Rampant NIMBYism is reaching new heights, literally, as residents of rural Colorado rise up in opposition to a proposed modest increase in the number of low-level military training flights over the area.
Perhaps this new permutation of NIMBY should be dubbed NIMA — for “not in my airspace.” Are we really to believe that a small increase in the number of prop-aircraft overflights will cause cattle stampedes and the disturbance of wildlife in the wide open spaces of southern Colorado? Next, we’ll be told that the flights must be suspended during jackalope mating season.
I’m not sure how deep this sentiment really runs. All it takes is a few squeaky wheels to hijack the “public process” and skew a debate — especially when the increasingly anti-military militants of southern Colorado can always count on a supportive pat on the head from the region’s major daily.
But it’s really getting ridiculous. How in the world can we adequately train soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen for real-world combat if our civilian populace is completely intolerant of any inconveniences those training operations cause? And what message does this send to the Pentagon, where future base-closure and troop-distribution decisions will be made?
The Piñon Canyon controversy already must have Washington wondering whether Colorado has “gone California” — that is, whether we’ve been invaded and taken over by ex-peaceniks and yippies. The whining about a few additional overflights must be raising even more doubts.
U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn says the Piñon Canyon controversy will have no impact on Fort Carson’s ability to attract a new aviation brigade, but I’m not convinced. The Pentagon is likely to take the path of least resistance when making such basing decisions. And why would it move that brigade to potentially hostile territory, if friendlier, more welcoming facilities can be found?
One individual who attended a recent Chamber of Commerce trip to Washington returned with potentially alarming news: During one of the briefings, apparently, he was informed that another round of base closures and consolidations may be approaching, sooner than anticipated.
Colorado was fortunate to benefit from the last round; whether it will be so lucky the next time can’t be taken for granted. Negative or positive perceptions about our attitude toward the military may not be the deciding factor in how we fare in the next round. But the knee-jerk negativity of a few noisy activists won’t help.
The next governor — whoever he is and whether or not he supports Piñon Canyon expansion — needs to work with state and federal legislators to begin rebuilding Colorado’s reputation as a military- friendly state. Colorado Springs would suffer most if the Pentagon begins moving its people to more welcoming climes.
That certainly colors my perception of these issues, as a city councilman. But the entire state stands to lose, economically and fiscally, if this major economic engine is stalled or snuffed out by a minority of militants.
Sean Paige (seanpaige@msn.com) represents the 3rd District on the Colorado Springs City Council.
