|
June 18,
2004 The Honorable Chet
Edwards, M. C. Dear Ranking Member
Edwards: The Fleet Reserve
Association (FRA) is extremely disappointed with the Navy’s request for
family housing and appreciates you referencing the service’s failure to
ask for funding for housing at least equal to the previous two years as
"inexcusable." It is particularly unwarranted when Navy and Marine Corps
families residing in high cost areas cannot afford to live on the economy.
The idea that the Navy believes that increased housing allowances cover
housing costs in those areas is purely a delusion. The allowance, paid on
the basis of the average cost of off-base housing in the local area, is
inadequate in such locations as FRA hails the Navy
and Marine Corps for using public/private ventures in response to the need
for new and renovated family housing. However, all of us are aware there
is a statutory "cap" of $850 million on funds that may be expended for PPV
projects. That sum is predicted to be consumed during this fiscal year.
Whether or not the "cap" will be raised for FY 2005 is a question that
cannot be answered at this writing. The possibility that the Navy’s intent
to award contracts for FY 2004-2005 to improve and provide more than
26,000 units appears to be unlikely. Given these circumstances the Navy
might have requested authorization and funding through the normal process
for some of the more essential housing needs, i.e. - 2,668 units at
Paraphrasing the
Navy’s newest policy to "spend no more than necessary on people," it’s of
no wonder it failed to seek FY 2005 military construction funding for
military housing. It has made cuts and cancellations in any number of
services for its sailors or increased costs for some recreational
programs. Most glaring is the Navy’s prudent request for reduced funds for
its MWR programs. A House colleague, Rep. Loretta Sanchez ( A review of the House
and Senate versions of the Military Construction sections in the FY 2005
National Defense Authorization Act lists family housing projects for the
Army, Navy and Air Force. Both versions would authorize $27 million for
one project for the Navy – 198 units at Marine Corps Air Station,
FRA cannot but
subscribe to the recent comment offered by Senator Christopher Dodd
(CT); "I understand that
our first obligation is protecting and equipping our troops deployed in
harm’s way, but ensuring safe, sanitary, and affordable housing for our
military families is critical to making certain our sailors can focus on
their military missions, without worrying about their families here at
home." The Association is in
hope that the final FY 2005 National Defense Authorization and
Appropriation Act should authorize and appropriate additional housing
construction and renovation for our nation’s sailors and
Marines. With appreciation for
your consideration, I am, Sincerely, Letters also sent
to: -
Congressmen Joel Hefley,
Chairman, ReadinessSubcommittee -
Solomon p. Orbitz, Ranking Member, Readiness
Subcommittee -
Joseph Knollenberg, Chairman,
Military Construction Subcommittee |