Posted by anAmerican (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

IOW and Franklin don't have a spoon in the OLF soup, and, they need to stay out of it. What neighbors Southampton, Franklin and IOW are! Throw all other localities that are in the soup under the bus, just to get something for them.

The other localities in this soup will always remember this, and in the future when IOW and Franklin need help from them, earplugs will be worn.

Posted by RainbowMom (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 11:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

NO.....absolutely...NO! You have people who are coming in the middle and don't know what has transpired to date with the OLF discussions. They need to zip their lips as it would not affect them, but want the publicity that they know more than the ones that have been involved since Day I. Back off Jerry and Harold!!!!!!

Posted by grantsara83 (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey out there, one more time, we do not want your olf. Hopefully, the current administration will treat the navy's budget requests like Jimmy Carter did in the 70's, cut it to nothing but the barest essentials. Then we'll see just what recovery plans Va. Bch. and the rest of the tidewater area will institute. Mr. Clowers and Blythe offer nothing, in the way of ever enticing the area residents, to accept the navy's proposal of an olf. I sort of understand Clowers position, but Blythe's agenda escapes me. Now that kaine has all but left the building, a sigh of relief that his hidden desire of exercising the power of emient domain left with him. There are still those out there, that continue believe in the beauty, of the emperor's new clothes.

Posted by gr8mommy (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 2:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nice article! I do hope some people will take heed and have a bit more of an open-mind regarding the OLF.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 2:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Flowers and Blythe live where? Not Southampton County!! Outsiders, They think they know best. Lets stick it in their front yard and see if their opinions change. Lets stick to one thing at a time. If we get too much going on at one time SOMETHING will fall through the cracks and not provide and operate 100% to it fullest. The RT671 project is a start but not all the way thought through yet. They are already jumping up and down TRYING TO RUSH IT because of the IP closure. The surrounding neighborhoods and area have not been told anything. Everyone just needs to clear the hazy out of their heads about the IP closure and think clearly!!

And the next time a outsider want to make a suggestion about any of this situation just ask them if they want the noise and the junk that comes with it in their front yard! If they say yes, then they are lying to you and already have their hands in the pot to benefit from it!!

Posted by Baffled (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I thought we told Jerry months ago that he could keep the jets in Virginia BEach near HIS house?

Posted by anAmerican (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 3:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I wonder if Jerry's mommy knows that he wants to throw some of her friends and their families under the bus?

Hmmm, maybe it should be explained to her.

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 4 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is it really necessary to once again descend into petty, school yard bickering? On what level does this seem productive to anyone? Why do we want to sound and be so irrational? The conversations here had become much more productive in recent weeks. I’m sorry to see us backslide.

Regardless of your position, the best chance you have at finding the deal you want, that best serves the community is through engagement of the parties and considering the facts. (Even if your position is to keep the Navy from placing an OLF here.) Emotions matter, but they must be left on the back burner unless you want to find yourself having the Navy/government do as it pleases with no productive input from the communities impacted. We need people with clear, level heads, open minds, and positive, viable proposals to find the best overall solution for the entire community - even if they are presenting the valid, factual reasons that an OLF is a bad idea in a particular community. People on both sides need to stop sniping at others because they don't agree with one another’s position and do something to prove their own.

As a note, defunding the Navy and potentially risking our national defense is not really a productive recommendation. We should also all keep in mind that just because we have not previously heard from someone in these letters to the editor, columns, and blogs does not mean they have not been following the debate for the duration - all constructive comments should be welcome. Neither is it productive to accuse people who no longer live in a particular area of not caring about the community. Many of them have families, property, and businesses in those communities, so, of course, they care about the well being of those communities. They just have a different perspective and, perhaps, a broader view. It never hurts to listen, even if you don’t agree; and, being rude and hurtful serves no purpose.

Posted by Jannab1960 (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 4:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You've got to be kidding... sell our privacy, serenity, peace and quiet for a measly 62 jobs?! Lets see that takes care of 6% of the lost jobs... where do the other 94 % come from?

Posted by grantsara83 (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

balance, thanks for your insight. Always fall back on patriotism, when you have no rational argument for anyone accepting a noisy, dirty olf. This boondoggle could only have been thought up by naval officers, that have been passed over for promotion. This project, if it were a private interprise proposal would not even pass the most basic of enviormental standards. If noise is to your liking, move to Va. Bch.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 9, 2010 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

a well articulated article. I just wish people would first and foremost look at the Navy's tale of need. They cannot demonstrate a need for this OLF. If the Navy after 8 years still cannot demonstrate a need that does not support the conclussion that Oceana should be abandoned, why move further into this process? Has the Navy demonstrated they do not have the capacity to perform the FCLPs at their existing runways? They may say they cannot, but they demonstrate that if all the constraints are removed from their runways, they have the capacity. The Navy is using capacity as their primary reason for coming to these 5 new sites.

The Navy used operational flexibility and noise mitigation for day to day operations for the old sites. They did not show a need with the 5 old sites in the old study. That same study was used to select your sites as potential finalists.

The Navy wishes to gloss over this need statement, ignore any potential alternatives to fix Oceana's quanitived problem, and has concluded that for Oceana, this OLF is a must and only option.

Before even talking about jobs, noise, environmental issues, I sure wish the Navy could prove they need this thing especially with the conclussion that BRAC is not a viable MJB.

I will give the Navy this, they have the opportunity to build this OLF if they go through the motions of the NEPA process. They don't even have to prove a need. They could even claim they do not need it, but simply want it. At least with the last statement the Navy would finally tell the community what their true desire is. Once they do this NEPA process, they may decide to build and condemn properties for this project. With or without public support.

Posted by Mike61 (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 6:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't live in Southampton County, I live in I.O.W but I have already noticed an increase in jets flying overhead in the last year or more and I don't like it one bit! I am not a conspiricy theorist, but as crooked as our Government is it would not suprise me to find out the mill closing was arranged to bring the area to its knees and quell the publics opposition to this OLF. Flowers, Blythe or myself don't really have a "dog in this fight" but I am entitled to my opinion as well as my opposition! Va. Beach can keep the jets and their lame attempt to be what they consider a "tourisim hotspot" (a.k.a. the oceanfront). I'll spend my time and $$ at a real beach like OBX. I still stand by my convictions that Fort Pickett in Blackstone already exsist, already owned by the gov't, already has a landing strip and is a mere 40 or 50 miles further to fly to accomplish the same thing. Stand your ground opponents to the OLF. Mr. Flowers, your ancestors would dis-own you if they were alive today, but I am sure you don't care. You have been "tainted" by the typical Va. Beach attitude. Your family may be from this area, but thats it.....you've lost sight of what it really means to be from Western Tidewater. Stay at the beach, please. Enough of you "come here's" have already moved out this way.

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

grantsara83,

It is not patriotism in the way that reference. Funding is about national defense, not whether there is an OLF here, somewhere else, or not all. The OLF really isn't the question when you suggest defunding the Navy. Actions such as defunding the military weaken our national defense capability. I would think that the past couple of weeks would have proven that is not something we can afford to do as a nation.

As for my position on OLF, I am not an advocate. However, I do promote having productive dialog and listening to answers and other points of view with open minds.

Posted by 23davidfrklnva (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 7:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

GO NAVY!

Posted by 23Venganza (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 7:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Navy all the way!!!

Posted by Ethan (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 10:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

First to Mike61: You are a conspiracy theorist, but you haven't thought this through. If the government was corrupt enough and heartless enough to arrange the closing of the mill just to make the OLF more palatable to locals, then they would probably not really care enough about public opinion to bother. They would just put the OLF where they want it and tell the locals to get over it. And besides, which administration do you think would have arranged the mill closing: the one in power when the current OLF issue first arose or the one in power now?

And to most of the others that have commented on this article, you have completely missed the point that Flowers and Blythe are trying to make. They aren't suggesting we cave in to the OLF. They are simply saying that we should see what we might be able to get if the OLF does come here. You all forget that whether there will be an OLF and where it will go will not be decided by anyone who lives around here. Congress will have most of the say and congressmen from Nebraska and Montana won't give a hoot about how much noise Southampton County has to endure. Almost all of our state leaders live in fear that the military presence in the state will be reduced. Just the threat that Oceana might be closed (no matter how unlikely that might be) and the effect that this would have on the entire state's economy is enough to make our state leaders willing to throw us under the bus. So what Flowers and Blythe are saying is lets see what we might be able to get. Not just from the federal government or the Navy, but from the state and/or Virginia Beach. Want some local road projects put at the top of VDoT's list? Or additional state funding for schools? Or revenue sharing payments from Virginia Beach? None of these would be that hard. But if you wait to find out what we might get after the decision to put the OLF here is made, there is no incentive for either the state or VB to give us anything. The worst scenario isn't getting the OLF. The worst scenario is getting the OLF and getting no compensation in return.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 11:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ethan - The point everyone is making about Flowers and Blythe opinion is that they are outsiders looking in. They dont have to live with it in their front yard. Thats why no one is giving their OPINION a chance, because THEIR opinion is NO COUNT!!

Why write a story to get outsiders opinion on whats going on? Whats next? A article with a resident from Washington state and THEIR opinion on the IP closure? Are you that desprite for a story?

Posted by Ethan (anonymous) on January 9, 2010 at 11:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rocko. As I said in my first post, outsiders will ultimately make the decision so maybe you need to listen to them. Don't fool yourself that just because everyone you know and talk to is against the OLF, then everyone else is against it also. Just how much did citizens of Southampton County get involved when the Navy was trying to put this in Washington County, NC? It wasn't an issue that anyone here cared about. And that is just how people in other localities that aren't affected feel about this now. If a person in Wise County sees this as either lots of noise in Southampton County vs. possible higher taxes due to loss of military revenue should Oceana close, which side do you think he is going to fall on? If you only preach to the choir and pay no attention to people outside this area, you may feel better but you will be doing nothing to help stop the OLF.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 9, 2010 at 11:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't forget this is the second (or third iteration) of this debate between the Navy and a rural community. In the first round, the Navy did tell folks to effectively get out. They did put a flag down at the Washington County site and dared folks to knock down their flag. The folks of Washington County did accept that challenge, and did knock down the Navy's flag. NC Congressional representatives worked at the various subcommittee levels and got the funding pulled. At that level, it is easier to explain to those of ND or Nevada about this.

