BRAC recommendations

[star2city]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting that the Global Hawk fleet is planned to go up to 51 by the year 2010 (?). Currently, it seems Beale AFB in Sacramento has at least four, with 21 more by 2008. If the Global Hawk is coming to GFAFB, it would seem that military and civilian employment would increase as the Global Hawk fleet is increased. These articles imply that a number of very specialized/high tech avionics type civilian positions are needed locally to support the Global Hawk program:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/uav-01i.html

http://www.savebeale.org/articles/Global_Hawk_delayed03.html

Again speculating, a Global Hawk program could do much more than refueling operations to propel the area forward in the aerospace industry (i.e. Would Northrup need to open a local office?) Very few cities benefit technologically from nearby military bases. Potentially, UND School of Aerospace would benefit, as well as the

Edited May 13, 2005 by star2city

[star2city]

From http://www.in-forum.com/pdfs/bracnd.pdf

Grand Forks will remain an active Air Force installation with a new active duty/Air National Guard association unit created in anticipation of emerging missions at Grand Forks.

Grand Forks (40-tanker) ranked lowest in military value of all active duty KC-135 bases. However, of Northern tier bases, Grand Forks ranked highest in military value for the UAV mission (43-UAV). Military judgment argued for a continued strategic presence in the north central U.S. (Grand Forks is one of the last remaining active military installations in the region). Military judgment also indicated the potential for emerging missions in homeland defense, particularly for border states. Therefore, Grand Forks is retained as an active installation, but realigned to distribute its KC-135R force structure to bases with higher value for the tanker mission

[PCM]

Grand Forks (40-tanker) ranked lowest in military value of all active duty KC-135 bases. However, of Northern tier bases, Grand Forks ranked highest in military value for the UAV mission (43-UAV). Military judgment argued for a continued strategic presence in the north central U.S. (Grand Forks is one of the last remaining active military installations in the region). Military judgment also indicated the potential for emerging missions in homeland defense, particularly for border states. Therefore, Grand Forks is retained as an active installation, but realigned to distribute its KC-135R force structure to bases with higher value for the tanker mission

[The Sicatoka]

Grand Forks ranked highest in military value for the UAV mission (43-UAV).

Military judgment argued for a continued strategic presence in the north central U.S.

Military judgment also indicated the potential for emerging missions in homeland

defense, particularly for border states.

Like border patrols with UAVs?

....

Hector (125) ranked low in military value.

The 119th Fighter Wing

[GeauxSioux]

Like border patrols with UAVs?

....

An ANG unit with no planes?

....

Will the ND ANG (along side full-time personnel) be looked at to support UAV missions out of GF AFB?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. There are too many unanswered questions in all of this.

[PCM]

An ANG unit with no planes?

....

Will the ND ANG (along side full-time personnel) be looked at to support UAV missions out of GF AFB?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The unit might not need F-16s, but I'm thinking that it should probably have some helicopters and guys with M-16s and SAWs riding in them to check out any suspicious activity spotted by a UAV.

[The Sicatoka]

An ANG unit with no planes and no flying mission?

The unit might not need F-16s, but I'm thinking that it should probably have some helicopters and guys with M-16s and SAWs riding in them to check out any suspicious activity spotted by a UAV.

Wouldn't you want helicopters closer to the border (because of speed and time)?

[PCM]

Wouldn't you want helicopters closer to the border (because of speed and time)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm considering the possibility that the Fargo ANG unit might be realigned (i.e. relocated) to GFAFB.

[The Sicatoka]

I'm considering the possibility that the Fargo ANG unit might be realigned (i.e. relocated) to GFAFB.

With a mission entirely new to both GF AFB and ND ANG no less.

PS - Technically it's the ND ANG (currently based in Fargo).

[PCM]

With a mission entirely new to both GF AFB and ND ANG no less.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Note the statement below from this Herald article:

Grand Forks will remain an active Air Force installation with a new active duty/Air National Guard association unit created in anticipation of emerging missions at Grand Forks.

To me, this implies that there will be some connection between the Fargo and Grand Forks bases and units that doesn't currently exist.

[UND92,96]

I certainly can't vouch for the accuracy of this, but the number I heard in terms of new personnel should GFAFB get the Global Hawk mission is roughly 800-900. I guess I would assume that that would be subtracted from the roughly 2200 who would be transferring as a result of losing the tankers.

[Fedorov]

So are property values falling already?

