled farmland.
We turned west on Whittemore Road and drove by very large, open fields. Then we traveled north up Centerville Turnpike and went again east on Mt. Pleasant Road to NALF Road and traveled down to the base itself.
The gates were open and despite written warning signs, we drove in (sorry, U.S. government) and drove around to the swimming pool and basketball courts without being challenged in any way whatsoever. The base looked slightly neglected as if it were being prepped to close.
The area surrounding Fentress Field seemed as sparsely populated as Southampton County, if not more so, and thus would be as dimly lit at night. We feel this existing auxiliary landing field could easily be updated and used to practice carrier landings at a great savings to the taxpayers. If the citizens of Virginia Beach feel that we are being unpatriotic by not wanting the OLF (outlying landing field) in Sussex, Surry and Southampton counties, then we feel that they are more than welcome to be super-patriotic and keep it in their own neighborhood.
There is a rumor circulating that a developer or developers wants or already owns the land south of Fentress to develop which would make this property extremely valuable and profitable.
Perhaps there is some behind-the-scenes dealing going on.
Deborah Owen
Courtland
Comments
Jerry Jordan wrote on Feb 25, 2008 7:19 AM:
"Deborah, I'm not sure where you were, but Fentress is still in operation. They mainly use the field at night to simulate aircraft landings. They use Oceana durning the day! The reason to move the OLF is due to encroachment. Less than 10 miles from Fentress is suburban development and large population densities. And yes, you can blame the elected officals for allowing the encroachment. But the navy has learned their lesson and is now looking for an isolated place with LOW population density to prevent future encroachment on the new OLF.Regardless, get your facts straight before making suggestions that have no merit."
Letters to the Editor: OLF: Who’s next on the list? - Tuesday, February 19, 2008
To The Editor:
It is real surprising to me that City of Suffolk officials are not concerned about this OLF proposal in Gates or Southampton counties.
There is always the question in your mind: If the Navy isn’t successful at these sites, who will they target next?
Washington County, N.C., through hard work and determination was able to stop the Navy from destroying their community, but did the Navy look for alternatives that didn’t include destroying communities? No, they decided to target other areas closer to Oceana and Norfolk Naval Air.
So who knows if Gates or Camden or Southampton will be able to stop the Navy, but if that does happen, who will be next on the list?
Also, has any city or county officials considered the flight paths all those Super hornets will use to get to Gates or Southampton? The Navy will not release any of that information to the proposed sites yet, other than they are saying they could use any flight path from any direction from Oceana or Fentress. They will not be regimented to using only one flight path. So heads up, citizens of Suffolk, Franklin, Whaleyville or any towns or communities close to Gates and Southampton counties; you are surly going to be included in a constant barrage of Super hornet noise and jet pollution along their paths.
So please look at a map of where you are and where these Super hornets will go, and voice your opposition to an OLF in Gates or any other local community the Navy has targeted. Contact your local and state officials today.
Elaine B Herring
Gates, N.C.
Comments
Jim wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:46 AM:
"Elaine, your logic makes no sense! Specifically "alternatives that didn’t include destroying communities". Regardless where the OLF goes, it will destroy communities! Lucky for you, Southampton is the big target, not Gates County..."
Forbes aide gets earful from OLF foes - Saturday, February 16, 2008
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
COURTLAND—When congressmen hold office hours within their districts, the events usually are sparsely attended by individuals with questions about their Social Security or Veterans Administration benefits, or those looking for some other type of traditional constituent service.
Rick Franklin, field representative from U.S. Representative Randy Forbes' Emporia office, had an entirely different kind of experience during office hours in Courtland on Friday.
Sitting alone at a desk in front of a crowd of about 30, Franklin listened and took occasional notes as emotional residents appealed to him for Forbes' support in their fight against the U.S. Navy's plan to build an outlying landing field in Virginia or North Carolina.
"When can we count on knowing whether our elected representative sides with his constituents in this part of his district or with his constituents in the other part?" asked Tony Clark, chairman of the newly organized group of airfield opponents, Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field.
Franklin did not answer that question directly, instead referring several times to the 24- to 30-month environmental review being conducted by the Navy on the five sites — including two encompassing property in Southampton — that are included on the short list of potential locations for the training facility.
"There are all kinds of things we think they will find once they do the study," he said. "But they've got to do the study first." "It's a difficult situation for everybody involved," Franklin added, noting the Navy's claim that building a new OLF in a dark, undeveloped area is necessary for training young pilots of F/A-18 Super Hornets to land on aircraft carriers.
"They need to try to find a place where (the OLF) won't hurt anybody, and it looks like that's impossible."
Franklin said Forbes stands behind his contention that the state should honor its commitment not to force the OLF on communities that do not wish to host it. He also noted that the issue sprang from the state and remains primarily in the hands of the governor and the Navy.
Still, opponents were looking for support at the federal level. "This group knows more about the positions of officials in North Carolina" than it does about the positions of Virginia's congressional delegation, one speaker said.
In fact, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., and Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-1st) have both publicly stated that they would oppose putting the airstrip in any North Carolina county that did not want it. Their opposition and political efforts against the Navy's original, preferred North Carolina sites are widely thought to have been a major factor in the Navy's decision to take those locations off the table when it announced five new potential sites last month.
Virginia state Delegates Roslyn C. Tyler (D-75th) and William K. Barlow (D-64th), who represent the counties where the proposed Virginia sites are located, have said they oppose any plan that would force the facility on unwilling communities. So far, though, Virginia OLF opponents have yet to get the support of such a champion at the federal level. On Friday, they lobbied hard for Congressman Forbes to take on that role.
"The distinguished statesman that arrives in our county and joins our fight is going to be at the top of our list," said resident Tommy Simmons.
Franklin said he understood the concerns that were expressed at Friday's meeting. "I think we agree more than we disagree," he added.
Franklin said Forbes will be making the rounds throughout his district next week to hold informational meetings with county leaders. He has scheduled one such meeting with Southampton officials for Tuesday.
Franklin also encouraged citizens to send letters and e-mail messages to Forbes' office to let the congressman know their positions on the airfield and to suggest things that should be included in the Navy's environmental impact study.
"Congressman Forbes has pledged that he will relay any information you give him," he said.
Letters to the Editor: In OLF debate, don’t forget the men and women serving our country - Friday, February 15, 2008
To the Editor:
As the days and weeks go by and The Tidewater News is put in boxes, I know, that with each issue, I will once again be proud to be an American.
In each issue, I know there will be a letter or two written by individuals in our community, who love this country as much as I do, voicing their concerns about having a military air strip located in our peaceful community.
I hear their voices and I feel their pain as they use words to express what they are feeling in their hearts. How fortunate we are to live in a country where we are allowed to express our feelings and our ideas in a way that will reach the homes of hundreds and thousands. Each and every day there are Americans giving their lives so we can enjoy this freedom.
Thank you, God, for letting me be born in a country and time in history where I can express my feelings openly.
My husband, George C. Bryant, gave 21 years of his life serving in the Air Force, helping to keep our country free and helping to make sure our personal rights are protected. My father, Reese McCormick, served in England in the Army Air Corps during World War II, doing his part to protect our freedom and our way of life. To each and every one of you who have exercised your “freedom of speech,” I say thank you. As I read each letter, I am more and more thankful to my husband, my dad and the many, many more who have given a part of their lives so we, as Americans, will have the opportunity to publicly agree or disagree with our “elected” officials.
