Editor’s note: This commentary is by Rosanne Greco, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel who is now a member of the South Burlington City Council. This is a letter she sent to the U.S. Air Force on Oct. 31, 2013.
Dear Secretary Fanning and General Welsh,
I’m writing to respectfully urge you to remove Burlington Vermont’s Air Guard Station from consideration as the first operational base for the F-35A for reasons of public safety, military training, impact on the community, and the ethical reputation of the United States Air Force that I served for almost thirty years.
Basing this brand-new and still problem-ridden fighter, particularly during its earliest and most accident-prone years, in the midst of Vermont’s largest city and most densely populated region is a bad idea for many reasons. Your Environmental Impact Statement reported on some of them. It omitted reporting on others of major significance: health effects of noise on at least 7,700 of our citizens, large scale toxic dangers from local crashes of the composite and stealth coated aircraft, and property devaluation of at least 3,400 homes.
Recent peer-reviewed scientific studies on the detrimental effects of loud noise on adult and children’s health, as well as the toxic dangers of aircraft fires involving composite materials and stealth coatings should prompt leaders committed to safety and to ethical values to reverse this decision, or at minimum, delay the basing decision in order to more accurately evaluate the military and public safety repercussions of the basing. Residents are already seeing significant property devaluation just as a result of the proposal to bring the F-35A here. (Attached is a listing of the major substantive omissions and errors in the Air Force’s Environmental Impact Statement that I sent to the EIS Project Manager.)
The numerous negative environmental impacts cited in the EIS, the multiple factual errors in the document, and its substantive omissions, should lead the Air Force to re-evaluate the current basing proposal — especially considering the number of people affected here in comparison with the two other equally or better-suited Air Guard bases being considered. The F-35A will adversely impact 7,719 people in Vermont; it impacts only 210 people in Jacksonville, Florida, and 321 people in McEntire, South Carolina.
And, I am asking you to take Burlington off the list for another equally powerful reason: the basing proposal is plunging our community into bitter, escalating conflict, and severely damaging the reputation of the Air Force. If you are not aware of what has been happening in our region, please get your staff to pull up the local news stories, letters, ads, rallies, town meetings, online media articles, and newspaper and broadcast coverage from the past year.
Although Vermont is a very liberal state, Vermonters, for the most part, have been patriotic and supportive of the military. But that is changing because of the controversy over the F-35A basing proposal. Being supportive of the military should not mean that people have to sacrifice their homes, and health, and their quality of life to accommodate a weapon system than can fit better and operate more effectively in a less populated area in another state.
The Vermont congressional delegation, the Vermont National Guard, and even the USAF were once highly respected up here. Now, hundreds are speaking against all three, especially against the USAF. There are divisions and rifts and anger in our communities. Anti-F-35 meetings and rallies draw record crowds. In every area poll taken the vast majority oppose the basing (including the public comments sent to the draft and revised draft EIS — 73% and 80% opposed). You will bring an aircraft to an area where it is unwelcome in the minds of most people.
Vermonters are not naive. They are informed, aware, and tenacious. They know Burlington is not the ideal location either environmentally or operationally for one of the F-35A’s first basings.
On 28 October, 500 people showed up at the Burlington City Council meeting to speak about the basing. It was probably the largest gathering ever at a City Council meeting. Over 200 of the Air Guard members were present (and to my surprise many of them were in uniform) to speak out in favor of getting the F-35A. An equal or greater number of opponents were there as well with anti-F-35A signs chanting anti-F-35A slogans. And even though the meeting public comment period was deliberately arranged to schedule mostly Guard members and those in support of the basing, still the final tally of speakers showed those opposed were equal in number. At previous City Council meetings in Burlington, South Burlington, and Winooski, the opponents of the basing far (over 90%) outnumbered the supporters of the basing.
Vermonters are not naive. They are informed, aware, and tenacious. They know Burlington is not the ideal location either environmentally or operationally for one of the F-35A’s first basings. They know there were/are 1,500 structures (mostly homes) in the “encroachment” area for the current F-16s, despite the Air Force’s scoring sheet erroneously assigning full points to Burlington for having zero structures there. They know there are nearly twice as many cloud-free days in Florida and South Carolina as in northwestern Vermont, yet the Air Force’s scoring sheet rated us the same. They know the official Vermont cost of living is higher than Florida and South Carolina, despite the Air Force’s scoring sheet giving us higher points for having lower costs. They know the Burlington airport’s 8,300-foot runway is much shorter than the other two Air Guard bases, despite the scoring sheet giving all three bases the same score.
Vermonters know something is drastically wrong with the Air Force process, and they are fighting to get the truth exposed, including taking legal action. A few national media outlets, (Boston Globe, Harper’s Blog, New York Times) have picked up on our story and reported that information regarding the basing process has been changed, manipulated, and even fabricated. (Other national media have expressed interest in reporting on this.) Pertinent information has been withheld from the public. Both the press and the attorney for Burlington area citizens opposed to F-35A basing have submitted numerous FOIA’s. Most have been denied or the replies have been evasive. Lawsuits are now being prepared. (Attached is a recent filing by one of the lawyers working for the opponents of the F-35A basing.)
Unless you intervene, we will have as an end result the very thing that the scoring process was designed to prevent.
For a long time I defended my Service in this basing process. It was difficult. Now, I am finding it impossible. It seems I may have to choose between loyalty to my Service or to integrity. The choice is obvious. “Integrity, service before self, and excellence in all we do” is still my motto.
Very Regretfully,
Colonel Rosanne M. Greco, USAF (Ret)
South Burlington City Councilor
31 October 2013
CC:
Ms. Kathleen I. Ferguson, Acting Assistant Secretary of the AF for Installations, Environment, and Logistics
Mr. Timothy K. Bridges, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the AF for Installations
Mr. Gerald F. Pease, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the AF for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health
Mr. Mark A. Pohlmeier, Chief Strategic Basing Division
General Mike Hostage, Commander, Air Combat Command
Ms. Deborah Lee James, USAF Secretary nominee
