Communities not fazed - Why military base closures may not be catastrophic

Predictions that military base closures will be catastrophic to communities have generally been exaggerated. While many communities face periods of decline after a base closure or fail to grow as rapidly as they might have otherwise, initial impacts on the community are often surprisingly milder than expected considering the numbers of employees and the size of base budgets. This study of the closure of Castle Air Force Base in Merced County, California, explains why the effects of base closures are generally not catastrophic. When the base closed, many compensating factors softened the impact on local markets: military retirees' spending shifted from the base commissary to local stores, purchases made by the base were primarily nonlocal anyway, toxic cleanup replaced construction expenditures on the base, housing construction continued, and military retirees' health care became privatized. These factors helped limit decreases in employment; in addition, many jobs held by departing military spouses became available to nonmilitary workers. Contrary to predictions, unemployment rates increased only moderately, and there was no significant decline in the population. Predictions of dire consequences from a military base closure often prove false because they overstate the effects of economic multipliers and fail to account for the fact that communities often rise to the challenge by forming new alliances and strengthening their organizational capabilities.