The Navy then tried round 2 with their aborted DSEIS. That was such a failure that the Navy simply quit that process. What did come of this 2nd round was the Navy started to demonstrate, in an attempt to win us over that they would not have to take so much land into Navy control for the safety and proper operation of the Navy. It got down to 2000 to 7500 acres of land the Navy wanted to condemn with the rest in potential restrictive use easements (what is basically being said at your sites).

These changes in the Navy's tactics and requirements really have hurt the Navy's tale. Why did they feel justified in condemning 24,000 to 30,000 acres of land in 2003? It was going to impact that much back then. Can anyone realistically accept that the Navy wont impact that much land, or greater in this third iteration?

What is the requirements for a facility to train our pilots to properly as well as safely train our pilots to land on the back of a carrier? Does Oceana and Fentress meet those requirements? If they do, when is the Navy going to start using those facilities. If not, when is the Navy going to fix those facilities so they can properly train our pilots?

Our representatives in both VA and NC need to let the rest of the country know that it is unacceptable for a facility to fail our pilots. If it is the surrounding community, then the city must be held responsible to fix the problem, or lose the revenue. Congress should be investigating the Oceana problem and finding a solution that meets our pilots needs. Having 0 of 6 runways properly training our pilots is a problem that must be addressed. That is what our Navy is telling us...zero of six of their runways can properly train our pilots to land on the back of a carrier at night. They are further telling us they need a minimum of 2 runways to accomplish this mission. The Navy is persuing one of those runways.

When the Navy starts the JSF NEPA process, and a new MJB is studied, how many OLFs do you think will be modeled for this new MJB. I bet it wont be a MJB with 4 runways with 2 OLFs to support these planes. So why do they need all that now? Encroachment?????

Posted by gr8mommy (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 8:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Excellent points Ethan! Thanks for your insight!

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

well put Ethan. thank you for a non-emotional, clear-headed view. very good points made.

Posted by Mike61 (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Obviously some on here are clearly not "hooked on phonics", at least not the comprehension part. I never said I believe the gov't arranged the mill closure to bring the area to it's knees and quell public opposition. I did however say it would not suprise me. Big difference there Ethan. However even entertaining the simple idea of "seeing what the government has to offer" shows maybe the residents of Southampton County are willing to negotiate away their peace and quite. If Ethan wants jet noise then he too can move to the beach. And by the way Ethan, all this must be Bush's fault.

Posted by knowledge (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The fear that occurs immediately after a loss can create irrational thought and the need to grasp at any straw to bring a quick fix to a problem.
Mr. Brown is an old hand at painting rosy pictures of the benefits of an OLF. There is no way he can promise the local community the majority of the 62 jobs. How long will it take to find people to teach locals, develop a program, train the individuals, etc? Programs through the community college system take time to process.
I go back several main thoughts: 1) Navy promises can be changed. Authorization and budget must come through the US Congress. The Defense Act for 2010 has already been signed. No funds; no authorization. 2) The sites are just under a draft EIS. 3) There are regulations involving the businesses around the OLF area. What if your business does not fit the regulation and you get booted out? 4)Have you studied how much of your tax base will be taken away and how will you compensate for that loss?
The main thought is that the F-35 is in so much trouble and it is doubtful that Oceana will be viable for that jet, why not wait until you see what happens with that jet before selling off some of our much needed food source.

Posted by anAmerican (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Navy can NOT offer anything but the OLF. The money for the building the OLF has to be used for it only. They can say that the OLF may bring in businesses, but, they can't bring in anything. The government's money has to be used only for what it was designated for, which is the building of an OLF.

As the spouse of a 4 state District Director for a Federal Department, this I know.

Posted by PreserveNature (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Does anyone remember the case of Mr. T's riding facility in Ivor? Residents were concerned with the noise of small vehicles like motorcycles and four wheelers. Seems to me like LARGE jets constantly flying over our land would produce a few more decibles than a minibike. And for what? To replace a little revenue and only 62 of the nearly 1200 jobs lost by the mill closing. Come on, we may be a largely agricultural region, but we are not uneducated. Look at the toll it will take on our environment. Any Hunters out there in Southampton and Sussex County? If you were a deer, what would you think if a large flying object flew over your woods just above the trees at Mach 1? You'd run like Hell and never come back. I know deer hunters in this area don't want that. Plus, look at the lost agricultural revenue an OLF will create. Any argument for an OLF on the heels of the mill closing just doesn't add up. We love our peace and quiet(what little we have left) here. If you are not from here and want noise, move to Va. Beach or Hampton. The Navy can build an OLF anywhere they want, just don't fly over my land!!!

Posted by StandingBear (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

regarding Balance's standard VB remark:
"defunding the Navy and potentially risking our national defense is not really a productive recommendation" :

What does one call the folks in VB who sued the Navy over jet noise, and who are still suing the Navy over jet noise? balance needs to take a good look in the mirror and accept his fellow VB greed, as well as his own. Please do the patriotic deed and allow eminent domain to buy houses which have infringed on military facilites, restore this land to wetlands (commend the flooded housing), and the jet pilots can continue to practice. This is the winning solution, and the just one. balance needs to stop his name-calling as rural VA and NC folks love their country and their land. Rural folks are not selling moving every 3-5 years like the average VB resident, sure that the monies earned through lawsuits are not given over to the new VF home-owners.

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 12:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

StandingBear,
I've never said I'm from VB. Don't make assumptions. I've never said I'm in favor of OLF. Don't make assumptions. I also never said that I agree with VB residents that may have sued and won settlements. I think that is as egregious as proposing defunding the Navy. Don't make assumptions.

All that I have said is that we need to prepared for the possibility that OLF may happen whether we like it or not; and, we should do our best to make sure we get something out of it if does happen. That does not mean any rural area should just roll over and give in while obtaining nothing in return. It just means that we need to be rational and promote a positive, productive approach to this situation. That is not the same a advocating any one position over another. It promotes a "cover all contingencies" approach. Why wouldn't we want to do that? Why wouldn't we look at all facts and make a decision from there? Facts with regard to the JSF may change overtime since it's still in development and scenarios may change, but we still need to take a rational rather than an emotional appoach to this situation. Like it or not, the Navy is in the position of having a compromised training facility because of encroachment; and, they cannot realistically remove all of the families that are a part of that encroachment. An OLF is going to happen somewhere, at some point, we just need to be prepared for the possibility that it may be here.

Posted by grantsara83 (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To those of us that have served in our armed forces, we know first hand the waste that occurs all too often, on nothing, but idiotic military schemes. We must not let ouselves, be mislead by nothing more than blatant lies by both the navy, and Va. Beach people. They are desparate in trying to secure peace and quiet by fostering, their now not welcome jet noise of naval aviation, to rural american. Get real, we can tie this up in the federal court system for decades. We're sorry that you were mislead by your politically corrupt, morally deficit, and ethically challenged political powers. If you must, keep lying and maybe, just maybe you might persuade a resident of our community to believe that noise poison is good for us. Patriotism, you "beach" people wouldn't recognise it, if it kicked you in the rearend. Cheers.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IF you let the Navy knows there is a crack in the door that they can get there foot in they are going to bust in. Going to them and asking them what they have to offer is showing them that crack and teasing them. Then you are going to have the hardest time getting rid of them!!

People move out to Franklin, Southampton County and further west to get AWAY from the noise and the busy life of Virginia Beach, Norfolk, Chesapeake, Suffolk and so on. The quietness and hometown feel is why people move here and gives them reason to drive the distance they do to go to work. With the closure of IP many are worried about the foreclosure rate going up. AND if it does, which its already high now and does not need to be higher, who is going to want to move here when we are going to offer the same that they are coming from?

Balance - you stated you are not from VB but did not finish the statement! Reason being? Where you from?

Yes, I live and pay my taxes in Southampton County and proud of it!! Who else commenting can say that they do both LIVE and PAY taxes in Southampton??

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 1:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nothing has changed since Sept, 14 2007. Thats when the article from the TN in the link below was published. Check it out. This is a refresher on the numbers of what will be lost in trade for a 52 job gain which is more than likely jobs for people that they are going to bring in, not the people that live here and the displacement of families that would have nowhere to go if they or since they dont have jobs and cannot get a mortgage let alone be able to rent something. After reading this article you may finally realize that the IP closure was not changed NOTHING when it comes down to the OLF situation!!

http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2007/s...

Posted by anAmerican (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

For the ones that haven't seen the maps of the proposed sites, I would suggest that they check this out. Some may be shocked to learn they may be in a site.

http://www.olfeis.com/alternatives.aspx

Also, check this out

http://www.olfeis.com/land.aspx

Posted by grantsara83 (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

maybe balance is or maybe he ain't, a beach resident, one thing he certainly is and that's pro olf. He sure doesn't have any other interests in our area than this olf mindset.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 3:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

PreserveNature - You have a very strong point on the riding facility situation in relation to this. The riding park would have been a great addition to the county for kids and adults. To bad the county goofed that up.

So lets start a list of what it would COST taxpayers if the OLF was placed here. This would be a list of money that is spent and the taxpayers will never get back. Everything in the link that was in past post and lawsuit Mr. T could bring on the county, considering the jerking around they have done to him, if they allow the Navy noise in Dory which is the same location that the riding facility was going to be!

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 3:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Where I live is not relevant to my comments or those of anyone else. Many people care deeply about this OLF situation for a myriad of reasons. Each of them is entitled to both hold and state their opinions – no matter which side – and deserve to do so without being castigated by those who do not agree with each of their statements. This is a complex situation with many variables at play. Frankly, with the rabid reaction of people toward those who have views that do not perfectly align with their own, I prefer not to divulge information, such as where I’m from, which may serve to identify me. Suffice it to say that I have a deep and abiding interest in the well-being of the Southampton County community; and, I have a centrist view of the situation for all potential OLF sites. That is all that matters with regard to my comment(s). I and everyone else on this and other blogs deserve not to have others attempt to traduce and vilify them by “putting words in their mouth.” Stop the petty nonsense and come up with real arguments, facts, and statistics for your positions, pro and con. Stop the “Ad hominem” in your attempts to defeat Navy proposals. And as you do, remember, “Fas est et ab hoste doceri.” – Ovid.

