By MAC MCDOWELL

In the Sept. 28 edition of the Whidbey News-Times, an article appeared which contained criticism of actions taken by Mayor Cohen regarding land development. Although I was mentioned several times in the article, I was not contacted or asked to comment on the issue. As such, I would now like to offer my thoughts.

I, along with many other members of the community, have worked for many years beginning in 1991 to keep NAS Whidbey off the Base Realignment and Closure Commissions (BRAC) list of military installations scheduled for closure. Additional rounds of BRAC hearings for potential closure were held in 1993, 1995 and again in 2005, and we have been successful time and again in making the case for keeping NAS Whidbey open as a valuable asset to the Navy.

Having personally worked on this critically important issue all of those 15 years both as a private citizen and as a county commissioner, I have talked with scores of congressmen and Pentagon officials and can say without question, encroachment around naval air stations is a critical issue looked at by the BRAC, and one that can only be controlled by local city and county governmental officials.

Two weeks ago, the Navy at the Chief of Naval Operations level (CNO) changed the Navy’s compatible land use map for NAS Whidbey. In the new map the 18 acre parcel owned by Don Boyer is now included in the Accident Potential Zone. This inclusion reflects current and anticipated future flight operations (EA-6B transition to EA-18G aircraft). This new information caught the immediate attention of the mayor and me, realizing that extensive development of this property would not be in the best interest of the base, the county or the city.

While preparing for the 2005 BRAC round, the state hired an economist to evaluate the seven major military installations in Washington and the impact of each on the local and state economy. This study showed that among other things, NAS Whidbey is the second largest military employer in the state and that 88 percent of all local economic activity is a direct result of the presence of NAS Whidbey. While these statistics may be difficult to believe, I think that most people would agree that the naval air station’s presence is a major contributor to our economic base. A major shopping center in line with the runway centerline and close enough to be in the accident potential zone is not a good idea. As one admiral once eloquently referred to bad ideas, “…it is as dumb as dirt.” For these reasons, I both believe that any major development on this property in question would be a big mistake.

We must remember the Navy is here to train aircrew and maintenance personnel and are not here to protect the best long term interests of the local community (not to imply they would intentionally do harm). They are legally prohibited from participating in local politics; from talking about issues related to the BRAC, or giving suggestions on how to improve a community’s chances of staying off any closure list. They can only comment on current Navy policy.

The Navy’s policy concerning the topic of how to measure encroachment on a naval air station changed in 2003. Prior to that time, a 100,000 square foot commercial building would be an encroachment. With the new policy, a new building up to 165,000 is not an encroachment on this size parcel. Despite this gratuitous change in policy on the part of the Navy we as a community must be mindful of protecting the area surrounding the base from encroachment.

It is up to your local elected officials to look after the best long term interests of their community. In my opinion, the comparatively small number of jobs provided by the development of a new clothing store or restaurant in no way would compensate for the future loss of 10,000 military and government workers, to say nothing of the huge loss of civilian jobs should NAS Whidbey ever close. Those jobs would include over half the teachers, retail workers, doctors, nurses, etc.

It is my belief that there are no bad people in this issue. The outside developer’s job is to provide housing for families and buildings for people in which to work. But this developer’s long term interest in Oak Harbor may not be the same as the local community’s interest. Mr. Boyer is certainly not the bad guy. He has been an outstanding citizen of Oak Harbor for decades, longer than the 33 years I have lived here. I admire all that Mr. Boyer has done for the community and the Navy. He has been a long time supporter of the Navy both locally and nationally who happens to own a very valuable parcel that I believe needs to be purchased at market value by the city, county and state. Even the Navy might be able to participate as there are some federal funds available to aid in the area of encroachment issues.

There has been one other new situation in 2005 BRAC different from prior BRAC rounds. A major air station, NAS Oceana in Virginia, was put on the closure list not by the Navy, but by the BRAC Commission. They created a new paradigm by taking the action of saying the base would close if the local community and the state did not pass “no encroachment regulations” and develop a financial plan necessary to purchase 2300 parcels within nine months. The BRAC directed a minimum commitment of $15 million per year for the purchase of the properties. Florida has already stepped forward with a no expense offer of a closed base owned by the state and or community and $200 million in infrastructure improvements to be made available if the 11,000 jobs from NAS Oceana are moved to Florida. Mayor Patty Cohen and I know the community does not have the ability to purchase already developed property, but we may be able to put together a local community, state, and maybe a federal partnership to buy this undeveloped property.

It is true Mayor Cohen and I have been researching alternative possibilities. Rather than criticizing Mayor Cohen for her efforts once she became aware of this recent change in the Navy land use map issued two weeks ago her initiative should be applauded.

Please remember the mayor, the council and your county commissioners are the ones elected to do that which is good for the long term benefit of the community… not the Navy, not the developer and not a single property owner.

Mac McDowell is Island County Commissioner for District 2, which includes Oak Harbor.