BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com

SURRY—The Navy had a chance to sell its idea of an outlying landing field Thursday to one of the communities on its list of potential locations.

Invited by the Surry County Board of Supervisors to attend a special community OLF forum at L.P. Jackson Elementary School, two Navy officials talked to a polite but seemingly unreceptive crowd of about 200.

Representatives from the Navy's Fleet Forces Command had the floor for the first half of the meeting and made a PowerPoint presentation in which they described the need for such a facility, the process that must take place before it could come to fruition and some of its potential benefits and detriments.

Citizens listened quietly, took notes and asked a few questions at the end of the presentation, displaying little of the emotion that defines much of the opposition to the issue and that Holmes had said he hoped to avoid during Thursday's meeting.

Commander Richard G. Catoire, OLF project officer, told those attending that the Navy is involved in the OLF process now, because it needs another facility where pilots can train to land jets and propeller aircraft on aircraft carriers.

Fentress Auxiliary Landing Field, located in Chesapeake, is the service's main site for training pilots of Oceana-based F/A-18 Super Hornets and other aircraft. But, he said, that airfield, located less than 10 miles from the Virginia Beach base, cannot handle the increased training capacity necessary to keep the Navy on a war-ready footing.

In addition to the capacity problem, he said, encroaching development and the lights it brings have rendered Fentress a less-than-ideal choice for pilots who need to practice the dangerous art of landing jets on an aircraft carrier at night.

"Pilots landing on an aircraft carrier at night experience more stress than they would if they were going into combat," Catoire said. "There is no room for error out there on that ship."

The OLF would give those pilots another place to practice, especially during "surge operations," when the Navy is preparing one or more carriers to set out to sea, he said.

The new facility could be expected to provide an average of two or three 45-minute training periods per day, he said. Each training period would accommodate four or five aircraft making eight to 10 landings each, usually after sunset.

Noise levels would be high when the planes were flying, he conceded, describing with several charts the expected noise impacts within the 30,000-acre space that would be subject to residential and development restrictions.

"It's loud; we understand that," Catoire said, noting that even people who live outside the 30,000-acre zone could expect some noise during practice periods.

Another Navy representative, Mark Anthony, OLF project director, promised residents that the Navy would fly a jet in the landing pattern one night during the environmental review to give them an idea of just how loud it would be. Also, the environmental study the Navy prepares will include an analysis of expected noise levels at various locations throughout the county.

The economic impact of an OLF also could be large, Catoire said. There would be 506-631 construction jobs created, and the project would result in $80 million in direct costs, with a regional impact of about $100 million, he said.

Operating the facility would require 62 civilian positions, with a total payroll of about $4.2 million per year, he said. Those positions would include firefighters, secretaries, airfield management and refuelers. Additionally, the Navy would contract for between $100,000 and $150,000 worth of facility repair and maintenance services, he said.

Catoire also tried to set minds at ease regarding the potential personal negative impacts of the facility. Some residents would have to give up their property for the airfield. Others in the buffer zone would be required to sign restrictive easements to the Navy that would limit their use of the property in the future.

Both types of landowners would be well compensated, Catoire said, noting that the Navy would begin with fair market value when trying to negotiate compensation. Those who were moved out of the OLF area would get relocation costs, as well. And those who farm area around the core airfield likely would be able to continue to do so, he said. "Farming and forestry are compatible land use activities."

Catoire closed his presentation by answering some frequently asked questions about the OLF and the Navy's selection process. Among those answers were the following:

• Fort Pickett was considered for the OLF location, but was rejected for several reasons, chiefly because of its distance from the Oceana squadrons that would be training there. The added cost in fuel and aircraft wear-and-tear would be prohibitive, he said.

• Bald eagles, ospreys, deer and even horses are known to live and thrive under the flight path at Oceana Naval Air Station, leading the Navy to conclude that noise effects on livestock and native species should be minimal.

• Retired aircraft carriers are not viable training solutions, because the point of training on a land-based airstrip is to get pilots used to hitting their marks every single time before sending them out to land on a relatively tiny landing strip bobbing in the ocean. "If there's a slight misstep (landing on a carrier), it's a bad day for everyone," Catoire said.

