V 4 

• P %//0

W LORING AIR FORCE BASE

;OVERNMENT

Storage ) O U M E N T S

KAN S/

f ? 3 3 o W / b

U N .V B R S .T ,HEARING

BE FO RE TH E

S M IT TE E ON ECONOM IC DE VE LO PM EN T

OF TH E

g ° M MITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS 

H s UNIT ED STATES SENATE

NINE TY -FO UR TH CONGRESS 

SE CO ND SE SS IO N 

ON

T H E PR OPO SE D PE RSO N N EL RED UCTI ON O F L ORIN G A IR F ORCE B A SE

MA Y 10, 1970— LIM ES TO NE, MAIN E

SERIAL NO. 94-H46

P ri n te d f o r th e us e of th e C om mitt ee on P ub lic W orks

73-444

U.S . GOVERNMENT PRINT ING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1976
K. • * 

» * t <

% I

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

JE NNIN GS RAN D OLPH , West Virginia, Chairman

a

ED M UN D S. M USK IE , Maine 

JOSEPH M. M ONTO YA , New Mexico 

MIKE G R A VE L, Alaska

L L O Y D M. B E N T SE N , Texas 

QUENTI N N. B U R D IC K , North Dakota

HO WAR D H. B A K E R , J r., Tennessee 

JAME S L. B U C K L E Y , New York 

R O B E R T T . ST A FF O RD , Vermont 

JAM ES A. MC CLUR E, Idaho 

P E T E V. DO MEN ICI, New Mexico

JOHN C. C U LV E R , Iowa

R O B E R T M ORGAN , North Carolina

G A R Y H A R T , Colorado

M. B arr y Meye r, Chief Counsel and Chief Clerk

B ailey G uar d, Minority Staff Director

L eon G. B illings and Richard D. G ru nd y, Senior Professional Staff Members

Richard A . Hel lm an, Minority Counsel

John W. Y ago, Jr., Assistant Chief Clerk; Philip T . C ummings, Assistant Chief Counsel

Harold I I. B rayman, Senior Professional Staff Member (Minority)

Professional ami research staff: K arl R. B raithw aite, Jame s W. C ase (Assistant Counsel'), P aul C himes, 

T renton C row, K atherine Y. C udlipp, Pau l F. Ebeltoft, Jr., Georg e F. F ent on, Jr., 

Randolph G. F lood, K athai.een R. E. Forcum, A nn G arrabran t, R ichard T. Gree r, R ichard M. 

Harris (Assistant Counsel), Wesle y F. Hay de n, Richard E. Herod (Assistant Counsel, Minority),

Veronica A. Holl and, Ronald L. Katz, Jud y F. P arente, John B. Purinton, Jr., Jame s D. 

Ran ge, W. L ee Rawi.s, C harlene A. Stur bit ts, E. Steve ns Swa in, Jr., Sally W. Wal ke r, and 