Posted by sweetwater (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 3:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a bit confused by the articles lead. Who exactly is rethinking their position here?

Posted by PreserveNature (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 4:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is obvious that more of us are against this intrusion of an OLF. What ever happened to "majority rules?" No matter what facts supporters of this nature and human living quality raping OLF come up with, the fact will always stand that we in Western Tidewater love our area just fine just the way it is now. For those few that try and justify it now because of the mill closing, always remember...OLF means UJN(Unbearable Jet Noise.) Do you want to be able to play with your children and talk with family and neighbors in your yards and even inside your homes? Well, you can forget that if they build this thing. Go down to Va. Beach and try to talk to someone while those jets are flying over you. You will not hear a thing you or the person you are trying to have a conversation with has to say.

We need a facility that will draw more people and revenue to this area. If you were looking for a place to start a new business and experienced four jets at Mach 1 flying 50 feet about your head at the site you were considering to build your facility, what would you do? I would forget Southampton County and go some place more peaceful. So would you. I don't care how much the Navy or anyone supporting an OLF tries to sugarcoat the idea, it will be a cancer for our area.

Posted by grantsara83 (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

here's the jest of the our feelings, leave your noise and whatever else makes this "proposal" so unattractive in your hometown. You surely have no ties in this area, even birds do not intentionally foul their own nests. Ever comment on anything other than your desire to relocate an olf. If it was the least bit attractive, Va. Beach, would be up in arms about the prospect of losing it. This issue, contrary to your beliefs is not complex, you befuddle the issue in your own mind, sorry about that.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

balance - You are wrong on this statement in your post "Where I live is not relevant to my comments or those of anyone else." It is relevant in more ways than one. If you don't LIVE here then it won't affect you, you might know someone that does or you have before, but it wont affect you. If you own a business or rental property in Southampton County then you could benefit from it. You wont have to deal with the noise, traffic, and all the other junk that comes with it. That simple!

Notice I use the word "live" in Southampton County, not own a business or rental property in Southampton County and live elsewhere. Those that own a business or rental property in Southampton County AND live elsewhere are only worried about THEIR (Flowers and so on) capital gain and dont have to deal with the outcome on a everyday basis.

The comment above does not apply to those that have a business here AND live here. Its for the "Farmers" that live in the city of pavement and benefit from our dirt. If you believe in and love your community then you LIVE in that community. Those that own a business here AND live here love their community! ITS THAT SIMPLE!!!

Getting on here to comment under a anonymous name to pump YOUR propaganda is JUNK!! And thats the cleanest word I can say on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by knowledge (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Once again, this topic has become "he said, she said" and just gets everyone in an uproar.
Question: Even with an OLF, the planes must return to base so will the residents around Oceana still be allowed to sue due to noise while the "new" OLF residents must sign a no suit pact?
Question: Do you know how much of your tax base will disappear? How will services you take for granted be paid for?
Question: Being taught to always get to the root of the problem and if encroachment is the problem, why not remove the problem? You don't have to remove everyone; just those within a certain db level. The rest of the people have the choice to stay or not.
Question: Do you think you are the area concerned about eminent domain? This has become a hot topic all over the US.
Question: With cropland disappearing at an alarming rate, do you wish to eat your food from the same people that put lead in your children's toys and chemicals in the formulas?
I usually do not attack individuals but "balance", come down off your cloud of titles and ancient language. I don't have to give titles to give facts and I do know of what you quote. I do not attack the Navy as an entire entity, but rather their waste of taxpayer money to study areas for years and their lack of coming to the table with straight answers and refusal to consider areas that people suggest. You can't have it both ways.

Posted by PreserveNature (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said, Rocko. As for "balance" and you others who don't live here or think the opinions of those who do live and work here do not matter, I think the messages posted here are loud and clear.........NO OLF!!!!

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

knowledge,

You offer very good questions for the Navy and government officials; and, they are ones to which it is well worth finding out the answers. I will answer one of the questions, because I mentioned the topic - at least, I'll answer it in so far as my knowledge takes me. "Question: Being taught to always get to the root of the problem and if encroachment is the problem, why not remove the problem? You don't have to remove everyone; just those within a certain db level. The rest of the people have the choice to stay or not." From what I have been able to glean, the encroachment problem is not just about the noise and moving people in a particular db zone. It also has to do with approach patterns that truly simulate those used at the ships, so even more people would need to be moved than just those impacted by the noise. As far as I understand it, this is why the numbers get so expansive. I think that others have discussed potential cropland impact and some of the other issues you point out. Again, all you mention is certainly worth detailed investigation.

Also, I have given no titles, though I do use ancient language. If anyone cared to check, that language meant to "stop appealing to people's emotional urges, rather than their intellect," and "It is proper to learn even from an enemy" - Ovid. It goes back to what I have said all along about being rational, positive, and proactive. And, of course, if one is going to defeat their enemy (viewed in this case as the Navy), then it would most certainly behoove them to learn from that enemy. That can only be done by listening and studying and having an open mind about the information presented. That is all I advocate.

For all, I have said several times that I am neither a proponent of an OLF, nor do I want to see the County shafted if it happens. It seems to me that I have the best interest of the community at heart in suggesting that facts be gathered and positions –with supporting material- be stated clearly and concisely without the infusion of irrationality. Rest assured, I speak "ex animo" when I make my comments.

Furthermore, I say that whether I am a resident of the County or not (and I leave you to wonder) is not relevant because my points are valid - whether or not you agree with them. My basic beliefs on seeking equipoise and how to approach attaining a resolution to an issue will not change no matter where in the world I may live or what adversary or challenge I may need to surmount.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 7:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Balance - Tell us your opinion on this one.

http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2007/s...

What has changed?

Also the navy can come in and buy the people out BUT they are not going to give them what they owe on their mortgages. Many of the people have refinanced with the last few years and now their house is not worth what they owe. The navy is only going to give "today's "foreclosure market" value" so who will be left holding the rest?

Route 460's accident toll raises on a daily basis. Do you really think that if the OLF is put any spot in VA, other than Drewryville, that 460 needs more traffic?

Do you really think that the OLF will hire some of the people laid off from the mill? The navy will bring their own people and contractors. The mill was a manufacturing plant, not a government facility. The workers there are manufacture workers, not government workers.

Balance - You and whoever can preach open minded thinking all you want to and I agree with the open minded thinking. But there are 2 kinds of open minded. One that is open minded, clear and can see reality which is the one that me and the real residents of Southampton County have. And then there is yours, the opened minded person that tries to cloud the minds of the ones that are clear with a bunch of "Open the door and give me a chance so I can sneak in for the attack" propaganda!!

But be real for a minute "balance" since you are hiding behind the bush whats the difference from the link above which was 2 years ago and now?

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 7:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Balance - You can play the "if i live in the county or not" game, but NO ONE is going to give the person hiding in camo behind a bush pushing propaganda and plays games any credit at all!!

Posted by balance (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 8:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Perhaps I should clarify.

I have never claimed to have any detailed knowledge about the Navy’s processes and procedures.

Unlike many others on these various blogs, I have never posted any links, statistics, or other specific data related to the OLF issue.

I have never sought to debate any specific material on statistics, impacts, environmental impact statements, etc. that have been presented by other bloggers or the Navy, because I do not in anyway claim to be a qualified expert or even one with extensive layman’s knowledge. I do not intend to begin that sort of debate now.

I have never advocated either the building or the blockage of an OLF.

How exactly have I clouded anything?

I have one simple wish. That is that the residents of this County (or, more specifically, the Franklin-Southampton County leaders) make absolutely certain that the end result of this process – whatever it is – provides the best possible outcome for our residents now, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, and on. I firmly believe this can only be done through productive engagement.

I’m quite finished with my comments in this blog. If residents here believe the best thing for them is to put their heads in the sand and say it’s not going to happen because we don’t want it to and if we make a lot of negative noise that will be enough, then so be it. I hope you’re right, but I do not believe that strategy will work. In that scenario, the only way an OLF will not be here is if they Navy rules that it is either does not need it or deems on their own that another location is more viable.

As a final note, I notice that none of the other pseudonyms in this blog have a name behind them. They all say anonymous, including yours Rocko. Is it really fair to hurl a barb at me with regard to retaining my anonymity?

Posted by knowenough (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 8:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rocko,

Isn't everyone, including you and me, "hiding behind the bush" when they post on this thread? I mean, no one is actually signing their real names, are they, except for the people who actually have the guts to write a letter to the editor, whether it be Tony Clark, Harold Blythe, the Updikes, or Jerry Flowers. It would be interesting to see who is actually a resident and who is not, although I do not discount someone's opinion just because they do not currently live here.
Actually, some of the opinions here are well thought out, and some, not so much. Like the poster who said that someone should "tell Jerry's mommy". That reminds me of what kids said when I was in kindergarden and 1st grade many years ago. Very immature. When someone makes a comment like that, I pay absolutely zero attention to anything else they have to offer.
I do not want the OLF and I live here, but I also have no desire to be involved with the anti OLF people who get so personal or childlike in their attacks on anyone who has the gall to disagree with them. I have not read or heard anything Tony Clark has said that is anything less than professional. I suggest some of the anti-OLF people could learn from him.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 10, 2010 at 9:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hiding behind the bush - "Balance" knows exactly what I am talking about and tried to turned it into something different.

Like "knowenough" and myself we are not "hiding behind the 'Where We Live' bush" WE LIVE HERE!!!

"Balance" - I am sorry to see you are giving up, but you still leave us with one BIG question unanswered. What is the difference in the stats from 2 years ago and now??? Write back when you can answer. Thanks

Posted by veritas (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I can't believe the TN gave Jerry Flowers another opportunity to get his wacko ideas put in print.

Posted by grantsara83 (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

$67m average salary, a blatant lie. These people have no shame, if they had a choice of either telling the truth or a lie, they'd lie just to lie.

