Encroachment

The CCAJN position is explained, as follows:

1. 2. 3.

From the beginnings of the organization almost six years ago, a considered strategic decision was made by the Board not to advocate the closure of Oceana. This position was adopted to accommodate the views of some who felt it was neither appropriate -- nor necessary -- to call for closure. More important, however, the position recognized the broadly held view that a "closure-linked" strategy would marginalize CCAJN by diminishing its credibility, and thus its ability to effectively promote its overall "adverse impacts" agenda. CCAJN has focused its efforts on achieving meaningful impact relief for the tens of thousands of residents currently residing in the high noise zones of Chesapeake and Virginia Beach. To be consistent with that agenda, it is the CCAJN Board's belief that it must resist the City's repeated efforts to expose even more residents to these impacts through irresponsible encroachment. During the past few years, CCAJN has, on several occasions, publicly challenged such proposed efforts at developmental encroachment. On the other hand, some of our Members now argue that CCAJN ought to shut its eyes to the City's current encroachment initiatives, which come now after the Super Hornet Record of Decision (ROD) (now that it has been made) -- and simply allow the Council itself drive the Navy out of Virginia Beach. Inasmuch as CCAJN is genuinely concerned about jet noise and the consequences of environmental impacts, it would be inconsistent to ignore the continuing efforts of the City to impose similarly harsh impacts on new residents. CCAJN has always followed the high road in its advocacy. It should not now choose a less laudable path, simply because it is conveniently available. CCAJN will continue to advance impact mitigation solutions and continue not to advocate the closure of Oceana, assuming that the near-term construction of a second Outlying Landing Field (OLF) remains an integral part of the Navy's plan. CCAJN considers the construction of a second OLF to be a critical and essential element in the siting of Super Hornet aircraft at Oceana. Our view is that the Navy and the cities of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake will either responsibly address these encroachment issues and our legitimate concerns, or it can be said, nature will take its own course. The "majority" on the Virginia Beach City Council is, at this very moment, on the cusp of making a policy decision that has a high likelihood of eventually driving naval aviation out of Virginia Beach. Our view is that the long-term viability of Oceana is threatened by the developer-influenced members of Council, not CCAJN. And they seem eager to do so. Incidentally, please also know that future encroachment in the vicinity of the OLF site in North Carolina is not a potential issue, because the Navy intends to purchase all the land in the projected high noise zones of the new OLF. No one in North Carolina will be affected in the way we are here! We know many members of CCAJN are frustrated and legitimately impatient with the slow (but let us say, very steady) progress achieved on our issues. Six years ago, the founding CCAJN Board members recognized the immense challenge that the organization faced -- and acknowledged to themselves that even a small amount of progress might not be realistically achievable. Six years later, the progress CCAJN that has indeed made -- and will continue to make -- is the result of our consistently being factual and logical in our arguments; disciplined and constructive in advancing our positions; and patient, but also confrontational, when that tactic is advisable and necessary. The public tempo of our issues is picking up dramatically day-by-day. We need to stay the course, the one that has delivered the solid results we have achieved to date.