Tweet
Panel OKs boost for Groton sub base
By RAY HACKETT
Norwich Bulletin
NEW LONDON -- The General Assembly's Appropriations Committee approved a measure Monday that, if enacted, would create the state's first Military Affairs Office and provide $50 million in state bonding for infrastructure improvements at the Groton submarine base.
However, further action is being delayed until lawmakers determine how to fund the proposals. The Office of Fiscal Analysis has estimated it will take $350,000 a year to fund the Military Affairs office, a director and staff.
But that proposal was not included in either Gov. M. Jodi Rell's proposed budget or in the Democratic alternative proposal.
"Leadership doesn't disagree with the need for the office, but now we have to find the money to fund it," state Rep. Tom Reynolds, D-Ledyard, said. "But this is one more hurdle that we cleared."
The two proposals stem from recommendations made last year by the Governor's Commission on the Diversification of the Southeastern Connecticut Economy. The subcommittee of that group focusing on defense and homeland security made the recommendations as a way of enhancing the base's military value in an effort to avoid having the base targeted in future base closing rounds.
"I have a suggestion on the money," said John Markowicz, a co-chairman of that subcommittee. "Simply take it out of the bill and instruct the Department of Economic and Community Development to create the office using existing personnel."
Local leaders who fought to reverse the Pentagon's 2005 recommendation to close the base expressed concern Monday that much of the emphasis on protecting the base from future closure has waned since the state's success two years ago.
Markowicz reconvened the Subase Realignment Coalition Monday, exactly two years and one day after the Pentagon recommendation was released, to discuss what steps have been taken -- and what needs to be done. Markowicz and others are convinced another base closing round could be coming within the next five to six years.
"I do think it will be targeted again," said Sebastian Desantis of New London, who admits he doesn't think about how close the state came in losing the base very often these days. "They say once you're on the list, it's just a matter of time."
Three times in the 1990s the U.S. Defense Department attempted to dismantle parts of the base. The 2005 base closing round called for a complete closure, which prompted state leaders to look at ways to avoid future threats.
State Sen. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, said Monday she was hopeful the measure in the General Assembly will come up for a vote in the state Senate this week. She conceded, however, the funding -- and in particular the $50 million in bonding -- would be subject of the ongoing budget negotiations between the governor's office and Democratic leaders in the General Assembly.
Money not enough
But it remains questionable whether an infusion of state money for infrastructure improvements will be enough.
"We can't build ourselves out of the hole," said Frank "Mick" O'Briene, a former submarine commander from Mystic who believes the rules used to rate a facility's military value are flawed to favor the two other East Coast sub bases in Norfolk, Va., and Kings Bay, Ga.
"We have to go in and challenge the rules," O'Briene said at Monday's coalition meeting. "If we don't challenge the rules of the game, we're going to be right back where we were."
The state convinced the independent Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) to overturn the Navy recommendation by pointing out flaws in rankings that created a predetermination in favor of Kings Bay over Groton.
Gabe Stern, who worked with University of Connecticut officials to uncover the flaws, suggested the state consider commissioning an academic study of the base-closing process to recommend a fairer methodology in rating facilities.
Markowicz also raised concerns regarding efforts to increase submarine construction at Electric Boat, noting unless production is increased to two subs per year soon, the size of the fleet will drop to 40.
"The closer we get to 40, the more vulnerable the base is," he said.
There are 52 subs in the fleet with a dozen older subs slated for decommissioning in the next six years. The Navy plans to increase submarine construction in 2012. The state's congressional delegation is attempting to increase that build rate as early as 2009.
New name for sub base floated as deterrent to closing
Associated Press
Published May 15 2007
GROTON, Conn. -- Keeping the U.S. Naval Submarine Base may come down to a name change, according to a local coalition of base supporters.
Members of the Subase Realignment Coalition discussed renaming the base the Naval Station Groton. The coalition was heavily involved in the fight to save the base from closure during the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment process.
"In the BRAC world, submarine bases don't do so well but naval stations do survive," John Markowicz, coalition chairman. "It is a large facility and the name naval station shows that more than calling it a base."
They also suggested keeping the name of the lower base, where the submarines are docked, as Naval Submarine Base New London at a meeting Monday morning.
Markowicz said he hoped that the New London City Council and the Groton Town Council would discuss a joint resolution about the change. He and others who have worked on the issue expect another round of base closing within the next five to six years.
The Pentagon tried to dismantle part of the base three times in the 1990s and, in 2005, called for a complete closure.
State lawmakers have also taken up legislation to protect the base and its 30,000 jobs. They approved a measure Monday to create the state's first Military Affairs Office and provide $50 million in state bonding for infrastructure improvements at the Groton submarine base.
The proposals, approved by the Legislature's Appropriations Committee, arose from recommendations made last year by the Governor's Commission on the Diversification of the Southeastern Connecticut Economy.
Lawmakers still have determine how to pay the military office. The $350,000 a year to finance the new military office was not included in Gov. M. Jodi Rell's budget or in the Democrats spending plan.
"Leadership doesn't disagree with the need for the office, but we now we have to find the money to fund it," said state Rep. Tom Reynolds, D-Ledyard. "But this is one more hurdle that we cleared."