Since I am able to see both sides of this issue, I am not writing this letter to take sides. I am, however, asking each and every one of you to remember that the brave young men and women who fly these “noisy” jets must have a safe, adequate place to practice day and night flights, which include landings.
There are many who want the jobs and money military installations bring to a community but do not want to accept the negatives that come with it.
If we are going to have a country where people have “freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, etc.,” we must be prepared to give those who safeguard these freedoms the tools, the space and the support they need to fulfill their missions. As a woman who loves this wonderful country in which I live, I beg you to keep in mind just how much sacrifice our military men and women are asked to give. Is it wrong for our country to ask for sacrifices on our parts?
As the days and weeks move ahead, please remember to ask yourself, “Am I doing all I can to give these men and women who wear the uniforms of our country the tools they need to prepare them for their missions?” If the answer is “no,” then I beg you to ask yourself, “What can I, as an American, do to help our military be prepared for each and every mission for which they are assigned?” If the answer is “yes,” God bless you.
Dorothy Bryant
Courtland
Comments
Mark Fuller wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:23 PM:
"Linda I live on a farm in Southampton that has been in the family for over 200 years. Times are okay, but business could be better. I love this area and hope that my children can grow up to enjoy this land as much as I have. However, I have to agree with Dorothy Bryant. I may not like it, but "if" it means ensuring my freedom, I will sadly but willingly move elsewhere. I say "if," because I'm still waiting for all the facts to emerge before making any opinions about the proposed OLF. Plus I know my children value family more than they value where we live. You can replace things, but not family. So please keep an open mind."
Joe wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:11 PM:
"Linda and Rose, In regards to IP in Franklin, the plant is only scheduled for operation over the next 20 years max! Once IP closes, and it will close due to oversea competition, there will be no industry in Southampton. And for the facts, Agricultural has only survived in Southampton due to federal kick backs (i.e. Farm Aid). Without that, it would be a ghost town.Personally I would rather live to see my grandchildren than to oppose the Navy's ability to prevent a terrorist attack due to lack of training. Watch the TV series Jerico, and explain to your children that you are helping to ENSURE that can happen here! See what they say then.
Regardless, I do have respect for Americans living their dream, but not for people who only care about THEMSELVES and THEIR INTEREST as you two clearly state!"
Linda Pittman wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:32 PM:
"It is obvious Joe has no idea what it's like to be born and raised on family land. He must not understand that our Southampton County land has been in many of our families for hundreds of years. Why should we roll over and donate this to the navy? Joe, please explain to my three children why they should be evicted from the only home they've ever known and why they should scrap their plans to follow their grandfathers and father in the family buisiness.Since you obviously don't live in one of the chosen circles and apparently have no respect for the lives we have here in the county, please keep your opinions to yourself!"
Rose Bradshaw wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:17 AM:
"Joe, I believe that your facts are not accurate. There is an industry in Southampton County. It is the largest and oldest industry in the great state of Virginia, the agricultural industry. And while some farmers are choosing to retire or switch careers, there are many farmers in the area ready to expand production. Please do not make false statements just because it is easy to "post a comment". And for the record, my family will not be packing our bags and moving away from our family farm any time soon. I commend Felice for the comments and the confidence in the post to include a last name."
Joe wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:42 AM:
"You can't just leave a simple letter alone. Fentress is not adequate due to encroachment also... Thus the reason to choose a place with low population density, no industry, and small tax base (i.e. farms are shutting down) is justified. Southampton fits those requirements!! So stop complaining, claiming your "partiot farm families", and just pack your bags!"
J. R. wrote on Feb 16, 2008 6:24 PM:
"Felice has hit the nail square on the head in her response. Once a community has had all the money and fun from having the master jet base, and are now tired of it (BUT, they do still want to keep the money it brings!) is NO reason at all to dump the dirty side of the bargain on another, less politically powerful community. The CITY of Va. Beach has brought this all on themselves. Let them continue to deal with it! This is NOT a NEED of the Navy. Don't buy all this propaganda they are dishing out, after all these years. Virginia was a great state before navy airplanes were invented, and we will still be great after they are gone, if that is what it takes."
Felice Hancock wrote on Feb 16, 2008 12:13 AM:
"Many of us have given much thoughts and prayers to the fact that yes, turly, these “noisy” jets must have a safe, adequate place to practice day and night flights, which include landings", as Dorothy Bryant has pointed out in her editorial.There is such a place already existing for pilots to practice. It is at only 38% capacity at this moment. It is call Fentress.
A new OLF, removal of patriot farm families, let alonge the millions (billions?) of public tax dollars to study and then build this "want" when there is no "need" seems to be such a waste.
Letters to the Editor: Don’t be fooled by ‘unbelievably quiet’ F-16s flying over area - Friday, February 15, 2008
To the Editor:
In my line of work, I spend several hours each week driving throughout rural Southampton, Sussex, Greensville, Surry and other nearby counties. Recently, I observed something which I think is highly suspicious.
On more than one occasion, morning and afternoon, I saw a flight of F-16s flying below 1,000 feet in the vicinity of two of the proposed OLF sites in Southampton County. They were unbelievably quiet.
My suspicion is that the Navy has requested the Air Force to make these relatively quiet, low-level passes over rural Southampton County to lull the citizens into thinking that such quiet flights will be the norm if an OLF is built here. It would not be the first time that two different branches of government have collaborated to deceive the public. I believe the F-16 is a single-engine fighter, much quieter than the FA-18 Hornet, which the Navy pilots fly.
I urge the citizens not to be fooled by such tactics. If you are opposed to the OLF in your back yard, and if you are disgusted by Mr. Crouch’s lies (supported by and speaking on behalf of Gov. Tim Kaine), then let your elected officials know.
Ash Cutchin Courtland
Comments
Joe wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:00 PM:
" Ash, I think you need to see the ear doctor! If the jets were that quiet, Trust me, the Navy would gladly use them!!!J.R., If you believe what Ash claims, then I highly DOUBT you are a veteran officer from the Army. "
Jim wrote on Feb 20, 2008 6:48 AM:
" Ash, your statement "They were unbelievably quiet" is an oxymoron! Amazing that people would actually believe what you say! Shame on them... "
J. R. wrote on Feb 16, 2008 3:14 PM:
" Oh, man, this is so sneaky it feels like the KGB, baby! If this is what we are dealing with, imagine what else they will try to pull! Be alert, like this letter writer, and call these dirty tricks exactly what they are. Blow the whistle on this bull. Our Virginia seal logo image, Sic semper tyrannis, should be the basis for our resistance fight. We want to put out heel on the neck of Kaine AND the NAVY. BTW, I am a veteran officer from the ARMY. "
Don't question patriotism of OLF foes - February 9, 2008
Friday, February 8, 2008 7:42 PM ESTNO OLF! NO OLF! That's all you hear and see every where you go around Southampton County right now, and there is a reason.
It's because the residents of this county have pride.