• Schoolchildren should not be negatively affected by the OLF, because the sites aren't expected to be located near schools and most of the training is scheduled for nighttime, when schools are not in session.

Both Catoire and Anthony also assured one questioner that the Navy would not poison any animals to remove them from the core, fenced airfield area.

They promised another that residents would have access to better maps at a planned "public scoping session" from 4 to 9 p.m. May 7 at Surry County High School.

The Navy plans in April to publish its Notice of Intent to begin the environmental study process that is required under the National Environmental Policy Act. Scoping meetings for the other affected counties are expected prior to Surry's May 7 session, but no earlier than 15 days after that publication.

Catoire said those meetings would give landowners a chance to ask Navy representatives specific questions about how the OLF would affect their properties.

---

To the Editor:

Regarding the OLF issue in rural areas of Virginia and North Carolina: It is difficult, if not impossible, for those of us potentially affected by this to comment without showing our emotional involvement, as well as our contempt for politicians who talk out of both sides of their mouths.

We read letters in our local paper from people who don’t live in the affected areas who try to tell us that we aren’t patriotic enough.

Does any reasonable person think this is about patriotism? This is all about money. It is about keeping a Naval Air Station in Oceana, and the money that comes with it, in Virginia Beach. It is about bribing the Navy with another OLF that offers no benefits to the affected locality, but helps the Navy avoid continued lawsuits over jet noise. It is about us paying the price for Virginia Beach and Chesapeake not doing a better job of limiting development around NAS Oceana and NALF Fentress.

We read in the newspaper and hear on the TV news that our governor and our General Assembly recognize and value historic landmarks, farmland, forests and Century Farms.

Fourteen localities in Virginia have already received $4.25 million in Farmland Preservation Grants to preserve farmland for continued agricultural use. How can you promote the preservation of farmland and offer it to the Navy at the same time? Of course, our governor also said that he would ask the Navy to remove any site from its list if the locality did not want it. Since all of the localities have notified the Navy and the governor that they do not want an outlying landing field, what is the governor waiting for?

I’m afraid that millions of tax dollars and private funds will be spent in the affected areas to fight this abuse of eminent domain.

I can’t help but wish that our governor would just be a man of his word and stop this now. There are alternatives that would not negatively impact the lives of so many citizens of the commonwealth.

James D. Pope Jr.
Capron

---

Comments

---

Sharon B Mattox wrote on Mar 30, 2008 7:01 PM:
" Mr. Pope speaks for many of us with the same opinion. Going through this "selection process" for the OLF is another fine example of government spending money they don't have for something they don't need in places that don't want it. Unfortunately, our Governor has not lived up to his word and continues to allow this process to progress. He has certainly not been a governor for all of the people. I hope he runs for another office where I can NOT vote for him AGAIN. Thank goodness we have politicians like Delegate Roslyn Tyler to stand up for the rural counties. Hopefully, Randy Forbes will come through for us also. "

---

Celeste wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:52 AM:
" Much has been written and spoken about the problems related to the Navy's selection of area parcels of land for its landing fields. We are talking about thousands and thousands of acres forever lost. This community must unite in its efforts to be removed from the short list of considerations. When communities work together we can make a difference. People are celebrating in NC becuase after several years of hard work they have succeeded in diverting the Navy elsewhere. The bad news is that it causes the Navy to give more attention to Southampton and Surry as potential OLF sites. It is difficult to win the case when there are key political officials who do not stand with the citizens.

One of the problems is that military people lack the understanding and ability to realte to life in rural Southampton County. For many generations this has been our home. There are Century Farms all around and we have a proud heritage.

Military families seldom have any place to call "home" because they move all over the country and the world every 3 years or so. Lifelong heritage and family farms passed from generation to generation have no meaning for them.

Each of us must step up in support of the efforts to stop the OLF. If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. We must stand together. Divided we will fall! "

---

Helen Harrell wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:18 PM:
" Mr. Pope, you are correct! How much of our tax dollars have been spent already by the Navy for the OLF, and, they haven't even finished selecting a place yet? More of our tax money is being spent evaluating the sites now, and they haven't even spent our tax money to buy the properties yet. This is exactly why our government is always in the hole. Most of the money our counties gets is from agriculture and timber.