By RAY HACKETT
Norwich Bulletin
NEW LONDON -- The General Assembly's Appropriations Committee approved a measure Monday that, if enacted, would create the state's first Military Affairs Office and provide $50 million in state bonding for infrastructure improvements at the Groton submarine base.
However, further action is being delayed until lawmakers determine how to fund the proposals. The Office of Fiscal Analysis has estimated it will take $350,000 a year to fund the Military Affairs office, a director and staff.
But that proposal was not included in either Gov. M. Jodi Rell's proposed budget or in the Democratic alternative proposal.
"Leadership doesn't disagree with the need for the office, but now we have to find the money to fund it," state Rep. Tom Reynolds, D-Ledyard, said. "But this is one more hurdle that we cleared."
The two proposals stem from recommendations made last year by the Governor's Commission on the Diversification of the Southeastern Connecticut Economy. The subcommittee of that group focusing on defense and homeland security made the recommendations as a way of enhancing the base's military value in an effort to avoid having the base targeted in future base closing rounds.
"I have a suggestion on the money," said John Markowicz, a co-chairman of that subcommittee. "Simply take it out of the bill and instruct the Department of Economic and Community Development to create the office using existing personnel."
Local leaders who fought to reverse the Pentagon's 2005 recommendation to close the base expressed concern Monday that much of the emphasis on protecting the base from future closure has waned since the state's success two years ago.
Markowicz reconvened the Subase Realignment Coalition Monday, exactly two years and one day after the Pentagon recommendation was released, to discuss what steps have been taken -- and what needs to be done. Markowicz and others are convinced another base closing round could be coming within the next five to six years.
"I do think it will be targeted again," said Sebastian Desantis of New London, who admits he doesn't think about how close the state came in losing the base very often these days. "They say once you're on the list, it's just a matter of time."
Three times in the 1990s the U.S. Defense Department attempted to dismantle parts of the base. The 2005 base closing round called for a complete closure, which prompted state leaders to look at ways to avoid future threats.
State Sen. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, said Monday she was hopeful the measure in the General Assembly will come up for a vote in the state Senate this week. She conceded, however, the funding -- and in particular the $50 million in bonding -- would be subject of the ongoing budget negotiations between the governor's office and Democratic leaders in the General Assembly.
Money not enough
But it remains questionable whether an infusion of state money for infrastructure improvements will be enough.
"We can't build ourselves out of the hole," said Frank "Mick" O'Briene, a former submarine commander from Mystic who believes the rules used to rate a facility's military value are flawed to favor the two other East Coast sub bases in Norfolk, Va., and Kings Bay, Ga.
"We have to go in and challenge the rules," O'Briene said at Monday's coalition meeting. "If we don't challenge the rules of the game, we're going to be right back where we were."
The state convinced the independent Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) to overturn the Navy recommendation by pointing out flaws in rankings that created a predetermination in favor of Kings Bay over Groton.
Gabe Stern, who worked with University of Connecticut officials to uncover the flaws, suggested the state consider commissioning an academic study of the base-closing process to recommend a fairer methodology in rating facilities.
Markowicz also raised concerns regarding efforts to increase submarine construction at Electric Boat, noting unless production is increased to two subs per year soon, the size of the fleet will drop to 40.
"The closer we get to 40, the more vulnerable the base is," he said.
There are 52 subs in the fleet with a dozen older subs slated for decommissioning in the next six years. The Navy plans to increase submarine construction in 2012. The state's congressional delegation is attempting to increase that build rate as early as 2009.
New name for sub base floated as deterrent to closing
Associated Press
Published May 15 2007
GROTON, Conn. -- Keeping the U.S. Naval Submarine Base may come down to a name change, according to a local coalition of base supporters.
Members of the Subase Realignment Coalition discussed renaming the base the Naval Station Groton. The coalition was heavily involved in the fight to save the base from closure during the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment process.
"In the BRAC world, submarine bases don't do so well but naval stations do survive," John Markowicz, coalition chairman. "It is a large facility and the name naval station shows that more than calling it a base."
They also suggested keeping the name of the lower base, where the submarines are docked, as Naval Submarine Base New London at a meeting Monday morning.
Markowicz said he hoped that the New London City Council and the Groton Town Council would discuss a joint resolution about the change. He and others who have worked on the issue expect another round of base closing within the next five to six years.
The Pentagon tried to dismantle part of the base three times in the 1990s and, in 2005, called for a complete closure.
State lawmakers have also taken up legislation to protect the base and its 30,000 jobs. They approved a measure Monday to create the state's first Military Affairs Office and provide $50 million in state bonding for infrastructure improvements at the Groton submarine base.
The proposals, approved by the Legislature's Appropriations Committee, arose from recommendations made last year by the Governor's Commission on the Diversification of the Southeastern Connecticut Economy.
Lawmakers still have determine how to pay the military office. The $350,000 a year to finance the new military office was not included in Gov. M. Jodi Rell's budget or in the Democrats spending plan.
"Leadership doesn't disagree with the need for the office, but we now we have to find the money to fund it," said state Rep. Tom Reynolds, D-Ledyard. "But this is one more hurdle that we cleared."