We don't want to see this huge change come in and affect so many of the things we love about our homes.
For those who say, we "don't care about our freedom," or are "unpatriotic," you are just plain wrong.
We do care, and we love our country, and that's why we do not want to see this happen.
Many of our ancestors fought and died for the very thing we are trying to protect: our community. Much of our county was built on the very thing we are in danger of losing: the farmland, and peace that comes with living here.
Of course, these pilots need somewhere to practice, but logically, there are so many alternatives, rather than taking away the one thing so many people who live here, move here or even just visit enjoy the most: the peace, the quiet-the simple every day life we have been raised with. Not the loud noise, not the air pollution and not to mention how much it would affect our vast wildlife and its environment.
We are not being unpatriotic in this; we are just defending another piece of the puzzle. You just have to look at the whole picture.
Amy Jenkins
Comment
Franklin Henry wrote on Feb 11, 2008 10:53 AM:
" In response to "these pilots need somewhere to practice, but logically, there are so many alternatives," Seems you are taking the stance, "not in my backyard, but please, put it in HIS backyard!" And yes, you don't "care about our freedom." You only care about YOURSELF and YOUR INTEREST!! So maybe Southampton should sign a law that they will protect themselves should our country come under attack since they oppose helping our country prepare to prevent such an attack.... "
Counties cooperate in OLF fight Friday, February 8, 2008
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
Friday, February 8, 2008 7:56 PM ESTFRANKLIN-Southampton County and some of its neighbors confirmed this week that they have shared interests and, perhaps, a shared future in the fight against a proposed Navy outlying landing field.
County Administrator Michael Johnson said Friday that his meeting with administrators from Sussex, Surry and Greensville counties resulted in "a consensus that we're all facing the same issue and have the same concerns." The county administrators also decided to set a second meeting, which would include the chairmen of the counties' governing bodies, for next Friday.
During that summit, the county leaders will have a chance to meet Barry P. Steinberg, a Washington, D.C., attorney whom the Crater Planning District Commission has retained to handle legal issues involved with the proposed landing strip.
"There is some value to working together," Johnson said during a telephone interview. He said Southampton is not included in the current arrangement between Steinberg and the CPDC, noting that such a deal would require Board of Supervisors' approval.
Johnson could present the terms for such an arrangement to supervisors as early as their Feb. 25 meeting, by which time he expects to know more about the attorney's hourly fees and the likely relationship between all of the parties.
He said it is impossible to know right now how much money the county could wind up spending in legal fees. "This is a fluid situation. Things can change in midstream." Steinberg worked with the CPDC on behalf of Fort Lee during the 2005 round of negotiations with the Base Realignment and Closure Commission. The Petersburg-area Army base came out on top of that round of realignments, winding up with the largest expansion of an Army base in many years. The attorney is managing partner of the Washington, D.C., office of Kutak Rock LLP, a national firm with more than 375 lawyers in 15 offices located from coast to coast.
The firm's clients have included hundreds of state and local government entities, investment banking firms, insurance companies, real estate investors and developers and other financial institutions and businesses, according to information posted on its Web site.
"Kutak Rock has earned a reputation across the United States and abroad for providing excellent legal services in a practical, cost-conscious manner," the firm's online profile states.
Steinberg has pertinent experience as a former chief of the U.S. Army Environmental Law Division and former chief of the U.S. Army Litigation Division at the Pentagon. He concentrates on national security matters associated with environmental contamination, military personnel, base closures and reuse and related issues. Getting together with the other counties to present a unified legal front, Johnson said, is just part of the strategy that will be necessary for Southampton to succeed in its quest to keep the proposed training facility for fighter pilots out of the county.
"If we're going to turn this thing around, it will take an active effort from a number of groups," he said. That effort should start with the county's representatives in the federal government and proceed all the way down to the local level, where even residents will be important, he said.
The Navy has identified two locations on the Southampton/Sussex border, one on the Surry/Prince George border and two in North Carolina as potential sites for pilots of its F/A-18 Super Hornet jets to conduct carrier landing practice.
Under the terms of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Navy will take the next 24 to 30 months to develop an environmental impact study for each of the five sites. Assuming no lawsuits intervene, the process would conclude with the Navy naming one of those sites as its preferred location
OLF opponents get organized - February 8, 2008
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.comFriday, February 8, 2008 8:55 AM EST
CAPRON—A loose-knit group of people rallying against the Navy adopted a name and began to organize into a cohesive task force on Wednesday.
Gathering at Capron United Methodist Church, about 50 of the most active opponents of a proposed outlying landing field took on the no-nonsense moniker "No OLF."
They also set up subcommittees to study the two sites the Navy is considering on the Southampton/Sussex borders and agreed to take steps to organize the group so it can more effectively fight the Navy's unwelcome advances.
"We talked about the importance of solidarity of folks within these sites," Statesville's Lynda Updike said Thursday.
Updike has been the organizing force behind the group, sending regular e-mail updates to a growing list of recipients and coordinating media coverage of its activities since hundreds of OLF opponents first met in a sweltering exhibition building at the Southampton County Fairgrounds in August.
It is a role she hopes to shed soon, as she and her husband "have a crop to get in the field," not to mention involvement in the Southampton Historical Society and other organizations. Updike said Thursday that the group agreed to have a search committee present a slate of officers for the new group at a future meeting. Meanwhile, subcommittees have been formed to confront the task of identifying all of the potentially pertinent features of the 30,000-acre "Dory" and "Mason" sites the Navy is considering for the airfield.
Those features could include Century Farms, special environmental features and historical or cultural characteristics, she said, noting that Southampton's 55 Century Farms — those that have operated for at least 100 consecutive years — lead the state and could help discourage the Navy from taking the huge plots that would be necessary to build the training facility.
Updike encouraged residents to contact the leaders of both subcommittees to let them know of characteristics that should be included in master lists that eventually will be submitted to the Navy.
Joey Cobb is the chairman of the subcommittee in charge of researching the Mason site; he may be reached at 434-658-4812 or by email at Joey.Cobb@Woolpert.com. Betty Beale is leading the research for the Dory site and may be reached by email at bbeale@southampton.k12.va.us or by calling Jack and Barbara Pond at 653-2468. Updike said one member of the group has bought Web site addresses and hopes to have a site up and running next week. "No OLF" also will organize as a limited liability corporation in order to be able to receive donations to pay for expenses, such as maintenance of that site, she said.
The group will meet again Wednesday to firm up some of its members' plans and assignments, she said, but the building will not support large crowds, so members of the public are not being encouraged to attend this time.
"We have been an informal group," Updike said. "Once we get a little bit better organized, we are going to have a meeting, and that is when we want everybody — uncles, brothers and cousins — there."
Meanwhile the group is looking for help from Southampton County, which it hopes will join Sussex and Surry to hire a Washington, D.C., environmental law firm that could represent the counties in protectionist lawsuits.
"I just don't want (the Navy) taking our rural way of life away," Updike said. "I'm afraid other parts of Oceana will join (an OLF), and they will take even more land down the road."
The Navy has identified two locations on the Southampton/Sussex border, one on the Surry/Prince George border and two in North Carolina as potential sites for pilots of its F/A-18 Super Hornet jets to conduct carrier landing practice.