[jloos]

So are property values falling already?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They will soon with or without the closure - somethings gotta give. For me this means leaving GF as my wife is a young teacher - they will have to shut down the school at the base which means cutting a lot of teachers in an already crowded market.

Besides educators I don't see the base closing having that big of an affect - it should lower rent, and some of those slapstick units they are building may sit vacant for a while, but overall I think GF will adapt fairly quick.

My question is, when does this happen? My other question is - how much taxpayer $$ is going into putting the new runway in this summer?

Last time I checked Ellsworth Air Force Base was just outside of Rapid City, about 300 miles from Sioux Falls.

[ScottM]

Last time I checked, Ellsworth was not in Sioux Falls.

[Fedorov]

They were probably talking about "the other" Ellsworth Air Force Base in SD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think they took the idea of "moving a base" a little too far.

[The Sicatoka]

My question is, when does this happen?  My other question is - how much taxpayer $$ is going into putting the new runway in this summer?

About $30 MM. If they are serious about UAVs they'll need the runway.

Grand Forks has needed to get more private-sector oriented. Maybe this will be a kick in the pants in that direction.

More available (and less costly) rentals would make it easier to attract student to UND.

And I still wonder about the ND ANG having a much larger role at GF AFB.

And we wondered what we'd talk about all summer.

[ESPNInsider]

They will soon with or without the closure - somethings gotta give. For me this means leaving GF as my wife is a young teacher - they will have to shut down the school at the base which means cutting a lot of teachers in an already crowded market.

Besides educators I don't see the base closing having that big of an affect - it should lower rent, and some of those slapstick units they are building may sit vacant for a while, but overall I think GF will adapt fairly quick.

My question is, when does this happen? My other question is - how much taxpayer $$ is going into putting the new runway in this summer?

Last time I checked Ellsworth Air Force Base was just outside of Rapid City, about 300 miles from Sioux Falls.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This goes before Bush in Sept. then he has to sign off on it. Wouldn't think it would take place for a couple of years. Also, the runway will still be needed for the new UAVs that will be flying out of there..

[Air Force One]

I was so excited when I looked at the closure list on CNN.com, and so heartbroken when I read the article on the Heraldo on-line. Keeping the base open but taking an active duty personnel cut of nearly 2,300 personnel seems totally like an empty victory. I am over here with a follow-on assignment to come back to GFAFB next May, to what? Will I get to keep my assignment? Will have have to spend another year and a half after this away from my family before I can retire and move back to the valley? I am purely heartbroken tonight. I've been assigned to wings that have 800 or less assigned and it is a ghost town. They are currently spending $25 million on a new 11,000 foot runway and somewhere in the neighborhood of $150 million on already completed and future housing construction for over 1,000 families, and the money that is already committed and contracts already let will be completed, even if the new units sit empty. Some of the planes and the personnel that fly and maintain them are going to McConnell AFB, KS, and MacDill AFB, FL, but I can't find where the rest of the folks are going. All my friends will be leaving. I guess I will have to make the best of those friendships once I get back from here and before they go. I was assigned there for the last 9 years and the base engenders everything I like about living in EGF/GF, small town pace and feel, even though it is a collage of people from the entire country from Maine to Hawaii, and we are the best air refueling wing on the face of the planet, we have the awards to prove it! I am at the same base that we have over 18 of the bases' tankers flying missions over Iraq and Afganistan everyday, and we do it damn good day in and day out. We flew 35% of the tanker missions during Operation Enduring Freedom with our airplanes, the rest of the refueling community flew the rest, over 1/3 came from our base alone! We busted our asses only to get shut down and redistributed like old parts so that they can fly glorified model airplanes off the same runway that used to launch B52s and helped keep the Red Menace at bay. I just feel so betrayed right now.

I guess we find out our fate tomorrow. Yipee, there will almost be enough people left on base to throw a party.

[Hansel]

Last year, Conrad added into the Intelligence Reform Bill passed in December the "Smart Border" project, which would base a new program of UAV research and development in Grand Forks to provide a new kind of border surveillance.

It's all part of the stepped-up stateside security needed since 9-11, he said.

The idea behind the project is to use sensors, cameras and unmanned aircraft to keep a closer eye on the border.

The Smart Border project would involve UND, North Dakota State University, Hewlett-Packard and Computer Sciences Corp.