I am tired of the ones in VB, etc. treating us in the rural areas as uneducated, low income, and folks that don't matter.

Helen Harrell
Sussex County

---

BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com

SURRY—They've been promised help from attorneys and legislators, but opponents of an outlying landing field proposed by the Navy for a site at Cabin Point have been warned that much of the fight during the next couple of years will fall on their shoulders.

"You'll have to organize yourselves," Surry Board of Supervisors Chairman M. Sherlock Holmes told a crowd of about 200 gathered Thursday at L.P. Jackson Middle School for a special forum on the Navy's proposed auxiliary airfield. "It's up to you now, from this point on, to organize locally."

Holmes' comments came near the end of a meeting the board had set up to give Navy officials a chance to make their pitch for the facility and to introduce county residents to the attorney who will represent Surry, Southampton, Sussex and Greensville counties during the Navy's two-year environmental study.

Southampton and Sussex counties share two other sites under consideration by the Navy. Northeastern North Carolina has two on the list, as well. All five sites will be targets of an intensive two-year environmental review that is expected to begin in earnest in April.

Holmes' advice may have sounded a bleak tone during Thursday's meeting, but citizens opposed to the OLF got some encouraging news during a question-and-answer session, when a state legislator and the aide to a U.S. congressman both vowed to support the county in its fight against the Navy.

Del. William K. Barlow, D-Smithfield, whose 64th District includes Surry and a portion of Southampton, told the audience, "Those of us who are local legislators are going to stand up for our constituents. Of all the places (the Navy) could go, why do they come in and take good virgin land, unspoiled?"

He warned Surry citizens to stand arm-in-arm with the other counties involved in the process and suggested they look for help wherever they can find it.

"United we stand; divided we fall," Barlow said. "This is like a battlefield, and we've got to have our horses coming from several directions."

One voice that had been silent on the OLF issue before Thursday was that of U.S. Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Va., who represents the 3rd Congressional District. An aide on hand for the forum stood when challenged and said of his boss: "His official position right now is that he will support the Surry County resolution (against the OLF) that was passed. As long as that is the county's position, he will support it."

Supervisors and their constituents were also encouraged by Barry Steinberg, the attorney hired to represent Surry and the other counties under consideration for the OLF.

"In a democracy, the will of the people counts," he said, suggesting that citizens contact their legislators, including those running for election, to get them on the record regarding their positions on the OLF.

"This needs to be an issue for the people that are running" for John Warner's U.S. Senate seat, he said. "Whoever is running for Senate ought to have to take a position."

Airfield opponents also should raise every objection and concern they can think of during the environmental impact study period required under the National Environmental Policy Act, he said.

Whether they are worried about the potential impact on global warming from cutting down 2,000 acres of trees to accommodate the airstrip or about the potential loss of historic sites or about the loss of county services that could result from a drop in tax revenue when that land is removed from the tax rolls, citizens should put those questions in writing and submit them as part of the NEPA process, Steinberg said.

The Navy would then be required to "take a hard look" at those concerns and answer them or prove them to be frivolous.

"You can't hold back an issue and wait until the Record of Decision is issued," he said. By then, it will be too late.

He suggested that opponents present specific concerns as part of the process, rather than just the general statement that they don't think the Navy should build the facility in their community.

"They got that message before they ever got here," he said.

---

BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com

FRANKLIN—A special meeting of the Surry County Board of Supervisors on Thursday will kick off what is expected to be a busy couple of months for opponents of the U.S. Navy's proposed outlying landing field.

Surry supervisors will hold a forum on the controversial Navy plan to study three Virginia and two North Carolina locations for their suitability as sites for a new airfield where pilots of fighter jets can train to land on aircraft carriers.

The meeting is set for 7 p.m. at L.P. Jackson Middle School, located at 4255 New Design Road, Dendron.