Under the terms of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Navy will take the next 24 to 30 months to develop an environmental impact study for each of the five sites. Assuming no lawsuits intervene, the process would conclude with the Navy naming one of those sites as its preferred location.
Take counties off OLF list, legislators say - February 7, 2008
By Allen Spahr/Contributing Writer/spahrac@vcu.eduThursday, February 7, 2008 4:47 PM EST
RICHMOND-Echoing their constituents, state legislators representing Western Tidewater are asking the federal government to remove Southampton, Sussex and Surry counties from the list of potential sites for the Navy Outlying Landing Field.
Delegates Roslyn C. Tyler, D-Jarratt, and William K. Barlow, D-Smithfield, said they will work to get the counties excluded as possible sites for the project. The lawmakers said the military installation would have negative effects on the surrounding area.
“Those who live nearby would have their quality of life diminished because of the loud sounds and other nuisances which would result from locating an OLF in the community,” Barlow said.
Tyler said she agrees with her constituents. “They are concerned about the possible loss of hundred-year family farms, noise and environmental and economic impact. This OLF will change our quality of life in our rural communities.”
The delegates said they will work with federal officials in hopes to persuading the Navy to put the OLF elsewhere. A long battle lies ahead, the legislators said.
“It will take local, state and federal elected officials working together to convince the secretary of the Navy in Washington of alternative sites and recommendations,” Tyler said. “The decision will be made 24 to 30 months from now; anything can change during that time period.” Because the final decision will be made by the executive branch of the federal government, the duo are working on a trip to Washington after the legislative session in Richmond ends on March 8, Barlow said.
Tyler and Barlow are discussing whom to meet with to plead their case. So far, they plan to meet with Virginia’s U.S. senators n Republican John Warner and Democrat Jim Webb n and with the area’s members of Congress: Democratic Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott and Republican Rep. Randy Forbes.
Tyler and Barlow also want to include the Navy officials who will have an influence on the final decision.
"By an interesting coincidence, both of our Virginia U.S. senators n John Warner and Jim Webb n are former secretaries of the Navy,” Barlow said. “If we can persuade our four federal legislators to strongly back our position, then those four will be in a better position to get the results we want.”
The delegates sat down with Gov. Timothy M. Kaine and the administrators and chairmen of the boards of supervisors of Southampton and Sussex counties on Jan. 31 to discuss the impact of the OLF.
The Navy is seeking the field to support carrier landing practices for aircraft at Naval Air Station Oceana and Naval Station Norfolk. Besides the sites in Southampton, Surry and Sussex counties, the Navy is considering two sites in North Carolina.
“We all are supportive of our military and concerned about the needs of Oceana. However, another solution is advisable,” Tyler said. “We have to work hard in the best interest of the people we all represent.”
The legislators are hopeful that the Navy will find a different site for the OLF.
“I don’t think that this is a battle lost by any means,” Barlow said. “If we can get the solid support of our four legislators in dealing with the federal Navy official, we have a good chance.”
Tyler represents Sussex County and Barlow represents Surry County, while both delegates share representation of Southampton.
Letter to the Editor Silence on OLF sites can be dangerous- February 6, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008 12:06 PM ESTGov. Tim Kaine and U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, in particular, with their unflinching support of locating in Virginia the Navy's Outlying Landing Field, have sacrificed Southside Virginia again.
Sen. John Warner and U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes support the Navy's proposed acquisitions of land for this purpose. Sen. Warner, however, suggested the use of Fort Pickett. Congressman Forbes' true stance has not been revealed. However, statements attributed to him show him walking the proverbial political fence.
We should be reminded that he is from the Tidewater area.
The only representative for our district to support the people has been Del. Rosalyn Tyler. Mrs. Tyler has met with the people, publicly spoken out against the landing fields and time and time again written articles in the local newspapers voicing her concerns. Thank you, Mrs. Tyler.
The Navy would have you believe that the location of these landing fields would be an economic boost to the localities through employment during the construction phase as well as upon completion of the project.
I attended the public meeting held in Sussex County and, when we asked point blank about employment, we were told that Navy personnel or persons employed through the Navy with specific, relevant skills would be employed. Few, if any, local persons, therefore, would benefit.Also, any and all land purchased by the Navy would no longer be taxable.
Press releases from Gov. Kaine's office and the Navy indicate that money and services will become available to the localities affected. Is this a bribe? If said money is available in the state coffers, then why hasn't Southside Virginia been the recipient of much-needed financial benefits before now?
Can you imagine what the loss of revenue alone would do to any of the counties currently being considered?
Taxes will indeed rise. Services will be curtailed. Real estate values will plummet and economic development will be extremely limited.
Southside Virginia cannot withstand this kind of blow to its economy.
I strongly urge every citizen in Greensville, Southampton, Sussex and Surry counties to attend every public meeting concerning the Outlying Landing Fields. Even if you don't live within a selected Virginia site, you will be affected. Please don't let this opportunity to voice your opinion pass by.
Write to Gov. Kaine, the Virginia Office of Commonwealth Preparedness, Sens. Webb and Warner, Congressman Forbes, Del. Lucas, the secretary of the Navy, etc.
If you do not let your voice be heard, your silence will be broken by the sound of an F/A18 Super Hornet flying overhead.
Connie E. Harrell
Jarratt
Governor abuses constituents' trust with OLF stance - February 2, 2008
By Ella Beale/Guest Columnist Saturday, February 2, 2008 9:08 AM EST
To the honorable Gov. Timothy Kaine:
I have always believed in the power of democracy and the important role that individuals play in their government. Unfortunately the trust that I have put into you and other government representatives has been misplaced and abused. This gross oversight can be no better highlighted than in the case of the Outlying Landing Field (OLF) in Southampton and Sussex County.
The blatant disregard that you have shown to the opinions of the constituents within this area underlies a larger problem running rampant throughout the governing bodies.
I have always been proud to say that I grew up and live in Southampton County, a rural county in the western extremity of the Tidewater region. I was raised with cornfields on either side of my family's home with woods standing in the front and back. It is a safe, peaceful community where the biggest attractions on Friday nights are the Little League baseball games.
This serene community is not an accident of fate but rather a choice made by each resident to live in the country.
By living in the country you forgo the convenience of having everything at your fingertips in return for sense of privacy and freedom found there. We were relatively sheltered from the outside world until the OLF was introduced into our small community. Make no mistake, we did not ask for this intrusion but rather it was forced upon us. We also did not ask to be lied to.
The representation within Southampton County is assembled in the form of the county Board of Supervisors who speak for the constituents in the individual regions. The board members listened and heard the cry of the people and sent you a formal letter of Aug. 1, informing you of their decision and asking to be taken off the list.
Bob Crouch from the Office of Commonwealth Preparedness mocked the Board by ensuring them that they would be informed of future steps and that their decision would be taken into consideration.
But the citizens were not taken into consideration and furthermore were not informed of the future steps. They had to observe on their own the clear cutting of more than 50,000 acres of land by International Paper to be sold to an "unnamed buyer." Did you know about the "unnamed buyer," governor? We are now currently being informed of the decision when there seems that there are little to no choices left. A cruel trick has been played and the repercussions are astounding. What can you offer the area?