Posted by jerryflowers (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 2:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I understand how sensitive and personal OLF has become to some of you and I too may end up agreeing with those of you, who speak so negatively about me, that OLF should be avoided at all cost. All I am asking is that before you shut the door on an opportunity you thoroughly research all options. It is not like we have Corporations knocking down the door to relocate here.
I will make a promise to every one of you anti-OLF bloggers. Allow me to try and set up a meeting with one of your state legislators, Chairman of Board of Supervisors from Southampton, Mayor of Franklin and Tony Clarke with Senators Jim Webb and or Mark Warner and a Navy representative. After that meeting Tony can report back to you on what if anything was guaranteed or discussed and if it does not meet with his approval I too will join the Anti-OLF organization.
Do not underestimate what negotiations can bring when dealing with the Federal Government. The Navy paid 15 million for a 3 acre lot on Laskin Rd. in Va.Beach 2 years ago and just recently the U.S.Government agreed to pay hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to the State of Nebraska for one Senators vote on the Health Care Bill.
There are some of you who would vote against OLF regardless of how many millions in revenue Southampton and Franklin were able to negotiate and I understand. What I do not understand is how do you think Franklin and Southampton will be able to continue to educate the children, provide essential government services and maintain a viable work enviroment that will allow your kids to find employment and stay in the community, without replacing the loss of IP's tax revenue?
I love Southampton County and I truly understand the distaste and anger over OLF but unfortunately I see it as one of the very few potential streams of revenue to pay the Counties bills.
And speaking of anger and distaste, calling me names , threatening me and bringing my mother into this debate is disgusting. I am sure these tactics have silenced some but it deminishes your credibility and detracts from your argument.
Tony are you willing to meet if I can get it set up?

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 11, 2010 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Flowers, I receive your olive branch in the spirit it is intended. I do hope you are successful in gathering a body that will listen to what this OLF is about. The region (all 5 sites) have not received the entire story, but have had to piece the thing togather from too many sources. We cannot go to the Navy's website and get any current, or realivent answers. So hopefully, this will be a start to the Navy finally coming to the sites and talking with the people.

I oppose the OLF, not because of noise, or farms, etc, but because the Navy is willing to treat others diffrently just because they live in a rural setting. However, if a community opted to say they wanted this thing, I would not be opposed to it. I would still ask what is the Navy going to do to make Oceana and Fentress meet the minimum standards that the 2nd OLF must attain. Oceana and Fentress do not meet the standards the Navy states is required to properly train our pilots with the darkness and encroachment parameters. If the Navy could explain how Oceana and Fentress are no longer terrible places for our young pilots to train, I would love to hear what they did to fix those problems. The Navy has demonstrated that Fentress and Oceana do not meet our pilots training requirements yet state those fields are intrigual to the over training of our pilots. How can they claim that and not be aggressively fixing these runways since 2003?

This double standard is one of my biggest hang ups with this project. That and the changing story by the Navy on their requirements. When you do successfully get the Navy to come out to the rural sites, I hope they will explain how Oceana is a viable MJB after the conclussion of the BRAC process stated it was not. Wishful thinking is not helping our pilots. It is not safe for those on the ground, those on the back of the carrier, and our pilots. A proper training environment is a safe training environment. If the Navy cannot make Oceana a safe training environement, then stop calling it a MJB, and start finding one.

All other issues to me are after the Navy validates the validity of Oceana to continue being a MJB and it starts to perform its fair share of training evolutions to include nighttime FCLP operations on its 4 runways. If the Navy cannot demonstrate that Oceana can once again perform FCLP operations 24/7 at Oceana, then any other conversations about jobs and economic incentives is moot.

What I am asking is the Navy proves they have a need for this OLF based on capacity as that is the rational they are using to justify building this additional OLF site. If they cannot prove a need, then let it be an option for the communities to host this OLF if they wish. Remove the specter of condemnation from this process. Just as Jacksonville Florida was allowed to vote to host the Navy, so should the site the Navy picks as its choice and the Navy abides by that decision. Will they?

Posted by SueAnn (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 3:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Flowers, it is not just Southampton that is involved in the OLF. The Mason site is Sussex/Southampton, the Dory site is Sussex/Southampton. Do you think it is fair to always talk about Southampton, and, what the Navy could give to Southampton and Franklin area? We, in Sussex, are working for fairness to all the sites. It is not just Southampton involved. Sussex county stands to loose just as much as Southampton. Please think of others.

Have you checked the Mason and Dory sites maps?

http://www.olfeis.com/alternatives.aspx

We, in Sussex, are concerned for Franklin also, but, it is not fair for us to loose our properties and livelihoods for Franklin and Southampton only.

Posted by RockSpringNative (Laura Bangor) on January 11, 2010 at 3:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you to Mr. Flowers for making the offer to put together a group that may be able to make some real headway on this issue. I hope this signals the turning of a corner in the OLF process. I further hope the meeting takes place and that the negotiation will result in an outcome satisfactory to all parties, especially those of Franklin-Southampton County and surrounding areas. I wish everyone the best of luck in the process.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 3:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Jerry- These are questions for you.

1. If YOU are trying to arrange this meeting, then why don't YOU report back instead of sending someone else since you opened the lid to stir the pot? In reality, this is to YOUR doing. Since you stood up to be the spokesperson then you should follow it to the end and not start it and bail!

2. With the navy paying as much as you claim they are then whos land will they be buying and who will pocket the money?

3. I understand you think Southampton county and Franklin are the biggest losers in the IP situation. But if the tax revenue from the OLF is your issue as you state then why not put it in Isle Of Wright county? Isle of Wright are the ones losing MORE THAN 25% of their tax revenue from it.

4. IF the deal went down and the Navy bought the houses they needed to then the question here is - Are they going to pay what these people ACTUALLY OWE on their mortgages and not the current "foreclosure market" prices?

5. With the raising toll of accidents on RT460 and RT58 how do you suppose the additional traffic is going to help this?

6. The government could and will lie to make us happy so who is going to hold them to their promises?

7. Has anyone made a attempt to bring any industries here? Is that not what the project on RT671 is all about?

8. Is your point more on the tax revenue or jobs? We can have all the tax revenue in the world BUT if the people dont have jobs then its pointless right?!!

And there many more which we all know the outcome to. If you give the Navy a slight thought that they have a chance they are going to hit the door with full force and we do not have the man power or knowledge to shut them down if thats what happens.

Jerry - If this deal goes bad, I would want you to stand up and accept responsability for starting this issue and have the TN to publish a letter of apology to the people here in the community.

Posted by SueAnn (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 4:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Flowers, Mr. Clarke is chairman of the VaNoOLF, and represents ALL the sites in Virginia, not just Southampton.

Posted by knowledge (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 5:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The large money land buys were token attempts by the Va Beach City Council to prove it was doing something about encroachment; nothing more. And the payments were way above tax value so how smart is that?
Payment will be made at about $2k/acre for prime agricultural land. Houses may and I say may, be at market value. The market is not good now so prices will be low. If you own a farm as a business, you will be paid for the land only. Forget that you may owe big loans on your equipment and mortgages on your home. It will not be a person by person process.

A more personal thought - think about the elders of the community; those people who are cared for my children, neighbors, church, etc. They live out their lives in their own home. A lot of these elders may be given $20K for their home. Where will they go on $20k? Not all will be able to go live with someone so they end up in nursing homes at taxpayer expense. Would you want this to happen to your parents or grandparents?
Everything goes back to encroachment and the ability of the F-35 to be based at Oceana. Also, I question why people are so eager to sell other people's land when the draft hasn't even been released. What are these people getting out of the deal? Most important, you can sign deals with the Navy but if Congress does not approve it, your deal is off. I believe there exists some barking up the wrong tree.

Posted by chuck (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 5:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Chesapeake is salivating over the prospects of a second OLF. They are hoping the subsequent reductions in operations at Fentress will result in smaller noise zones, opening up more land around Fentress for development. Look at all the developments they have already approved, and all the infrastructure improvements they have made and plan to make in the Mount Pleasant Road - Centerville Turnpike area east of Great Bridge. More encroachment, more lights, further degrading Fentress, diverting more training to the second OLF. The implication is that the Fentress OLF is a detriment to economic growth in Chesapeake.

Posted by Millie (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 7:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

We have been thrown under the bus. NC is pushing for us. I have family that said so. The person saying we are not in the running must be a plant.

Posted by callingdove (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 7:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Jerry Flowers does not have the BIG PICTURE. Well, he lived in the city of Franklin before moving to Suffolk, and still lacks knowledge of Franklin and the Paper Mill.

The average wage at the Mill has been stated anywhere from $54,000 to 72,000 (lower figure is well above the VA state average, so let's go with that). As long as the Mill offered such a great salary, how many businesses came and looked and realized that they could not match that salary.

As has been stated, and often, there are 5 rural sites. Why is Jerry Flowers insisting on offering up the Dory Site? Flowers does not represent Southampton (nor Franklin) and how I wish he stop 'selling out' other people's personal property. Hopefully, the rest of the politicians (local and state) really don't need his nose where it doesn't belong.

Please, no one has to offer land in Southampton up to 'save' Franklin. Harsh reality of the Mill closing may be a SOMEWHAT of a blessing as businesses can come to Franklin and now afford to hire folks at a competive rate.
Secondly, the Navy can not offer deals unless Congress approves the budget, and no one should second guess Congress (even our Sen Webb & Warner).

Pardon me, don't know whether to laugh or cry at JF's suggestions. Overall, my guess is that they won't be welcomed by anyone outside of VA Beach.

Posted by farmingVA (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 8:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How un-nice of Jerry Flowers to offer my land near the Dory OLF Site (since the Navy can 'twink' the sites anytime and move them, repeatedly stated by the Navy personnel at the Scoping). Obviously JF's mama didn't teach him manners such as not to play with other kid's toys. My land, and everyone's farmland in the Dory Site (and all sites!!!!!) are homes to people, supply property taxes, offer jobs. How dare anyone offer my home and property to benefit Franklin. A better idea would be for JF to offer his business in Courtland to someone in Franklin (in other words, Jerry needs to share his own toys and not steal from other the other kids). We all need to remember that JF has moved away from Franklin and Southampton and stands to gain economically in his loan-business in VB if he can swing this deal. This deal using other people's property!