Navy representatives Mark Anthony and Commander Richard Catoire will be on hand for what will be their first public meeting with government representatives from one of the counties chosen as potential hosts for the facility, according to Surry County Administrator Tyrone Franklin.

In January, the Navy announced that it would study one site in Surry, two encompassing property in Southampton and Sussex counties and two in North Carolina as possible locations for the OLF. Each of the sites would require about 2,000 acres of land for the actual airstrip and as much as 30,000 acres for a buffer zone.

Attorney Barry P. Steinberg, managing partner of the Washington, D.C., firm Kutak Rock, is expected to be on hand to discuss the Navy's requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act. The Act calls for a series of environmental studies and "public scoping sessions" to be completed before the Navy can seek federal approval of the airstrip. Franklin said Steinberg is set to make a PowerPoint presentation about the process, and Surry residents, as well as an expected contingent from Southampton and Sussex, will hear "some general information" regarding their options for opposing the facility.

"The (Surry) board is very clear that this is something they don't want in their community," Franklin said.

Surry has joined with Southampton, Sussex and Greensville to hire Steinberg to represent them in any necessary legal actions against the Navy.

The attorney is scheduled to meet in closed session with Southampton supervisors Friday at 10 a.m. at the Southampton County office center. A similar meeting is planned with the Sussex Board of Supervisors on Monday. The Navy representatives expected at Surry's meeting made a presentation for the Sussex Ruritan Club earlier this month, but they have not yet appeared before a large, public group.

Surry's Franklin said Tuesday that the Navy also has set up a public scoping session in Surry for May 7, to be held at Surry County High School. That meeting, which will be conducted by the service, he said, will provide a chance for officials to offer information about real estate, OLF operations, noise impacts and other aspects of the airfield through informational booths and brochures.

Johnson said he has not yet been contacted about Southampton's public scoping meeting, which probably would be held at Southampton High School.

The Navy is expected to publish a formal announcement of the scoping meetings within the next month or so as part of a publication in the Federal Register of its Environmental Impact Study plans.

An opposition group that has formed to represent citizens of all three Virginia counties, Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field, will hold its own meeting at 7 p.m. April 2 at Southampton High School, according to Chairman Tony Clark.

"We're going to try to let people know what to expect as to what the process will be," Clark said Tuesday. "The most important thing at this point is to have informed citizens."

Clark said the group's executive committee will meet Wednesday to put together an agenda for its meeting. He said Steinberg will be there with a presentation, and he has been told to expect representatives from the office of Congressman Randy Forbes (R-04) to be on hand, as well. Other elected officials also have been invited, but have not yet responded, he said.

"The next week or two is going to be crazy busy," he said.

Delegate Roslyn Tyler, whose 75th House of Delegates district includes Southampton and Sussex counties, has set up an April 10 meeting in Washington between U.S. Sen. Jim Webb and area representatives.

A majority of Southampton's board of supervisors plans to make the trip for that 1:30 p.m. meeting. Surry's county administrator said his board also had been invited, but he was unsure whether members would attend.

In a recent telephone interview, Tyler encouraged other OLF opponents who want to attend the Washington meeting to contact her office. Transportation arrangements will be up to those attending, she said.

---

BY WENDY WALKER/STAFF WRITER/wendy.bryant@tidewaternews.com

FRANKLIN—The city has been asked to look into the future.

While Southampton, Surry, Sussex and Greensville counties are supporting the fight against a Navy outlying landing field being built in the area, no voice from the city of Franklin has been heard, according to Lynne Rabil of the Franklin-Southampton Futures Group Inc.

She said, "I understand that a letter of support has been sent," but she asked that council "seriously consider assisting" Southampton and the other localities.

"What is good for Southampton County can only be good for Franklin," she said.

She requested that the city join in the "governmental coalition" that has formed to strengthen the voice of the people that the OLF will affect.

"I ask for your consideration tonight," Rabil said. Mayor Jim Councill requested a copy of Southampton County's resolution on the issue from Rabil, noting that the council would have to be able to discuss the matter.

Vice Mayor Raystine Johnson suggested placing the issue on the next agenda for discussion.

The next meeting of the council is scheduled for April 14.