The OLF brings no new jobs to the vicinity and diminishes the amount of timber land available for harvesting by International Paper, one of the biggest employers in the area. The land that is sure to be annexed around the base will bring little profit to its owners in a time when national values are plummeting and prices for everything else are rising.
The wildlife and beauty of the state of Virginia that you highlighted as one of your focuses while in office will be diminished by the deforestation and noise pollution. Most importantly families that have lived on their land for more than 150 years will be forced to relocate.
It is an insurmountable debt that the residents of Southampton and Sussex counties will be forced to pay on your behalf.
Your flippant attitude towards the welfare of the people living within these areas shows the true nature of your political and social ideology. The secrecy of the process, that I am sure you will attribute to national security, also is a telling attribute of the kind of legacy you want to leave behind.
The glaring lack of faith that you put in the residents of this area to absorb and process the facts of this decision speaks to me the general lack of faith you have in the education system of the state. If Virginia schools are doing their job to prepare individuals for the real world then there should be no doubt in their ability to understand the legislation and basic facts.
The refusal of support by the area's constituents in no way implies that they are unpatriotic and selfish and the assertion that they are is nothing but a feeble excuse used when there is no solid argument to take its place.
Through this ongoing experience it has become increasingly clear to me that the power, in this case, does not lie in the hands of the people but rather in a small, manipulative, cunning group. I have also had a moment of clarity concerning another belief that I have held since early childhood: that the majority of people are good and when given the opportunity most would do right instead of wrong.
You have not jaded me enough to think that all people are bad but rather that it is hard for the screams of the majority to be heard over the roaring of the minority's jet planes.
Finally my question to you is how do you sleep at night?
I reason very peacefully, considering there are no Navy Jets executing training over the top of your home.
Don't the residents of Southampton and Sussex counties deserve the same good night's sleep?
Ella L. Beale attended Southampton High School and is a sophomore at Radford University. Her e-mail address is elbeale@radford.edu
Comments
Juan wrote on Feb 6, 2008 9:56 AM:
" Southampton County is not the paradise everyone is describing it to be. Heck, I can't even stand to drive through the area with the stench coming from International Paper. Diesel fuel from jets doesn't smell anywhere as foul as the paper plant!
I guess everyone puts up with the pollution caused by IP because they want their Wendy's double stacks and the Happy Meals from McD's but could care less if the rag-heads invaded, as long as they still get their fast food in the paper bag that they just throw out on the side of the highway. Has anyone really taken a look at the roads in this place, its disgusting all the liter and trash all over 58. Southampton county more closely resembles a landfill instead of this old country historic paradise some are painting it to be.
I for one am glad to support our military, and would love to see the construction of the OLF in Southampton. If the operations planned at the facility results in lessening the loss of our military personnel, no matter how few, it will be well worth it to displace a few griping citizens of this county by offering just and fair compensation for their properties.
Those griping about the OLF should be ashamed of themselves. If only those could be sent over to the Middle East and Afghanistan to fight against the insurgents, I wonder how quickly their tune might change! "
George wrote on Feb 5, 2008 9:10 AM:
" I think its funny about the comment where IP sold 50K acers to an unknown buyer! Just remember that IP WILL close down in the near future (20 years max), and thus southampton will become a ghost town. Thus the reason they are selling the land.
Its also funny how country folks put limitations on the land they sale(i.e. must be 2000 sq ft house, no junk cars, etc.), but exclude themselves from these limitations. Guess you all think your above everyone else!
So if you don't want the air field to help our nation defend itself, then don't expect the government to protect you should our nation get invaded! "
J. R. Ferguson wrote on Feb 4, 2008 9:53 AM:
" Virginia, this is what you get when you keep on electing carpetbaggers such as Kaine (and Allen, and Robb, and Warner, next Webb) to our "highest honor" (according to former Governor Godwin), the position of Governor. Native Virginians are only 43% of those living in Va. now! Did you really think he would give a hoot about rural folks? Wake up! Why can't Virginia raise up a native son to lead her own people? What is wrong with us? "
Helen Harrell wrote on Feb 4, 2008 8:38 AM:
" There is also the safety factor. The planes will be flying across the land to get to the site. What about when, not "IF", a plane goes down how many residents will be killed, homes destroyed, fires caused by the crash? What about the farmers who will lose their livelihood?
The people in VB call us "unpatriotic", I think they should look into the mirror. Most of us were here before there was such a thing as aircraft, and also Oceana. "
Kay D. Bryant wrote on Feb 4, 2008 2:03 AM:
" As Mrs. Harrell and Mrs. Mattox have stated this article written by Ms. Beale says it all. You depend on farmers for produce so why not leave the land for that purpose. This has been a way of life for years for these people and something of this magnitude should not be forced on these people. We have made our choice to live in quiet safer communities so why not leave them as they are and take this venture somewhere else. "
Helen Harrell wrote on Feb 3, 2008 9:32 AM:
"This a great column! As Mrs. Mattox stated, I can't say anything better. The Governor doesn't care about the Century and older farms. We have acres set aside for Conservation, but, they don't matter either. I guess we need to have two Governors, one to represent the cities, and, one to represent the rural areas. It is a shame that our elected officials don't realize that they represent all of us, and, not just where they think the votes are. "
Sharon B. Mattox wrote on Feb 2, 2008 11:32 AM:
" Outstanding! So eloquent! There is certainly nothing I can say to improve upon this informed and heartfelt column. This letter deserves to go to the Governor, the Secretary of the Navy and to the OCP. I do not know Ella Beale, but as a resident of Sussex County, I applaud and appreciate her comments. "
Helen Harrell wrote on Feb 9, 2008 7:35 PM:
" John, I also wonder where you are. Why don't you make those kind of statements to the ones in Virginia Beach and Oceana? They came after the base was there, and, they knew the base was there. THEY want the planes gone and started lawsuits and whining because of the noise. Why don't they give up THEIR homes. Don't throw the word "Unpatriotic" at us, tell VB to look in the mirror. How many of the whiners served this country? My husband was military, my father served, my brother served, and I have nephews serving now in Iraq. How many of them can say that? "
Sharon B. Mattox ?wrote on Feb 8, 2008 11:30 PM:" This is the kind of negativity that those of us who oppose an OLF in out community face. Though the majority of the people do not want to see an OLF here in Southside VA, we continue to have to listen to the very vocal few who want to equate that to patriotism. One has nothing to do with the other. People such as "John" need to educate themselves about the real issue, before making personal attacks showing their narrow-mindedness and judgmental nature. Sure I take losing my home personally. Wouldn't anyone? Where does "John" live? Maybe we can direct the Navy to his area since it is CLEAR he thinks he is obviously more patriotic than the rest of us. I stand behind my letter and my beliefs. I hope and pray that people with "John's" opinion will make an attempt to understand someone's differing point of view. Without walking in another person's shoes, it is a hard thing to judge. This land has been in my family for generations. IF an OLF is truly needed and IF this was the only suitable site, I would gladly relinquish it for the cause of American freedom, but that is not the case in this instance. I will not give it up without fighting for my current family and for the sake of our forefathers. That's MY INTEREST, "John". I hope I have made it CLEAR for you. "
John wrote on Feb 6, 2008 2:13 PM:" Personally, I would rather suffer giving up land my family owned for over 100 years to help ensure our nations freedom! Your story is heartfelt, but it is clear you only care about YOURSELF and your PERSONAL interest and not the best interest of our country and its security.