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 10:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is a letter to the editor in response to Jerry Flowers and was published on 11/18/09 from the Gaskins Family that could lose the families land to the OLF.

http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2009/n...

Here is a article dealing with the sand pits in Sebrell that has published on 11/29/07 that was started and pushed by Jerry Flowers. In this article, this line is a quote from him

"Noting that the trucks headed to and from the borrow pit would coincidentally pass his own house, Flowers said, "I have no problem with it."" Was he really living there at that time? I think not!!

http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2007/n...

This is a article published 9/21/07 where Jerry and partners sold out and bypassed the residents of Sebrell for their own cashout. The quote from his partner Robert H Pope is as stated which Flowers must have agreed with since in the previous link you read that he stayed for the second meeting to make sure things happend.

""We would like to try to get our value out of our land," Pope told planners at the beginning of last Thursday's public hearing to discuss the conditional use permit request."

http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2007/s...

So as I can see it, Jerry is in it for his own capital gain. With a number of letters on file with the TN about how a number of people that fully disagree with Jerry with GOOD "CLEAR THOUGHT" CAUSE.

So what is Jerry's word really worth?

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 10:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Jerry - Do you really know what is being laid on you and your families name? Do you really want the OLF situation to be the end of a good family name? Regardless if you see it or not, you will be the one held liable for this not just by me but the rest of this community too.

This is not a sand pit in someones back yard. The OLF will be the ultimate pit in everyones front and back yard and in the air around us. As proven in past post you offer NO GOOD to the situation and I ask you to lay it to rest!! You can make all the calls you want to but I can promise you the people that still live and love Southampton County WILL shut it down!!

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 11, 2010 at 10:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As stated in the article, Jerry Flowers is part owner of 2 farm, which one is part of the sand pit in Sebrell and also Bill's Grill in Courtland. If you totally disagree with Jerry and his "views", well lets show him. Now you know where NOT to spend you money!!!

Posted by windsurfer757 (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 4 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have looked quickly through the comments on this subject and I don't see any suggestions on putting this OLF at the Dare County Bombing Range. I have it on Google Earth at the moment and I see nothing there except a few government roads and some farmland to the north and a bit to the south. Other than the distance traveled to reach it, that shouldn't be that much of a problem since refueling facilities are already in place for a proposed OLF. I am sure there must be some issues with migratory waterfowl, though that concern could be brought up at any of the other proposed sites. As it is already there, why not utilize this area as an OLF site; or at the least consider it?

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 12, 2010 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just like Ft. Pickett and AP Hill, the Navy has reviewed those facilities as well as Dare and have developed scenarios that disallow that option. They claim that between the AF and the Navy, there is to great a chance for interference between the two missions. They insist that bombing runs and FCLP patterns may interfere with each other. Thus the option to use Dare is bad.

If someone wished to determine the number of times Dare and FCLP operations would interfere with each other that might be a good study to perform. I believe the Navy gave us enough information with the previous NEPA process. Could the Navy realisiticly deconflict bombing missions with FCLP missions?

The supplemental data provided to support the FEIS has the information the Navy provided for the communities to digest. There is enough information in those documents to make an educated arguement as to the viability of dual using Dare. This would effectively bring back Hyde County into this process if this was investigated further.

Could an arguement be made that demonstrated that per month and per airwing, there might be the ability to perform all this training? One of the things the Navy likes to toss around is the term efficiently. That would have to be included in the argument.

Posted by gr8mommy (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 5:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Interesting; the poll on this very site shows that perhaps the tides are turning and people are becoming a little more open-minded about listening to what the Navy has to say about the OLF.

http://www.tidewaternews.com/polls/2010/...

Posted by 23davidfrklnva (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 6:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You are ALL FUNNY! If only you'd get more involved in education, or homelessness, or healthcare., or any other number of causes. But I see most of this crowd is too wrapped up in their own little worlds. Selfishness I guess. Too Self absorbed. I see most of you have that George Carlin syndrome NIMBY. You all love freedom, love the Armed Forces, love America, are even willing to support good causes. But........Nimby, Not In My Back Yard. LMAO Yes it would inconvenince a few homes (sarcasm). But not the amount of folks that are against it. OOOOOO I live in South Dakota and I'm against an OLF anywhere in Virgina. LMAO

Posted by SueAnn (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 7:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

davidfrklnva, you should know of what you speak. A few homes?????....how about hundreds? Do you know how large 30,000 acres are? It is about the size of Norfolk.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

gr8mommy - The poll questions is a joke!! Yes you should always have a open mind BUT there is a difference between a open mind that has been filled with propaganda and lies that have been told and a open mind filled with reality.

I am sure after many thought the question out it was too late and they had already answered.

The proper question for the poll should have been - "With the closure of IP should the residents of western tidewater rethink their past opinion on the OLF".

But does ANYBODY really think the Navy's answer will be different than they were 2 years ago just because the mill is closing? If you don't know what the answers were here is the link from 2 years ago. This answers more than you think.

http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2007/s...

As far as anybody knows Jerry could be answering the same poll from different computers to get the point across!!

Posted by gr8mommy (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 9:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rocko -- You are so stuck in a rut with your thinking! Clearly your mind is already made up and you are in the minority. You are making excuse after excuse for a POLL that is ON this very website (a poll that, conveniently enough, shows that people are leaning more towards listening to what the Navy has to say about the OLF). Listening to what the Navy has to say does not equate to "it is a done deal."

How do you know that the Navy wouldn't try to work out a compromise and give Southampton County a deal that would out well for those that are negotiating FOR Southampton County residents? Look at the Nebraska Senator that worked out one heck of a deal for the state of Nebraska in exchange for his "yay" vote on the healthcare bill. It's all about negotiating it to your advantage. Sure, most Nebraskans don't want the healthcare reform bill passed but if they have to have it, at least now they have quite a deal worked out for their state. It will behoove virtually everyone in that state.

Nobody has filled anyone's mind with propaganda. An open mind would neither be filled with propaganda nor would it be filled with other people's thoughts of "reality." An open mind is just that: open to both sides and not having a firm opinion on the matter. And that's what people are asking you to do. Why not drop what you have seen and heard, sit down with the Navy hence-forth and see what they have to say?

The majority of people in this area are now looking at what the Navy can offer to us and how can we, in Southampton County, make it to our advantage. You, Rocko, may say there is not one single advantage to an OLF coming to our area. But that is your rightful opinion on the matter....it doesn't mean that everyone thinks that way.

The article that you provided a link to is definitely written with bias; no doubt about it. The person that wrote it is emphatically against an OLF. Some could suggest that that is propaganda! Those are not answers in that article. That is one person's THOUGHTS (i.e., opinion) on whether it would help or hinder the economy (and, of course, that person is emphatically against an OLF so do you really think he would say in the article, "Oh, it will help our economy!"). Opinion does not equate to truth on any level.

People are becoming more open-minded and it is refreshing!

Posted by Timberlake (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 9:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am glad the poll shows that the ugly, mean and ignorant voices above are just the minority of a minority.

Posted by knowenough (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 10:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Amen Timberlake. Although I would prefer in a perfect world not to have the OLF here, I definitely am open minded enough to consider all options in this current situation our area finds itself in. What really disappoints me are the "ugly, mean, and ignorant voices", as you put it, in this blog. These people just attack with such hatred and venom anyone who doesn't see things their way. I mean, bringing someone's mother or family into a personal attack is just going too far. It's sick, pathetic, and childish. Someone once said, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt. WWJD

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 10:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The OLF is all about politics not about the community. The community is in limbo now and there are people flying around, praying on us and are ready to swoop in to take advantage of us because they think we are so desperate. Its the real world of dirty politics and business. Don't sit there and think that there is not someone in this situation who is not getting their pockets padded.

I understand what you are saying about Nebraska. But who is to say the same is not happening here with a deal that is behind closed doors and one person is telling another "You get the OLF landed in VA and I will take care of you".

With all the questions post on this blog, I see NO ONE posting any answers. Why do you think that is? The Navy is not going to be a "financial freedom highway" for Southampton county. Is the money from the OLF going to be used in trade for the tax money of the unemployed IP and other workers?

The OLF might throw enough money to the county BUT how is the OLF going to help the unemployment and rate here? Food has to be put on the table right? Which in MY opinion is the most important thing RIGHT NOW!!

Posted by farmin4america (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 10:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let me begin by saying that I am very proud of those citizens from Southampton and the surrounding counties that would be affected by the OLF, for standing up to the NAVY.
I do not believe that the residents of Southampton should have to sacrifice their ways of life and beautiful countryside for the NAVY to put in an unwanted OLF. It is not Southampton County's fault that Chesapeake allowed residential development around its OLF. It is not Southampton County's responsibility to be the location for an OLF just so Virginia Beach can keep NAS Oceana. Sometimes we learn by our mistakes, and Virginia Beach and the City of Chesapeake have made mistakes by allowing development to occur so close to these facilities. Well now they are in trouble and need an OLF for the jets to practice on, and I'm sorry but Southampton County has made it clear that it does not want this facility.
I do not think it is Southampton County's responsibility to hold a meeting to discuss any further topics on this issue. Nothing the NAVY says will make a difference because most people have already investigated the issue thoroughly and made the best decision for themselves. The Southampton County Board of Supervisors have already sent a letter to Governor Tim Kaine and expressed their opposition to an OLF. They acted in the correct manner because they listened to what their constituents had to say. What the citizens of the county suggested is exactly what the supervisors did.
I have heard a lot of talk from people about how the closure of the mill will affect them. There is no doubt that the mill workers really will have it tough when looking for a job in today's economy. However, there is no reason to bring up an Outlying Landing Field when discussing the closure of the mill. There is no reason to waste time causing a lot of controversy and heated discussions over a topic that people have already made up their minds over.
Lastly, I can not say enough how much I am opposed to the people from other cities writing the newspaper and telling Southampton County residents what to do. Virginia Beach and Chesapeake made its own decisions when they decided to develop land around NAS Oceana and Fentress Airfield. Southampton County residents were not in the middle of those decisions, so now the people who are not living and voting in Southampton County, need to let its own residents make their own decisions. If it does not turn out like Virginia Beach and the NAVY hopes, then this will be a important lesson to teach future generations to carefully evaluate their actions before developing around a naval airbase.
I would like to offer my support to the citizens of Southampton County and I will support your efforts to help defend our beautiful countryside, lifestyles, and values that we have always stood for as a community.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 12, 2010 at 11:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

farmin4america - I TOTALLY agree!!