---

Comments

---

Felice Hancock, Berlin-Ivor district wrote on Mar 27, 2008 10:46 AM:
" Our farmland is a valuable asset to our counties and to the nation. It should not be used as an amenity for large urban areas (Virginia Beach should not use rural areas for their pollution problems, especially since a main rally cry for them is increased property values and additional development space).

Please attend any and all meetings regarding the OLF. Even the residents of Governor's Land and James City County (Williamsburg area) are asking serious questions about how the F-18 Jets (and wait for the F-22?) will effect them if Cabin Point Site in rural Surry County is selected.

Franklin residents need to ask the same questions. What effects Southampton effects Franklin, and vice versa. "

---

BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
Wednesday, March 19, 2008 9:47 AM EDT

WAKEFIELD—Representatives of the U.S. Navy visited Wakefield Monday night to make their case for an outlying landing field before community leaders from Sussex and Southampton counties.

Visiting a venue where they could have expected a chilly reception, Mark Anthony and Cmdr. Richard Catoire spent more than two hours with members of the Wakefield Ruritan Club.

Anthony is the OLF project manager for the Navy's Fleet Forces Command, and Catoire is a Navy official in Norfolk. They accepted the Ruritans' invitation to speak at Monday's meeting in an effort to "clear up some misperceptions" about the auxiliary airfield that has been proposed to handle nighttime aircraft carrier landing practice.

Many of the club's members would be directly or indirectly impacted by the landing strip's proposed Dory location, and they had plenty of questions about how their lives would change if it ends up being built there, according to those who attended the meeting.

"We really had a good discussion," Anthony said Tuesday. "I see these meetings as a chance for us to ... present the facts as best I can. I think we accomplished that last night."

Though he conceded that nobody stood up and announced their support for a Dory-area OLF on Monday, Anthony said he felt he had opened the eyes of some who attended when he discussed the facts related to an OLF.

He and Catoire talked about noise, OLF alternatives, potential economic impacts, necessary easements and buyout options for those whose property winds up within the fenced airfield or its 30,000-acre buffer zone.

"Most people were really interested when they found out how much noise there wasn't going to be," he said.

Still, though, there was no evidence that minds were changed during the meeting, according to Ruritan members who attended.

"I don't know if we came away feeling any better," said Robert Bain, a member of the group's board of directors. "But it was a good meeting. We asked every question you could think of, and we had a lot of good dialog."

Bain said he was impressed that the Navy representatives were willing to engage in such a direct dialog with a group that was clearly opposed to the course the service is pursuing.

Anthony and Catoire were met with No-OLF signs outside the building and put food on their plates from a table stacked with No-OLF flyers, Bain said.

In fact, Bain was so impressed with the presentation that he invited the men to the April 16 Shad Planking to be hosted by the Wakefield Ruritans.

Anthony said they plan to attend, despite having been warned about the large contingent of OLF opponents expected to be on hand.

"I think it's important that we go to meetings like this," he explained, noting that he and Catoire had spoken with the Board of Directors at the Airfield 4-H Center on Friday to try to set their minds at ease about the potential impact of the landing strip on that facility.

He added that he is willing to make similar visits to community, church and civic groups throughout the area. Smaller groups should call him at 757-836-3699. Larger ones should go through the county administrator's office, he said.

At least one major opponent of the OLF was unconvinced by the Navy's explanations Monday. Jack Pond, whose farm and home are both within about a mile of the proposed Dory site, said Tuesday that he remains opposed to the proposal even after Monday's meeting.

"I'm glad they had the meeting and had some discussions," he said. "But I don't feel like we accomplished anything.

"They are real politicians," Pond said of the Navy representatives. "They stand up there and talk for 10 minutes, and they don't tell you nothing."

---

To the Editor:

A couple of weeks ago your newspaper, The Tidewater News, so kindly printed my comments made in person to Congressman Randy Forbes’ assistant, Mr. Rick Franklin, when he visited a group of concerned citizens who are opposed to the OLF at the Southampton County Administrative Building.

I would like to thank you for publishing my comments. I also would like to thank your media representative for being present.