Would you rather give up material things (i.e land) or give up your freedom? "
Letters to the Editor OLF would rob family of its heritage - Friday, February 1, 2008
I realize I am blessed and very fortunate to say that I live on land where I was born and where I have lived all of my 50-plus years.
Not many people can say that nor do some care. It means a lot to me personally, however.
Just for a moment, imagine what it is like to raise your children on land that was homesteaded by your great-great-grandfather well over 100 years ago. While you are thinking about that, imagine what it is like to live on land that you watched your father and your grandfather till and toil over for years.
Imagine living on land that you and your husband actually hand cleared of trees, stumps, roots and debris so that you could build your home and start your life together.
It is not just the peace and tranquility and freedom of living in a rural area that I covet; I love these particular hundreds of acres of land because of my heritage and my ancestry.
If you can possibly imagine how I feel, I hope you can understand why the possible location of the Outlying Landing Field (OLF) on the Mason tract in Sussex and Southampton counties is traumatizing real people. If you are still trying to imagine how I feel, picture my parents and the needless stress and strain this is putting them through.
My dad is a World War II veteran, but now, at the age of 87, is having to fight a war just to save his home of the last 56 years. What is fair about that?
Whatever happened to the American dream? My mother has lived on this land for virtually all of her 82 years. How do we explain to her that she may have to move and/or have what should be her golden years turned into turmoil and despair? Would you like to see your parents suffer like this?
I humbly ask for your support in opposing the location of the OLF in Southside Virginia.
Sharon B. Mattox
Jarratt
Governor: OLF critical to Oceana - February 1, 2008
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.comFriday, February 1, 2008 9:21 AM EST
SUSSEX COUNTY—During a meeting Thursday, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine told supervisors from Sussex and Southampton that he worries Virginia could lose the sprawling Navy base at Oceana if the service cannot build a new Outlying Landing Field somewhere nearby.
“He was quite honest with us that he would not chase this out of Sussex County,” Eric Fly told an audience of about 30 during a Sussex Board of Supervisors meeting Thursday evening.
Fly represents the Wakefield District in Sussex. He and board Chairman Rufus Tyler joined Southampton County Board of Supervisors Chairman Dallas O. Jones, along with Sussex County Administrator Mary E. Jones and Southampton Administrator Michael Johnson, in a hastily arranged meeting with the governor. Also attending were Del. Roslyn Tyler, who set up the meeting, Del. William Barlow and Robert P. Crouch Jr. of the governor's Office for Commonwealth Preparedness.
Rufus Tyler said the governor was “very attentive” as the visitors described their concerns about loss of productive farmland, loss of control of family-owned properties, loss of the rural quality of life, loss of potential economic development opportunities and loss of tax revenue from land that could be taken off the tax rolls if an airstrip is built in either Sussex or Southampton.
“I think he heard our concerns,” Tyler said. “But he did express his concern about keeping Oceana in Virginia.”
Fly said the governor's office presented estimates showing that Virginia could lose $2.2 billion in revenue if Oceana were to move elsewhere, and he said that Houston and Florida have been angling for the base for some time. “The only positive thing we can do is to drive this thing down to North Carolina,” he said. “We expressed our support for the Camden site.”
Citing the imminent issues of power lines and a restricted-access Route 460 that would run through large parts of the county Fly told those attending the Sussex meeting that “Sussex County can't handle an OLF economically.”
Southampton would face similar economic issues, as both the power lines and Route 460 will cut a wide swath through the county.
Despite the promise of unspecified economic incentives for a county that agrees to host the practice landing strip, Sussex supervisors confirmed their continued opposition to the plan. At the request of a resident who asked, “Does Sussex have a price?” the board voted unanimously to oppose any Navy plan to locate an auxiliary airstrip in the county.
Jones said she and county administrators from Southampton, Greensville and Surry had agreed to meet next week to discuss how to fight the Navy's advances.
The Navy has identified two locations on the Southampton/Sussex border, one on the Surry/Prince George border and two in North Carolina as potential sites for pilots of its F/A-18 Super Hornet jets to conduct carrier landing practice.
CommentsMatthew wrote on Feb 6, 2008 8:51 AM: " Also Gary, in regards to your comment
"At least you received just compensation for your private property – you can tell your grandchildren that you helped keep our country from being nuked, just like in the tv show Jericho! But in the real world, the one where people have lived and died trying to keep their families fed and clothed through a Civil War, two World Wars, and a Great Depression, there is no just compensation. "
You are saying that you value your freedom and the chance to see your grandchilden enjoy the same freedom with no mention of where you live or what you posses... Yet you also say that you don't want to give up your land and give the "put it in his backyard" sentiment. I had to point out this contradiction.
And yes, I would rather see my grandchildren than get nuked. Family means more to me than material things, including land."
Matthew wrote on Feb 6, 2008 8:32 AM: "I must say a very "heartfelt" comment that needs to be added to the no OLF petition website! And yes, the state has limited rights, but it is the federal government that is involved in obtaining the land, not the state. Gov. Kaine is trying to get the federal government to pick VA over NC to keep jobs in VA. Just the same as Southampton County buying land in courtland and Franklin buying land near Armory Drive and Rt 58 for an industrial park. All in an effort to bring new jobs and more tax base. Plus the reason southampton county opposes the OLF is because it will be a training site that will not bring new jobs or increased tax revenue. If it did bring new jobs and taxes, I bet they would suddenly approve it, just like the new industrial parks. Yet they all forget about Pretlow industrial park that is a BUST. Even Carrsville is trying to bring more industry just to increase their tax base.
Regardless, reading through your well developed and orchestrated novel, one this is clear. Just like Southampton country, Franklin, and Carrsville, You only care about one thing. And that is YOURSELF and YOUR BEST INTERESTS.."
Gary wrote on Feb 6, 2008 7:36 AM:" Thank you Ali and Matthew for confirming what the citizens of these counties already know. The OLF is about keeping the Navy’s business in Virginia. It is not about the most effective training facility for carrier pilots. As you say, Oceana is vital to the interests of Virginia. That is – the Virginia economy. And it was economics that caused this problem. If real estate developers had not been allowed to encroach on Oceana’s space, continued use of the field for day or night operations would not be an issue. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Navy has been complaining about this for over fifteen years and has been looking elsewhere to move the entire base operation. The Navy is looking out for its pilots while government officials and local developers are looking out for what? National security? Military readiness? Money is the correct answer. Too much money is at stake to let this base slip away.
It’s too late to undo what government officials have allowed to happen around Oceana. So the next best thing is to use eminent domain, according to Ali, to confiscate private property and keep the Navy happy. I hope someone at the Department of the Navy will re-read the 5th Amendment, re-read President Bush’s Executive order of 2006 limiting State’s rights in the use of eminent domain, and also read all these “useless” petitions and letters from United States citizens who fear they will lose their homes. The fact is - the State of Virginia made a huge mistake in how it managed land around Oceana and now faces the imminent threat of the Navy pulling out and going someplace where they can offer the most effective and safest training for their pilots.