To the others - If the OLF is such a GREAT thing then why is Isle Of Wright county NOT begging for the OLF? Remember they are the ones LOSING 25% or more of their tax revenue?

Many wise people have said before "Be careful what you ask for because if you get it you just might not like it!!"

Posted by gr8mommy (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 6:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Rocko - Again, you are not keeping an open mind at all. Negative thinking, consistently, is what you are doing. Are you even sure that IOW County will lose 25% of their tax revenue or is this just propaganda? If true, however, perhaps this is one of the issues that can be addressed and the Navy will compromise on it.

No one is spouting off the the OLF is such a great thing. I don't see one single person on here saying that it is a "GREAT" thing. No one is "asking" for it either. What people are saying is, "Yes, I will listen to what the Navy has to say and then make my decision regarding it AFTER I have heard the facts straight from the horses mouth (and not on some blog, opinionated article, etc)."

I think you are terrified of even hearing what the Navy has to say, because, well -- what if what they truly have to say is not all that bad. What if it a deal is worked out? You don't even want to let it get to that point because the very idea that a compromise might be reached is frightening to you.

Trust me; I don't want this healthcare reform bill. But, my representatives have voted for it, compromised and made a deal for it. There isn't anything I can do about it. It would have been nice to have a Senator like Nebraska's to work out an even better deal for the state of VA.

And perhaps, that is what our representatives may do for us.....but it's going to take alot of answers to get to that point. Maybe the Navy will do a better job of answering questions once they know it's not falling on angry, close-minded, deaf ears.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I doubt the majority of people at the sites are close minded. I would venture that many people are open minded and I would bet that many are begging to see some valid information. They don't want to hear about this OLF from people like me. Who am I?

Yet in the absence of any leadership, people still need answers. By this time, most if not all who will be impacted have an understanding of what an OLF is. Of what it does, and why our pilots use one. What many are still struggling with is why my area? Why does the Navy need another OLF? Why am I being put into this position? What will I do if I have to leave, or have to make that decision of voluntarily selling because my quality of life may be severely impacted? For many, this homestead is all they have known their entire lives and this particular community is important. When my site was a finalist, these were some of the questions I struggled with, plus, does the Navy really need this? If yes, I will adjust, if no, the Navy will adjust. This is still valid and in the hearts and minds of the people at the 5 new sites.

Many are looking for information that only the Navy has. Where is the Navy? If the Navy calls a meeting for next week at any of the sites, people will show up to hear them. They will be respectful, listen, discuss the information, evaluate what was told them, and ask thought provoking questions of the Navy. Many will dive deeper into the Navy's presentation. They will evaluate the information at a deeper level and review the data with an open mind.

I have chatted with many no OLF groups and one of the first questions we ask each other is, "are we seeing this right?" I personally question over and over my conclusions. I look for others to validate my information as well as my methodology.

One of my goals is to ensure our pilots receive the proper training they require in a safe manner. The Navy taught me to evaluate our course of action, and if it is inaccurate, then bring it up so we can change it. They also taught me to engage with those who have an opposing view point in robust dialog to correct the problem or misunderstandings. Never was I taught to not discuss problems.

Opposition to the Navy's action is not opposition to the Navy. Folks are empowered to think for their community, their property, their way of life, and our pilots. I have all the confidence in the world that people of the region are capable of determining what is best, just and fair for themselves and our nation. The people at these sites have a vested interest in this decision making process and must be included in the process. The Navy controls that aspect of this. They may set up meetings at any time.

The Navy is strong on community relations. Why won’t the Navy engage in COMREL projects around here, ones that will engage anyone who wishes to participate? People will come because people are begging for information from our Navy.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 6:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

gr8mommy - In past articles in the TN, the words of what IOW have said have been printed in black and white. The will lose over 25% of their tax revenue do to IP. Since those words came directly out of their mouth then it is not propaganda. Questions have been answered of the last few years about the OLF. Do you REALLY think the Navy's answers will change just because IP is closing? Reality is that if the answers change then they are just telling you what you want to hear to buy their way in.

The reality of the whole situations is that the people that are actually losing something are not worried and dont carry about why the Navy and the pilots needs the OLF and truthfully they have the right to be that way!! What is theirs, is theirs. It dont belong to the "outsiders" it belongs to them!

The Navy and the rest of the pushers and praying on the people that are not to seeing through the "smoke and mirrors"! Its real world politics and business!!

allsites - Why are all questions answered with questions and NO REAL answer comes out? As you stated in your post "If the Navy calls a meeting for next week at any of the sites, people will show up to hear them. They will be respectful, listen, discuss the information, evaluate what was told them, and ask thought provoking questions of the Navy." Thats about half true. If the questions are the one the Navy does not want to hear or answer then what happens? You are right about people showing up to the meeting but I think you are wrong about it being so clean cut and peaceful as you think it will be. I am 100% sure there will over half the people there will be there to tell the Navy what they can do with the OLF! If the Navy does not like what some people are saying or asking they will have them removed from the meeting. That is because they dont want to answer the true hardcore questions and put doubt in the peoples mind that they have the attention of at the moment. With the knowledge you do have of the OLF situation please answer the questions on this that have been asked and please do not reply with a question.

Posted by SueAnn (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rocko, I have been to the meetings with the Navy at all the sites, and, the people there to hear what the Navy had to say, have been very respectful.

Posted by chuck (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 8:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"People want leadership ... and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. ... They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand."

"People don't drink the sand because they're thirsty. They drink the sand because they don't know the difference."

This scene from The American President has certain implications here. I have to wonder -- are we getting so thirsty for jobs to replace those lost at IP that we are willing to drink the sand...?

If so, then why stop with the sand? Let's wash it down with the kool-aid. Let's tell the Navy: We want Oceana -- lock, stock and barrel -- and we want it now. Build a new master jet base in western Tidewater, with all it entails... construction jobs, new housing, new businesses to serve the base and its attendant population, etc.

just a thought...

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 8:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have attended many Navy controlled OLF meetings and presentations. I have seen frustrated people, but I have never seen anyone escorted from a presentation. I have been going to these things, and even ran a few of them as the primary speaker and no one has ever came close to what you have mentioned. So to claim half is way out of line. With regard to what people will do if the Navy does not answer their questions, I cannot control what a person will do.

With regard to the Navy not wishing to answer the tough or hard core questions, that is exactly what I have been saying the Navy does not desire to do. That is why they refuse to come to the sites and talk with the people. It is not that they are afraid of what the person will do once the Navy answers the question, it is the Navy does not wish to engage the people in robust conversations and give the people the opportunity to ask the hard core questions.

With regard to why I throw questions around vice answers, I am not empowered by the Navy to answer questions on their behalf. I can show folks where I got my answer which is normally a Navy source. The Navy has answered the question so I just restate the answer. I had the opportunity to read the Navy's documentation and have the desire to point people to the answer utilizing Navy sources. Where I do not have a public source Navy answer, I have to keep it as a question.

Also, I assume (yes I understand what that word means) the Navy is reading these blogs and at any time may answer these questions. The technical questions I ask only the Navy has the answer. If I do not have a Navy source, I cannot answer the question. So I ask questions. I hope others will understand the question and also ask them of the Navy. I am hoping that at some time, the Navy decides to stop putting flags in the ground daring us to knock them over and will start having robust dialog with us that supports a deep dive of this OLF process. In the original NEPA process, the Navy did not talk to us. When the Navy and NC DENR introduced the six potential new NC sites in 2007, the Navy acknowledged they were not effectively communicating with us and promised to work on that. It has been over 2 years and the Navy is still not talking to the communities. The only difference is the Navy has 5 new communities they are not talking to. Most of my questions are directed AT the Navy.

I know that if I asked a pointed question of the Navy in an email it will be answered, and usually quickly. What is bad about that is only I have the question, and the answer. When I dessiminate the question and answer, it is not the Navy saying it, but me. Again, I am not empowered to speak on the Navy's behalf, so I do not take on that role. Many of the questions I ask are valid for anyone to ask, and everyone should have access from the Navy to the answer. Folks prefer their answers from the Navy, not people like me. At least I am willing to discuss with people this OLF.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Here is an example of Navy communications. Today the Navy updated their website. It has 11 main pages. At the bottom of each page it has a line that reads, This page was last reviewed on Wednesday, January 13, 2010" or "This page was last updated on Wednesday, January 13, 2010. For this update, this is the page that was updated, http://www.olfeis.com/alternatives.aspx . What was updated, I have not a clue. The Navy gives no clear indication other then something on this page was changed, go figure it out.

This page is depicts that 5 sites.

on the website, there is a sticker that says NEW right here. "The maps below have been updated.

The oval represented on the OLF Site maps was prepared using the most recent noise data and models an approximate 60 dB DNL noise contour. The oval may change as modeling data is further refined. Site specific projected noise contours will be presented in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

A frequently asked question at public outreach events has to do with the shifting of site locations. To provide the public the most current data on proposed sites, the Navy posted initial core and buffer locations of the sites provided by Virginia on the Virginia Office of Commonwealth Preparedness website in July 07. Shortly thereafter, as a result of updates to our data, the Navy adjusted the core area for the Dory site to the north in an effort to reduce potential environmental impacts at the site. No other sites have been adjusted, and that was the only adjustment to the Dory site."

Read the paragraph and it appears that nothing has changed since July 07. So what changed? I don't have a clue. Guess folks have to look at their respective maps and guess. Is this a proper way by the Navy of communicating with the communities; to say something changed, but then say nothing changed, yet something changed on this page? I guess it is now our responsibility to figure out what the Navy changed, if we really care.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

according to this website, http://www.olfeis.com/scoping.aspx the Navy acknowledged 2,564 people attending their scoping meetings. This is the only attendance available for this iteration of the OLF hunt.

Based on this number, there should have been over 1,200 people acting in such a way that would have required them to be removed. I think I would have seen, and the papers would have reported such an event.