Hav en Whiteside

S u b c o m m it tee on E cono m ic D e v el o pm en t

JOSEPH M. MO NTOYA, New Mexico, Chai rman

ED M UN D S. M USK IE , Maine 

QU EN TI N N. B U R D IC K , North Dakota 

R O B E R T M ORG AN , Ncrth Carolina 

G A R Y H A R T, Colorado

JAME S A. M cC LU RE , Idaho 

R O B E R T T . STA FFO R D , Vermont 

P E T E V. DO MEN ICI, New Mexico

(II)
C O N T E N T S

OP EN IN G STATEM ENTS

Cohen, Hon. William S., a Representative in Congress from the State of Page 

Maine________________________________________________________ 2

Emery, Hon. David F., a Representative in Congress from the State of

Maine________________________________________________________ 4

Hathaway, Hon. William D., U.S. Senator from the S tate of Maine_____ 1

LIST OF WITNE SSES

Amsden, Perham , president, Maine Teachers Association______________ 89

Prepared sta tem ent___________________________________________ 91

Anderson, John, Ja nd ra ’s Woodsh ed________________________________ 85

Baltzer, George, J. C. Pen ney Co__________________________________ 62

Barresi, James A., executive director, Northern Maine Regional Planning

Commission___________________________________________________ 45

Beliveau, Severin________________________________________________ 34

Boothby, Daniel, sup erintendent of schools, Limestone, Maine_________ 51

Brown, George__________________________________________________ 87

Collins, Donald, S. W. Collins Co__________________________________ 60

Cullins, Richard, Damon Ele mentary School, Loring Air Force Base____ 98

Cyr, Thomas, Cy r’s De partm ent Store______________________________ 54

Dorsey, David, First National Bank of Aroostook___________________ 85

Dunn, Frank, Dunn’s F ur niture___________________________________ 86

Frost, Jeff, Caribou Chamb er of Commerce__________________________ 64

Gagnon, Tom, president, Presque Isle Auto Dealers Associa tion.............. 69

Gaha gan, Hayes, Senator, Maine State Sen ate_______________________ 27

Greenier, Mel, Loring Local, American Federation of Government Employees------------------------------- 45

Golob, Mary____________________________________________________ 99

Haines, Paul, chairm an, Save Loring Committee, accom panied by Severin

Beliveau and Kenneth Ha yes_____________________________________ 32

Ham ilton, Sam, Briggs Hardware Co_______________________________ 61

Harper, Brian, Cou nty Moving & Storage C o._____ _________________ 63

Johnson, Bill, cham ber of commerce, Caribou, Maine________________ 58

Prepared stat em ent__________________________________________ 59

Johnsto n, Betty , Fort Fairfield Cham ber of Commerce________________ 84

Kearney, Daniel J., national vice president, New England Region,

American Federation of Governm ent Employees___________________ 41

Kelley, Dorothy, Maine Po tato Council______________ ______ _______ 120

Kilmer, Da vid ___________________________________________________ 55

Krauter, Martin, town man ager of Limestone________________________ 48

LeBlanc, Joel, Aroostook County Commissioner______________________ 109

Levesque, Emilien, Commissioner, Department of Manpower Affairs___ 35

Martin, John, speaker, Maine House of Rep resentatives ______________ 24

McGillicuddy, Thomas, District Director, Small Business A dm inistration.. 38

McKean, Richard, Limestone Chamber of Commerce_________________ 52

McKinney, Rev. Earle T., president, Northern Aroostook Clergy Fellowship and Minister, First Universalist Church, Caribou_____ _______ 99

Morin, Ronaldo, American Legion_________________________________ 100

Morton, Col. Russell S., base commander, Loring Air Force Base______ 69

Palmer, Linwood, minority leader, Maine House of Rep resentatives ___ 25

Pease, Allen, director, Sta te Plan ning Office_________________________ 7

Pierce, Francis ______________________________________________ ” §§

Speers, Jerry, Maine Senate Majority Lea der________________________ 23

(in)
IV

Sotomayor, Joh n, president, Maine Military Retirees A ss ocia ti on..........

St. Peter, Terry, Caribou City Manager, and Bill Johnson, Caribou 

Chamber of Commerce---------------------------------------------------------------

Tiern an, John, Presque Isle------ ----------- - ------------------------------- --------- Tompkins, Burt, city councilor, Presque Isle--------------------------------------

ADDIT ION AL MA TERIAL

Appendix— “Loring Air Force Base Im pact Study: Economic and Social 

Costs,” preliminary report of the Social Science Research In stitut e-----

Civilian employees of Loring, le tter f r o m ...----- Hathaw ay, Hon. William D., U.S. Senator from the State of Maine, lette r 

to the Secretary of the Air Forc e. -------------------------------------- Longley, Hon. James B., Governor, State of Maine, letter transm itting 

the stu dy entitled, “Statewide Economic Imp act, Cutbac k at Loring 

Air Force Base” _______________________________________________

Statem ents: . ,, , , , . Muskie, Hon. Edm und S., U.S. Senator from the State of Maine-----

Bros. Me at Packing, Inc------------------------------------- -------- ------------

Maine Public Service Co............. .. — .............- -----------------------------

Page

101

104

56

67

65

129

126

6

9

4

122

124
LORING AIR FORCE BASE

MONDAY, M AY 10, 19 76

U.S. S en a te,

C om mit te e on P ub li c W or ks, 

S ub co m m it te e on E co no mi c D ev el op men t

Lrmesto'iw, M omm.

The subcommittee met at 10:35 a.m,, pursuant to call, in the Limestone High School Auditorium, Hon. William D. Hathaway presiding.