I also believe a word of thanks should be sent to Mrs. Glenn Updike of Statesville, who notified many of us via e-mail that Mr. Franklin was coming to Courtland to hear from us on the OLF issue. Had it not been for Mrs. Updike, I would not have had the opportunity to send my message directly to Congressman Forbes via Mr. Franklin. Her role in arranging this forum, in my opinion, was instrumental in our current success. Fewer than three days later, after others and I spoke, Congressman Forbes himself shows up in person at the administrative building to meet with our local government officials. Call it as you may.

I wish to thank each and every person who has taken the time and gotten involved in some way to help fight for our cause.

I am very pleased now that someone with some weight and some backbone in the federal government is indeed listening to our cry here in “old Southampton.” Your headline in Friday’s newspaper, “Forbes takes harder stance” is a breath of fresh air to us all.

Thomas B. Simmons
Courtland

---

BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com
Friday, March 14, 2008 2:13 PM EDT

FRANKLIN—If necessary, Congressman J. Randy Forbes (R-4th) would use his House Armed Services Committee position to derail a Southampton or Sussex site for the Navy’s proposed new practice landing field for jets, he said Thursday.

Describing the content of a videoconference held Wednesday with two leaders of the group Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field, Forbes said he had attempted to convey the message that he would stand up for his constituents throughout the process.

“We’re going to go to bat for you,” he said he told Tony Clark and Alton Owens of the group Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field.

During Wednesday’s videoconference and in a “Tele-Town Hall” on Monday, Forbes told opponents of the proposed airfield that he could use his position as ranking minority member of the Armed Services’ Committee’s Readiness Subcommittee to put the brakes on any House bill authorizing the Navy to spend money on an OLF in Southampton or Sussex counties.

Calling his position on the subcommittee a “trump card” for his constituents in Southampton and Sussex, he said, “It would be incredibly rare for a military project to be approved out of the Readiness Subcommittee that has not been approved by both the chairman and the ranking (minority) member.”

Even if the authorization for such a bill came from the Senate, Forbes said, he would likely be a member of the conference committee charged with developing a compromise between the two houses of Congress. That position also would give him the ability to influence the legislation, he said. Clark, who is chairman of the OLF opposition group, said Thursday that he was pleased with Forbes’ comments.

“We really have a strong supporter now in Randy Forbes,” he said. “I want to make sure that we can take advantage of his support. They really want to help us.”

Clark said that Forbes had initiated the videoconference, suggesting it through his aide, Rick Franklin, who had originally called Clark to let him know the congressman would be unable to attend an April 2 meeting VAOLF has planned at Southampton High School.

“We have been ... very proactive all along,” Forbes said in a telephone interview Thursday. In fact, his office put together a huge Town Hall meeting by telephone Monday night, calling about 5,000 homes in Southampton and Sussex counties to offer residents a chance to listen and ask questions about the OLF during a one-and-a-half-hour phone call.

Though he had no way to know how many total households had actually participated in the call, Forbes said as many as 900 were on the line at any one time. As callers had their questions answered and hung up, others were able to join in.

Callers were allowed to press a button to join a queue of people waiting to ask questions, he said, noting that about 30 were able to do so before the call’s 9 p.m. cutoff. Those left on the line at that time were asked to leave their names and phone numbers so staff members could get back in touch with them later.

“We were the first ones in Virginia to do it, and one of the first in Congress to do it,” he said of the high-tech conference call.

“One lady thanked us and said it was the first time she’d had any elected official to call and ask for her opinion, not to ask for her vote or for money.”

Forbes has used the technology to hold similar teleconferences on issues such as immigration and taxes, but he decided to limit this one to the OLF because of local interest in the matter.

“I haven’t seen an issue that more people were concerned about in Southampton and Sussex counties,” he said.

The level of concern those residents have comes as no surprise, Forbes said, noting that his Chesapeake home is 180 feet from the one where he was raised.

“The property that surrounds it is not just my house, it’s my home,” he added.

Despite the sympathy he feels toward the people who could be displaced by the proposed 2,000-acre facility and its 30,000-acre buffer zone, and setting aside his promise to support the wishes of those in his district regarding the OLF, Forbes would not commit to opposing the landing field outright.