This is not a fight with the Navy. I think we all agree that our pilots should have the best training facility available because we all know the importance of a strong and capable military. Oceana cannot provide that any longer. Too much damage has been done.
If the government decides to confiscate Sussex or Sothampton property and build the OLF in one of these rural communities, how long will it last? The OLF will serve only as a night landing facility, according to information currently available. So what happens as the Virginia Beach population continues to swell and development gets more and more dense? How long will other issues that surround Oceana be allowed to persist before the Navy again says, “We need to move.” At some point, Oceana will not be viable as a site for any flight operations. What then? My guess is the Navy will move the whole facility somewhere else.
And then what will you say to these “not in my backyarders?” Sorry. But it was just some old houses and graveyards, swamps and woods. At least you received just compensation for your private property – you can tell your grandchildren that you helped keep our country from being nuked, just like in the tv show Jericho!
But in the real world, the one where people have lived and died trying to keep their families fed and clothed through a Civil War, two World Wars, and a Great Depression, there is no just compensation. There are just empty promises from elected officials. How much longer will we need to defend our nation from foreign invaders when it is slowly crumbling under the weight of greed and a loss of any kind of vision, especially a vision toward our past and the sanctity of individual rights so beautifully stated by Jefferson and Madison, Franklin and Adams. According to people like Ali and Matthew, all men are endowed with certain inalienable rights so long as they do not interfere with the business of government. You are right – the government can and will take what it needs to take. The OLF will probably be built in Sussex or Southampton. All these letters and petitions and articles will become so much recycled paper. And one day, so will our history books, our Constitution, and our Declaration of Independence.
Ali wrote on Feb 5, 2008 8:34 PM:" Kudos to you, Matthew, for actually having correct information about an OLF and providing informative rebuttals. Were you in the Navy at one point? I'm impressed with your knowledge. There is so much misinformation and intentional ignorance regarding this OLF. I applaud you and I concur with your thoughts & opinions. Good to know not everyone is against an OLF!
The bottom line: The Navy is going to place an OLF where it wants. Petitions, writing to your delegates and representatives isn't going to help.....everyone in the government knows how vital Oceana is to the state of Virginia and that takes precedence. Basically = eminent domain! "
Matthew wrote on Feb 5, 2008 11:56 AM:" I read the petition site. Heartfelt, yes, but regardless where they put the OLF, you will get the same heartfelt responses about their "rich history" and "farming for over 200 years". And your response is typical, "don't put it in my backyard, put it over there in that person's backyard."
In regards to your comment that if "providing the best training opportunity.. was first priority..they would have moved out west." It is clear you don't understand the red tape involved with doing so.
Regardless, I understand people wanting to keep their land and heritage, but they fail to look at the big picture. I still question their patriotism and still consider them hypocrites! And yes, I would move if they decided to put the OLF in my backyard. I may not like it, but I value my freedom more than I do my heritage. You need to watch the tv series Jerico! That is what can happen if our military is not prepared!"
Gary wrote on Feb 5, 2008 8:30 AM:" I encourage Matthew to go to the petition web site that was created in August of last year. It currently has over 800 signatures in opposition to the OLF. But more importantly, he should read some of the heartfelt comments of local residents. Clearly, this land has a rich history and the people who have farmed it for hundreds of years are the best kind of patriots this country has. They live, work and raise their families despite conditions that are often arrayed against them. And they would do anything to protect our nation.
What bothers local families here with the OLF, and I agree with them, is that this decision has little to do with our nation's defense and most to do with keeping the Navy's money here in Virginia. The Governor gave his word that he would not force the OLF on counties that did not want it, but now he says keeping Oceana's 2 billion dollars in business is more important than that.
Having the OLF in Virginia has nothing to do with providing the best training opportunity for our pilots. If ideal conditions for carrier pilot training were the first priority, the Navy would have closed Oceana down years ago when it was on the military hit list and moved pilot training out west to the desert with Pacific pilots.
Please visit the petition web site at: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/1960mapa/petition.html
Read what these people have to say. Then you might think twice before questioning their patriotism and calling them hypocrites."
Matthew wrote on Feb 4, 2008 12:23 PM:"Responding back to Lilian, the gov. only has to provide just compensation when obtaining land for gov. use. And no, it is not right to take land from someone due to their finicial situation. But you have to look at the economic impact: low cost to purchase, and ideal location. With little to no major industry, fewer working farms (i.e. small tax base), and low population density, it is the best choice. Plus you CAN'T use an old carrier to practice on in the ocean. 1. Should an accident occur, the plane is totalled and cant be recovered without underwater equipment, 2. EPA is involved (jet fuel), and 3. Using a land base location is 1/4 cheaper and safer to our pilots!
In regards to beauty, its all a matter of opinion and I do live in Franklin! But the basis for using the area is on what I mention above and not on aesthetics. "
Lilian wrote on Feb 4, 2008 9:47 AM:" Responding to Matthew, you obviously don't live around here. Our landscape is some of the most beautiful in the state. It's not so pretty where everybody has moved from everywhere and built houses and destroyed our farming community. AND if you have a run down car or house and it's all you have, would it be right for the government to take it from you?
And, regarding the OLF, I agree with Jeff Turner. The ocean's a pretty big place. Should be room there. "
Matthew wrote on Feb 3, 2008 11:07 PM:" Remember the constitution does not protect property! Otherwise, how could the government protect our great nation. Stop being hypocrite's by supporting our troop and the war, yet refusing to give up property to ensure our defense and freedom... Plus there is nothing special about rural Southampton county. Just a lot of run down farms and ugly landscape. "
Jeff Turner wrote on Feb 1, 2008 12:40 PM:" If they need to practice carrier landings, tow a mothballed carrier out off shore and practice there. It would certainly be more realistic with the rise and fall of the waves and hey, water is softer than dirt right? "
Felice Hancock wrote on Feb 1, 2008 12:26 PM:
" While we can not expect change to happen, we should not have to expect it in our FRONT YARDS! Let the Navy keep all its bribe money and use it in buying out the BACKYARDS of city folks who moved into the VA Beach & Cheasespeake. Their city mayors and Board of Supervisors should claim their responsibility for the threat to the rural heritage they are greedily inflecting. Is Gov. Kaine the Governor of VA or only two big cities? "
OLF fight will be lengthy, county official warns - January 30, 2008
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.comWednesday, January 30, 2008 8:34 AM EST
COURTLAND—There's "a long, bumpy road" ahead for Southampton County citizens hoping to keep the Navy and its proposed Outlying Landing Field out of the county, a group of nearly 200 heard Monday night.
"This will be a drawn-out, gut-wrenching, emotional roller-coaster ride that won't end anytime soon," County Administrator Michael Johnson warned during a meeting of Southampton's Board of Supervisors.
Although the Navy took three potential county airfield sites out of contention, Johnson said he and other Southampton officials were "concerned and alarmed" when the service announced that two other sites had been shifted so that large portions of the county would be affected if they are chosen as OLF locations.
But the county will not be helpless through the selection process, he said.