Herald Global Hawk article

[GeauxSioux]

Herald Global Hawk article

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I found a blurb along the same lines from last October. It appears that this has been in the works for some time.

http://www.access5.aero/site_content/news/...rderPatrol.html

[Hansel]

I see Conrad says he is going to fight to keep the tankers in GF. Although keeping the tankers would keep a lot of jobs at the base (temporarily), you would think there is a good shot GFAFB would lose them eventually anyway due to the "low ranking" by the military for that service. If you had a choice (thinking longterm) between the UAV's and the tankers what would you choose? Personally I would go with the UAV's as GF is in a perfect region for their use (meaning what jobs come would stay) and it opens up possible research ventures to the RRV "research corridor".

Thoughts?

[GeauxSioux]

I see Conrad says he is going to fight to keep the tankers in GF.  Although keeping the tankers would keep a lot of jobs at the base (temporarily), you would think there is a good shot GFAFB would lose them eventually anyway due to the "low ranking" by the military for that service.  If you had a choice (thinking longterm) between the UAV's and the tankers what would you choose?  Personally I would go with the UAV's as GF is in a perfect region for their use (meaning what jobs come would stay) and it opens up possible research ventures to the RRV "research corridor".

Thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was thinking the same thing. Try and promote the assets that you have, instead of convincing someone that your deficiencies aren't so bad. I agree that the tankers are gone soon regardless.

In the short term this is going to hurt GF. The loss of people is going to cause the housing values to fall, some small businesses will close and the 2010 census is going to look bad. Tough on a small city trying to recover from a devastating flood.

The long term, 10-15 years out, this will be positive. More high tech jobs. I believe that UND Aerospace can be helped by the UAV's moving in. It could be a great symbiotic relationship.

[UND92,96]

I was thinking the same thing.  Try and promote the assets that you have, instead of convincing someone that your deficiencies aren't so bad.  I agree that the tankers are gone soon regardless.

In the short term this is going to hurt GF.  The loss of people is going to cause the housing values to fall, some small businesses will close and the 2010 census is going to look bad.  Tough on a small city trying to recover from a devastating flood.

The long term, 10-15 years out, this will be positive. More high tech jobs.  I believe that UND Aerospace can be helped by the UAV's moving in.  It could be a great symbiotic relationship.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am involved in the real estate business in GF, and I honestly don't see the base's realignment as having a huge effect on property values in GF. In Grand Forks itself there aren't a lot of active Air Force personnel who own property, and most people live on base. It's a little tougher to predict what will happen with the civilians who will lose their jobs, but probably a lot of them will be able to find another job locally depending on what field they're in. I would have been afraid of losing many of the retired Air Force personnel had the base closed, since presumably they no longer would have had easy access to medical care, etc. that they currently have by virtue of the base being here, and therefore may have been more likely to move.

Certainly losing the number of people that has been speculated is going to hurt the overall economy (particularly in places like Emerado and Larimore), and I would expect sales tax numbers to take a big hit once the realignment commences, but it could have been worse. I certainly wouldn't want to be a business owner or even property owner in or near Rapid City these days.

[star2city]

I was thinking the same thing.  Try and promote the assets that you have, instead of convincing someone that your deficiencies aren't so bad.  I agree that the tankers are gone soon regardless.

In the short term this is going to hurt GF.  The loss of people is going to cause the housing values to fall, some small businesses will close and the 2010 census is going to look bad.  Tough on a small city trying to recover from a devastating flood.

The long term, 10-15 years out, this will be positive. More high tech jobs.  I believe that UND Aerospace can be helped by the UAV's moving in.  It could be a great symbiotic relationship.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agree with this - emphasize your strengths, not your weaknesses.

GeauxSioux: Looks like Pensacola also is taking a hit from the Navy realignment. With the shortage of housing there in the aftermath of Hurricane Ivan, perhaps the surge in housing costs would get dampened down now.

Just a general note. It does seem rather strange that four cities that have all experienced a natural disaster in their recent history will also be bearing an economic assault from BRAC: Rapid City, Grand Forks, Pensacola, and Pascagoula, MS (Hurricane Georges). If a city has it own unique culture, these four certainly must be developing character through resilience.

[star2city]

I am involved in the real estate business in GF, and I honestly don't see the base's realignment as having a huge effect on property values in GF. In Grand Forks itself there aren't a lot of active Air Force personnel who own property, and most people live on base. It's a little tougher to predict what will happen with the civilians who will lose their jobs, but probably a lot of them will be able to find another job locally depending on what field they're in.