I attended the COA presentation and the Mason presentation. I figured about 24 people were at the COA presentation and over 130 at the Mason meeting. The pastor can give a better estimate of how many at his church. Myself and a reporter were the last two to leave the church. The Navy was one of the last groups to leave. It was a cordial event. After the meeting, the Navy broke up into smaller groups answering questions. I did not see anyone removed from either meeting. What did happen was the Navy was willing to spend a large amount of time on explaining their postcard notification system, but gave me the chance to ask three questions before the Navy moved on. Some will say, "you got three questions", while others desired the Navy to recognize me longer because of the questions I was asking. Since it was a Navy ran event, they controlled who got to ask the questions.

Posted by gr8mommy (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Chuck -- We may get that: the whole kit and kaboodle, in the future. If you look at NAS Lemoore in California, Southampton County is very comparable. My strong gut feeling is that perhaps this is what their long-term plans may be (long term meaning within 5 years). There is no doubt that the Navy is not happy with the Virginia Beach encroachment. Virginia Beach has allowed the encroachment; not the Navy. The Navy, no doubt, would like a more rural site for a master jet base.

The deck of cards is in our hands. We need to play them to our full advantage. If the Navy declines to answer the hard-core questions, "see you later." We are in a fantastic position. Listen to what they say, ask questions, and if we like what we hear, negotiate.

In a perfect world, we wouldn't need a military. We wouldn't need aircraft and jets to protect our freedom. It's an ugly world we live in and with that, we realize that *some* place has to host an OLF and possibly a new master jet base. We need it near Norfolk and we need both the OLF and MJB in rural places. Southampton County was chosen by our governor (among, what, 4 other sites?). There is a reason why other locations were not selected by him (i.e., Fort Pickett). We have to remember that they have alot more inside information and I am positive that our governor had good reason to select the sites that he did.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 9:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

chuck,

An awesome thought process. Go for everything, your lands are worth that. If the Navy opts to build the MJB in your community, and that is what you desire, then the needs and wants are parallel and this makes sense. The Navy now has their darkness and can train as they will fight. Part of asking for the MJB is also making the land available for the one OLF required for this MJB (maybe a west coast Lamoore type MJB to eliminate the need for a satilite OLF facility). The communities will protect the mission at all the fields, and our pilots finally get the proper training they deserve in a safe environment centered around their MJB.

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 9:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

allsites - I understand you are in the middle. If you have attended these meetings then you should be able to answer these for us? Just flat simple answers nothing going around and around.

1. If the Navy does not know where they are going to put this then how can they start taking contract bids on Friday?

2. Were you sent to smooth things over here?

3. What is the difference in the Navy's answers from 2 years ago and now?

4. Since IP is closing has the Navy's answers changed?

5. If the OLF is such a great thing then why after all of the talks before why was every site said saying heck no?

6. Will the Navy pay what is OWED on the properties not market value?

7. If they Navy displaces a family that are unemployed by taking their home, What will the Navy do to supply them a new one?
***** Now remember if a person is unemployed then how can they get a NEW mortgage? With a new mortgage you have to be at a job for a minimal of 1 year and some banks require longer.
***** Also remember these people may have payments saved or help with pay their mortgage until they find a job. Don't assume just because they are unemployed they are not making the mortgage payment.

Keep in mind if this part of the plan goes bad there might be a homeless issue on our hands!

Any insight on these questions is a start. If these simple questions cannot be answered then what the point of bringing this topic up again?

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 9:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

allsites - You stated one key phrase in one of your last post "A Navy ran meeting". In most eyes that should not be. When you have a gathering at your home, do YOU run the gathering or do you let someone outside that you invited run the gathering? See my point? If you let the invited "Navy" run the gathering then they are going to do and answer how they please.

And even if no one was "removed" from the meeting, they were on their best behavior, but if I am not mistaking didn't all the site still say NO??!!!

The governor did appoint the sites. Is he still in office? Did his "blue team" team mate when the election following him? Which by the way Jerry Flowers wrote a letter to the editor of this paper begging people to vote for the "blue team" runner!! Can anyone see how this is flowing with the connections there?

People speak in different ways. Let the statement above be a example.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 11:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

1. My interpretation of the Friday article will be a story by the TN that will explain in greater detail how the Navy will perform bids. I do not see that on Friday, the Navy is opening a bid process for any particular site or sites with the intent of accepting bids to build this OLF.

2. I am an individual who's community was in the cross hairs like your communities are. When the Navy/DENR added the NC sites, one of the proposed sites would have taken my mom’s land from her for this project. From Sept 2007 - Jan 22, 2008, there was all the new proposed sites in VA, the 6 new sites in NC as well as the 5 original sites. I made myself available to the 4 northern NC sites and the knowledge I have, I have had some contact with the VA sites. We did not anticipate that the Navy would have scrapped the original NEPA process the way they did. I am just a guy who realizes the Navy is not being as forthright as they could be on this project and I speak up when and where I can.

3. During the DSEIS, the Navy stressed surge operations and the inability to perform them. Noise impacts to the community were a concern by the Navy. They still had to include that for day to day operations the Navy stated they had the capabilities (capacity) to perform FCLPs using Oceana and Fentress (FEIS). They were concerned about efficiently performing the various missions and minimizing noise for all. Now, the Navy is stressing the FRP and that Fentress ALONE is responsible for performing FCLPs. Oceana is no longer designed to perform, or assist Fentress in performing FCLPs. Oceana's night time capacity is removed from the equation. Noise mitigation for anyone is not a concern but implied with splitting the FCLPs between the OLFs. Both times, the Navy does not wish to discuss the viability of Oceana as the future MJB. The Navy just says Oceana is the future but cannot get around the BRAC process conclusion that the planes of Oceana must be relocated (Presidential Order).

((More)) Thank you TN for this forum.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 11:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

4. Since IP announced its closing process, the Navy has not discussed anything about this OLF process other than moving the release of the DEIS to the right to provide data on the JSF (something not included in the NOI). Since the Navy's has not discussed anything with the communities since IP's announcement, in fairness to the Navy, no, they have not changed their story. However, since the announcement of IP closing, the Navy has announced the introduction of the JSF to the fleet. This aircraft has to have a home and this thing requires a separate NEPA process (Marc Anthony explained that, along with the ongoing NEPA process the USMC is performing because of this aircraft’s introduction), one that will look at the environmental impacts at all the facilities that will support this plane. The Navy cannot do a speculative NEPA process (what this OLF NEPA process has turned into) to set up the main NEPA process (to find a home for the JSF on the east coast). Once the Navy determines that Oceana might be a potential scenario for homebasing the JSF, that condition is a foreseeable environmental impact to this process that effectively voids this current OLF process. The need to find a home base for the JSF far outweighs the possible noise changes of replacing the F/A-18 CD aircraft one for one with a JSF aircraft. Look at the data of the FEIS. Chapters 1 – 10 are about the homebasing options, chapters 11 and 12 are about the OLF options. That is an indicator of what the various options for finding a home base entails. This JSF will have at least that many options plus should have a greenfield option to explore. Finding a viable home for the JSF is more than just finding an OLF for Oceana. It is a bear of a process, and it will get ugly when the Navy has to start demonstrating Oceana’s problems and what it will take to fix them. Did they change their story, no, but because of the JSF, the current NEPA process and the requirements provided to the two governors and the 5 communities no longer meet the proposed action. The 24,000 acre foot print is inaccurate which is what is enabling many if not all the sites to be relooked at from the 1st study. If a 50/50 flight operations split is accepted, vice the 33/66 split for this 24,000 acre foot print, then the foot print will be something closer to 45,000 acres. If the DNL contour is calculated with 70% of operations performed with the criterion of summertime, like the 63% is being calculated, many more operations will be performed after 10pm and receive the 10dB penalty. This will make the dB DNL contour lines huge for the 60 dB DNL line. Since the Navy has introduced the JSF, and raised the noise of all those planes to be equal to, or higher than the EF, the ACTIONS of the Navy have changed their stated story.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 11:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

5. I have never stated the OLF is a good thing, so I cannot answer why someone would believe that. After I evaluated the Navy's data, I concluded this OLF was a want, and personally feel it is inappropriate for any government entity to condemn properties for a want. I also expect that whatever the Navy decides must be done at the 2nd OLF, they must do at their MJB and existing OLF since these facilities are suppose to help Fentress perform the mission. Since the 1st NEPA process had an OLF for Oceana as a nice to have (not required), I feel justified in asking the Navy why condemn for something that is not required. Since the Navy has never satisfactorily demonstrated they do not have the capacity to perform FCLPs, I fall back on the Navy’s last official statement that for day to day operations Oceana and Fentress have the capacity to perform FCLP operations. (FEIS 2-40)

6. I do not know exactly the process of eminent domain and how condemnation works. I have a working knowledge of it based on numerous discussions on the subject. What happens if the person does not get enough to pay the existing mortgage is unknown by me. This may be one of those items a community should include as part of their incentive package. Something that provides just compensation for potentially hundreds of years of sweat, toil, blood from generations of family members to make the property the way it is.

7. unknown.

**********
What I encourage the folks at these sites is to read what I say as well as others and study the Navy’s documentations and decide for yourselves. Download and save the various historical documents on the Navy’s website as this is what the Navy used to justify the decision to condemn 30,000 acres of land for this project. They will claim everything has changed, thats fine. It is still a good templete of what to expect. Get a copy of those things. Study them. Study OPNAVINST 11010.36c and SECNAVINST 11010.11 These are the Navy’s AICUZ instructions. look at what those documents say and then see if the Navy is treating your community within the spirit of these orders. The Navy mentioned the OPNAVINST at the scoping meetings. The OPNAV is a subordinate instruction and gets its power from the SECNAV instruction.

I will not tell folks how to think, it is up to you to make the decisions. That is another reason I like to ask questions, vice make statements. I want folks to study this and make their own decisions. When this is all over, the people at the 5 new sites will be the ones impacted by this process.

I hope I answered your questions.