The Navy's environmental studies of the two Southampton sites, as well as one on the Surry/Prince George line and two in North Carolina, will take at least two years.
The National Environmental Policy Act requires an extensive study of wetlands and other environmental issues, as well as an examination of the cultural resources, archeology and other factors of each potential site. It provides "a doorway for citizen input," he told supervisors. The process also will provide an opportunity for citizens to have the Navy explain why sprawling Fort Pickett was passed over as a potential site for the airfield and whether there is really a need for a new airstrip at all.
Navy officials have said that they need a new auxiliary runway where pilots of F/A-18 Super Hornets can practice their nighttime aircraft carrier landings in darkness and safety. Encroaching development and the light that came with it have marginalized the current practice touch-and-go field in Chesapeake, they said.
Johnson and county supervisors are working to set up Washington, D.C., meetings with Virginia's senators to lobby their support for the county.
Meanwhile, Southampton citizens are being asked for their help in the process. "Write to your senator and congressman," Board of Supervisors Chairman Dallas O. Jones said to an overflowing crowd in the boardroom and hallway of the county office building. "Flood his office with letters and phone calls — anything you can do to get his attention."
State and Navy officials have suggested that they would be willing to negotiate substantive economic development and other benefits to whatever area ends up hosting the airfield.
But Berlin-Ivor District Supervisor Ronald West said it will be important that the county not send the Navy or the state any mixed signals. "We are not for sale," he said.
Despite such emphatic talk, however, there were hints that some officials' confidence has been shaken by the Navy's decision to move Southampton to its short list.
"I think we see the handwriting on the wall," said Franklin District Supervisor Walter L. Young Jr.
Noting that Gov. Timothy M. Kaine has been unsupportive of the county's requests to be removed from consideration, West added, "My real feeling is that, whether we want this or not, it will come."
Whatever the outcome of the process, Johnson reiterated to his board that fighting the Navy will be a long and hard task. "This will be a marathon, not a sprint," he said.
Opposition steers Navy back to its first choice - Wednesday, August 1, 2007
BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.comVIRGINIA BEACH—Widespread opposition to potential Virginia and North Carolina practice landing sites for its fighter jets would likely lead the Navy to redouble its efforts to locate an outlying landing field in Washington County, N.C.
The Navy would rather fight for its original site in court than force another unwilling community to host the landing strip, according to Rear Adm.David Anderson of the Navy's Fleet Forces Command.
Anderson and Capt. Patrick J. Lorge, commanding officer of Naval Air Station Oceana, played host on Monday to representatives from Southampton, Sussex and Nottoway counties and the Town of Blackstone in an event organized by U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes (VA-04).
The municipalities are among five Virginia counties with property that state and federal officials suggested to the Navy as potential OLF sites. In mid-July, the Office on Commonwealth Preparedness submitted a list of 10 sites in and around Southside Virginia that met a broad range of criteria.
Prior to that offering, Sen. John Warner had asked that the Navy consider Fort Pickett, near Blackstone, as a potential location for an auxiliary landing field to supplement operations at the existing Naval Landing Field Fentress in Chesapeake.
Representatives from those counties in Forbes' district were invited to an informational meeting at Oceana on Monday, where they watched simulated landings of the F/A-18 Super Hornets that would use the new airstrip and heard a presentation on the details of the proposal. Some, including Southampton Board of Supervisors Chairman Dallas O. Jones, took a helicopter ride to Fentress to see the effects of encroachment on that practice landing strip. A second helicopter trip for the remainder of the group was cancelled because of storms.
It was during a question-and-answer session after lunch in the base's Officer's Club that Adm. Anderson told the 30 or so local-government representatives that the Navy feels confident about its chances in court if it is forced to press ahead with the Washington County, N.C., site, or one of four others it identified early in the process that began back in 1999.
"If all of this work comes back and it fails," Anderson said about the recently identified sites in Virginia and North Carolina, "we're going after Washington County."
The question-and-answer session came at the end of a day that started with local officials being driven by bus from a parking lot just inside the gates of Oceana to a building that houses pilot briefing rooms and Super Hornet flight simulators.
In a large briefing room, Navy representatives from Oceana and the Fleet Forces Command joined Forbes and his assistants in welcoming the delegations. Attending from Southampton were Chairman Jones and Supervisors Anita Felts of the Jerusalem District and Walt Brown of the Newsoms District, along with County Administrator Michael Johnson.
Noting the fact that the original choice of Washington County, N.C., for the OLF led to lawsuits and bitter contention from environmentalists and residents, Anderson told those attending, "We have come to believe more than ever that a dialogue is important."
Forbes then complimented those who attended, noting "If you have the facts, you can make good decisions for your constituents."
PowerPoint presentations by the Navy showed that the new landing strip would support the Navy's training of Super Hornet pilots by hosting an expected 13,600 landings per year, broken down into one or two 45-minute sessions per day, when four or five aircraft would perform eight to 10 landings and take-offs.
About 70 percent of the operations would occur after sunset, and training would normally be confined to the period between Sunday evening and Friday afternoon. But the facility would need to be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week to allow for so-called "surge training" in support of pending deployments.
Navy officials said that, depending on the site chosen, the core area actually owned by the Navy could be as small as 2,000 acres, with some surrounding acreage subject to the purchase of restrictive use easements that would allow most agricultural and hunting uses but would forbid most development.
The Navy would pay for those easements, as well as for buying property and relocating homeowners and businesses within the most restrictive of its "clear zones" and accident potential zones.
Acknowledging that the Navy had played a role in allowing the development that encroaches on Oceana and Fentress, contributing to the need for a second OLF, Anderson said, "The Navy has not always managed this as well as we should have."
"We are very good at dropping bombs and fighting wars, but we're not very good at running a business," he said.
Until recently, for example, officials had not kept an eye on what type of facilities were being built around Oceana, despite the fact that the Navy held development easements on much of the property around the base. Consequently, some undesirable businesses — such as a gymnastics school — were built within zones that should have been kept free of such development.
Those issues, along with the pressing need for training in support of the War on Terror, prompted the Navy to begin looking for an OLF. But "unprecedented resistance" to the original sites the Navy identified in North Carolina caused officials to begin looking elsewhere.
Fort Pickett, Anderson said, was put forward by Sen. Warner's office early in the process, a revelation that seemed not to sit well with some attending from that area.
"We've been under a microscope, and nobody told us we're being looked at," Blackstone Mayor William D. Coleburn said.
Though it currently hosts a military base with an airfield, Anderson said, Fort Pickett would not necessarily be a good fit for the Navy. "The thing we're concerned about with Fort Pickett is all the other (military training) activity that takes place there," he said. "Will they be able to continue that activity?"
Anderson's advice to local officials Monday was for them to be in contact with the state about their concerns related to the proposed airfield.
"If your community doesn't want this, then we want to get it off the list early," he said. "We will take a site that will be less optimal for us if it winds up being more acceptable for the community."
He said Virginia and North Carolina officials have been asked to remove communities unwilling to host the landing field from their lists before Sept. 15. At that time, Fleet Forces Command will make a recommendation to the Secretary of the Navy for more study on whatever sites are left that fit the Navy's needs.