“I can’t take the position with the Navy that you can’t put it anywhere in America,” he said, noting that he “was very clear” with the VAOLF officials that he could not promise to oppose a field in Surry County or North Carolina.

Sussex and Southampton — which lie within Forbes’ 4th District — share two of five sites identified by the Navy as possible locations for the airfield. Surry and Prince George counties have another, and two are in North Carolina.

“I really do think we’re in the best position of being able to stop this of anybody,” Forbes said.

---

BY R.E. SPEARS III/STAFF WRITER/res.spears@tidewaternews.com

FRANKLIN—In a videoconference Wednesday, members of the group that has aligned against a proposed training facility for Navy jets received their strongest indication yet of support for their cause in Washington, D.C.

U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-4th) told leaders of the group Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field that he would use his position as a ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee to attempt to block the outlying landing field from either of its proposed locations in Southampton or Sussex counties, according to Tony Clark, chairman of the VAOLF group.

Clark said that Forbes told him he would use his position on the committee to withhold support for any Navy funds that would be used to build an OLF in his district. Without the support of a ranking committee member, such a proposal likely would die in the committee.

“We really have a strong supporter now in Randy Forbes,” Clark said. “I want to make sure that we can take advantage of his support. They really want to help us.”

Forbes' meeting with Clark and Sussex resident Alton Owens came on the heels of an unusual and massive teleconference with interested residents Monday evening, Clark said.

Many residents received phone calls from Forbes' office, alerting them to the pending “Telephone Town Hall” and giving them instructions on how to participate.

Clark said about 1,500 people participated in what turned out to be a constructive event.

“Both sides were really, really pleased with it,” Clark said. “He said he got a lot really good questions; he got a lot of thoughtful comments.”

Both the teleconference on Monday and Wednesday's videoconference were initiated by Forbes' office, Clark said.

---

To the Editor:

The following is a letter to U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes:

I am a landowner of one of the proposed sites for the Outlying Landing Field (OLF), and I am writing you to express my discontent with the government’s current plan. I hope you will strongly consider my arguments as you are faced with deciding the fate of many agricultural families that live in Southampton County.

The OLFs proposed sites bordering Southampton County and Sussex County propose many problems for the surrounding populations for the following reasons:

1. The Mason site encompasses 150 acres of my family’s farmland, as well as that of many other local farmers. There is no substantial enumeration that can account for this loss in livelihood.

Each several farmers rely on the fertile soil of this area as a source of income, and this is something that cannot be replaced. Loss of this land will account for substantial loss in family income for many years to come. 2. Property values will unquestionably decline as noise and other disturbances plague the surrounding area, given that navy pilots begin their initial descent several miles from the actual landing site.

3. Millions of tax dollars will be wasted as this site is not especially close to the coast where navy pilots will return from most missions and training sessions. There are numerous other potential sites closer to the coast which would elicit tremendous savings in fuel.

4. There is no incentive with respect to incoming jobs due to the fact that the OLF site may only employ up to 60 individuals, which is a marginal gain at best.

5. The Mason site will overtake a primary route to Interstate 95, which a high percentage of the county’s residents utilize in order to travel to their jobs each day. These are just a few arguments that occupy the thoughts of residents of Southampton and Sussex counties on a daily basis. There is a certain lifestyle of rural southern Virginia that will be forever destroyed with the addition of this military installation, and my fear is that it will drive away many families with longstanding roots in the community.

While farming is not the economic stimulus it once was for the country, I feel confident this day will soon return. As we shift our reliance of foreign production and monopolistic firms such as Monsanto, toward more domestic and free-market influences, a turnaround can certainly occur.

Southampton and Sussex counties are full of historic influences, and these counties were once a part of the agricultural backbone of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

I hope that you will strongly push your colleagues to think twice before destroying the livelihoods of several law abiding and taxpaying Americans.

I can speak for the citizens in my area in saying that we have faith in your leadership abilities, and we hope that you will soon take action in order to prevent this pending desolation of lifestyle.

Mark Allen Partridge
Drewryville

---