Posted by farmin4america (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 11:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

*This is written in sections due to the amount of characters*
I wrote this mainly as a argument against residential development in Southampton County, but I think it would be inserted here pretty well because an OLF is just as harmful to farmland. Just losing an acre of farmland makes a big difference in the grand scale of things. Please let your friends read this. It may be hard to grasp, but this is growing into a serious issue so factor this into these arguments you make against the OLF. It might just give you another view of what those fields under that shaded area in the proposed sites are capable of. I bet you never knew agriculture was such a valuable resource both local and globally. I would like to preserve every bit of farmland that we could, and I hope that you agree.
Did you know that in the next 50 years, the United Nations expects the world population to increase to just over 9 billion people? Have you ever wondered where your food comes from? It comes from farmers all over the country and the world, just like the ones here in Southampton County, like myself. Farmers work hard everyday to provide for the needs of the United States of America and its citizens, you may not realize this now, but as the world's violence over valuable resources increases don't you think that once the world's population increases to over 9 billion people that agriculture will become ever more important to people? It is pretty easy today in 2010 for some people to take this letter as a joke, but fellow citizens of this wonderful county and surrounding areas, it is now time to make our decisions in the best interest of preserving farmland.

Posted by farmin4america (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 11:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

*This is written in sections due to the amount of characters*
If we just sit back and do nothing about our future food situation, we will be complaining about the price of food just like we complain about oil today. It seems to me that we should be very concerned about where our food will come from in the future because after all, having food is necessary for life to exist. Unfortunately, there are children in foreign countries at this very moment that are dying of starvation. If people are already starving, and the world population is continuing to increase, where will the food come from in the future? The amount of farmland in Southampton County and the surrounding areas is continuing to decrease due to the increase in housing developments as well as the current threat of a OLF, or Outlying Landing Field. This can be stopped by the local politicians paying more attention to their decisions beyond just what sounds good today. You might also say well you know there is a lot of farmland in the Great Plains and the Mid-West portions of the country where farming is booming and producing a large amount of the nation's crops. Well, let me inform you that Southampton County is not the only place in the United States that deals with the threat of residential and commercial developments. Development of farmland is also a threat to the vast farmlands in the Great Plains and Mid-West states as well. Let me go back to an earlier point, I already stated that we cannot feed the world population as it stands today, so if you were to sacrifice any more land as of today for a development or for an OLF, you are just going to put the availability of food into a deeper hole than it was yesterday.
There is hope, however, but it can only be achieved through a team effort with farmers, concerned citizens, and politicians. It is the farmer's responsibility to continue to farm the land and produce higher yields in order to be able to produce more to help fill the future food deficit. It is the politician's responsibility to ensure that farmers have land left to be able to farm and produce the crops necessary to feed the world in the future. It is the responsibility of concerned citizens to stand up make their voices heard to politicians about the importance of preserving farmland. Farming in America is at a turning point. Rapidly rising global food demand, spiking food and fuel prices, and the ever-present threat of development are pressuring our farmers to squeeze the most out of their land.

Posted by farmin4america (anonymous) on January 13, 2010 at 11:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

*This is written in sections due to the amount of characters*
Think about it like this, according to American Farmland Trust, we’re losing 2 acres of farmland to development every minute. It takes approximately 1.2 acres of farmland to produce enough food to maintain current American dietary standards for one person. So if, for instance, a 50 acre field was up for approval for a residential development today, there would be approximately 41.66 people who would no longer be fed off of this property, thus leading to increasing prices at the grocery store as a result of the increased competition for the agricultural goods. Figure in the amount of land that an OLF would take up....
We can support farmers by buying locally. We must also support efforts to protect the farms that supply local foods. The farms and ranches that supply local markets—those closest to urban centers—are the most at risk. I encourage community members to support local farms by purchasing their products at local farmers’ markets, grocery stores, restaurants. With our combined buying power, we can help keep agriculture viable in our community to continue providing the delicious foods, economic benefits and improved environmental quality we’ve all come to enjoy. The change can begin today, all you have to do is call your representatives and local politicians and tell them you want future generations to be able to have something to eat, so we need to begin preserving the current farmlands we have today, before an OLF or a developer takes it away. Come out to the Board of Supervisors meetings as well as the Planning Commission meetings and let your voice be heard.
Projects such an OLF or a residential development are the ones that make those differences in our amount of farmland. Sure its not that many acres on the big scale of things, but as I've shown, those acres are just that many less than what we had before. So do we allow the NAVY to take away our farmland? Are you acting in the best manner to preserve our valuable farmland for the future generations of this world?
I think we need to look at the of issue losing farmland more often because it often is taken for granted that we have plenty of farmland to produce food, however that is not true.

Posted by allsites (Matthew (Matt) Peeler) on January 13, 2010 at 11:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Navy made it a point at the unveiling of the 6 sites in NC that DENR announced them first. That is because the Navy wanted NC governor to put the sites on the block, not the Navy. The Navy also has mentioned that the public hearings in late 2007 at Raleigh and in EC were NC run events, not Navy. They were guests and had no real power other then what Sec Ross gave the Navy.

At the public hearings, the Navy requested control of the various rooms they performed their presentations in. The rest of the building and grounds was not requested and not under Navy control. At the Washington County meeting, those folks had a huge tent set up with chairs, signs, posters, food. When it came to crowd control, the Navy was at the doors letting folks into the building based on the fire marshal's limitations.

Same thing happened at the Mason meeting, the pastor opened the meeting, and then gave control of his building to the Navy, at which point the Navy started their presentation.

The Navy does make that distinction, are we guests, or are we in charge. They ask for this building at this time to control the happenings within the building. I think this goes back to what happened to the Navy at the Town of Roper meeting. The Mayor of Roper had a sound system set up to some crazy dB. At some point the Mayor lit off that sound system, and then asked the Navy if that was loud. Since that time, the Navy wants control of what will happen to them when they are visiting. They want control of the room that has the presentation.

When we tried to set up a presentation, we were told to move it down another hallway as we were within the requested zone of control the Navy asked for. We moved our presentation.

Yes, all the sites have said NO, we do not wish to host this OLF. The local governments of the 5 sites plus many of the surrounding local governments have entered various documents of support saying NO OLF or documents of support for their neighboring county. At the local government level, I think one has to get to Chesapeake before the first local government has written a document that is in favor of the Navy building a 2nd OLF.

Senator Hagen and Burr, as well as Rep Butterfield and Jones in NC have spoken in support of the 2 sites in NC. They really can't reach into VA as you guys are represented by your various reps. Our local state reps are in line with our Congressional reps. Even our Gov supports NO OLF were the people and local government does not wish it.

Posted by FHancock (anonymous) on January 14, 2010 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Many thanks to allsites for standing up in support of rural heritage and people of NC and Western Tidewater. We are in this together. If anyone of the rural 5 sites is taken by VB interests and the Navy, then we all lose. Many of us don't understand why anyone would think that the transformation of the rural landscape into a development is progress, a good thing. The land is producing and doing what it needs to -- food and fiber has to be grown somewhere and our country should not rely on importing these vital items. We are quickly loosing farmland as it is. Tim Kaine, the self-proclaimed Conservation Gov, worked so hard to protect farmland in VA for this very reason. (Kaine very ironically decided that Western Tidewater was not vital, sigh. Bigger sigh, Kaine decided Western Tidewater didn't have the right to be part of this decision.)

Posted by Rocko (anonymous) on January 14, 2010 at 6:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

allsites - Unlike the man that is pushing in this article, Jerry Flowers, you have actually tried to answer questions and give reason for your thoughts instead of suggesting stuff with no thought process. And for that I have to say thanks.

farmin4america - you make a great point and within your post I see another point that I think some people might miss.

If the farm land is taken for the OLF thats more food that we are giving a chance to me IMPORTED and giving the foreign countries more power over us. They do make paper for IP now which is the cause of the closure right?

Posted by FHancock (anonymous) on January 14, 2010 at 6:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rocko at 6:05 pm, this is a major point has been made by others as well: our first line of defense has to be a safe and reliable source for food and fiber (and not importation, often from 3rd world countries which often do not like the U.S.). The safe source is a small American farmer who you can look in the eye (not overseas, not agribusiness). A point which is under-appreciated is that NC & Western Tidewater is the land of such farmers with that stewardship handed down over the generations (small farmers need appreciation and this is generally being denied them; the idea of taking their family land will easily lead to American vulnerability ).

Does anything else think that the small American Farm Family should be able to stand tall in the 5 proposed OLF Sites, instead of being made to feel unpatriotic?

Posted by chuck (anonymous) on January 14, 2010 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Chesapeake City Planning Department has a very informative graphic showing the noise zones around Fentress. http://www.cityofchesapeake.net/services...

When I moved near Fentress in 1989, my residence was on the low end of the 65-70 Ldn zone. When the F/A-18 Hornets and Superhornets came to Oceana, the Navy adjusted the zones, and the noise zone for my residence changed to 70-75 Ldn. I don't have the numbers at the moment, but I think there were at least twice the number of aircraft at Oceana in 1989 as there are now; however, the noise levels for the F/A-18s increased dramatically.

As you look at the graphic, locate the two white Clear Zones -- the landing strip is between these two areas. Also, notice the light blue APZ-1 areas -- these are the areas where the jets begin their descent and ascent to/from the landing strip. The light green APZ-2 areas delineate the flight paths as the jets circle around to repeat the touchdown/takeoff procedures. It is not unusual for the jets to fly over the red areas, especially when there are 4-5 jets in the pattern.

Oceana NAS is about 8 miles NNE of Fentress, and the 65-70 Ldn noise zone extends between the two. Virginia Beach is currently revisiting compatible land use for the area between Fentress and Oceana as a result of the BRAC process. However, there already exists significant development in that area.

One interesting exercise would be to take the AICUZ noise zone graphic for Fentress and superimpose that on the aerial maps of the OLF sites -- this would give you some idea of how far out the noise zones extend at your particular location. Keep in mind that the Navy has constricted the flight paths around Fentress because of development -- they would not be so constricted at a rural site, so the noise zones would likely extend out further.

Posted by SilverBullet (anonymous) on January 16, 2010 at 8:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Chuck, thats more than an interesting exercise; it seems to me its imperative that the comparison be made. I hope you are working with Tony and the NoOLF.

FHancock, your last statement reminds of how the Indians must have felt when the 'Government' settlers landed here. Of course, we have had plenty of corn since then, but the wealth has been redistributed somewhat.