Present: Senator Hathaway.

Also present: Representatives Cohen and Emery.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY, U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MAINE

Senator Hathaway. The hearing in regard to the Loring Air Force 

Base will begin.

First of all, I would like to make some procedural announcements. 

The school has requested t ha t there be no smoking at all in the auditorium. So if you wish to smoke, please step outside.

At approximately 12:30 there will be lunch available at a cost of 

90 cents per person in the school cafeteria.

The record of the hearings will be kept open for 15 days, tha t is 

15 days after this he aring is over today. Anyone who wishes to submit 

testimony after the h earin g should send it to any one of the members 

of the Maine delegation and we will see that it is included in the record.

Senator Muskie, as you know, was unable to be here today because 

of a pinched nerve in his neck. I saw him on Wednesday and he very 

much regretted not being able to come today. He was tryin g to get the 

doctors to allow him to come, but the trip would have upset everything 

they had done for him so far.

Although he will be working and back in his office probably today 

or tomorrow, he is under orders by his physician not to travel at all. 

However, a member of his staff is present. Jim Case is here, and he 

will read a statement on behalf of Senator Muskie.

The delegation appreciates very much the help and cooperation 

of the Senate Subcommittee on Economic Development which is providing the stenographer and will take care of the transcript and the 

printed record of the testimony.

I have a brief opening statement. I think the other members have, 

too. But I will make it just as brief as possible so that we can get on 

with the witnesses.

First of all, I would like to welcome all of you to the congressional 

delegation’s hearing on the subject of Loring Air Force Base’s economic value to Aroostook County and to the State of Maine.

(1)
2

As you can see fro m the list of witn esse s, the testim ony toda y will 

illu mi nate the ne gativ e effects which a red uc tio n at Lo ring wou ld hav e 

on local gov ernme nt, business, edu cation , an d other im po rtan t in st itutio ns in the area.

Th e pro duct of th is heari ng will be of gr ea t value to the Ma ine 

delega tion in m aking i ts case for the reten tio n o f L or ing as we kno w it.

Sinc e there will be testimony tod ay on the pro cedural steps to be 

tak en by the A ir Fo rce over the next few months , I will only say at 

th is p oint that t his is our heari ng—it is no t t he A ir F orce’s hearin g— 

and in the fight fo r Lo rin g it is only th e first step. Ju dg in g by th e 

witn ess list, how ever, it is a good , firm , fir st step an d demo nstrates 

str on g com munity su pp ort in th is effo rt.

Lo rin g its elf was begun in 1946 as one of the first acts of the new’ 

Strategic Air Com mand. The base ha s ne arly 9,000 acres and was 

no t com pleted un til 1953.

It was, of course, an e xtre mely am bitiou s construction p roject c osting nearly $200 millio n to clea r the fores ts, dr ain and fill the land , 

an d ere ct fac ilitie s adequa te to the dema nds of str ate gic defense in 

the extrem e cli ma te of the county.

In 1954, th e base was nam ed fo r Maj. Charles J. Lo rin g, Jr. , of 

Por tlan d who ha d been posthumously aw arded the Me dal of Hon or 

fo r his heroic act s in Korea.

Today , the base has assets o f nearly $600 million , with the ai rc ra ft 

alone accou nting fo r $351 millio n of th at sum. Th e total pa yroll at 

Lo rin g in 1975 exceeded $40 million , w hic h, of course, is some measure 

of wh at the economic impac t will be if th at payro ll is subs tantially 

reduced.

Now’, befo re g oin g on to the o ther mem bers of the delega tion . I would 

like to em phasize t hat while th e p roposed L oring reduct ion announ ced 

on Ma rch 11 shocked all of us, we m ust not tak e the A ir Force in tentio n as the fina l w ord in this m atter. W ha t they wan t is not necessarily 

wh at the y will get.

Up to n ow, the Air F orce has given us no m ili tary or stra teg ic ju st ification fo r th is pro posal, des pite ou r rep eated requ ests for all such 

da ta, assumptio ns, a nd conclusions.

Ind eed , the A ir F orc e has been unable or un wi lling so fa r t o supp ly 

us wi th its economic justificatio ns. And des pite our repeated in vi ta ­

tio ns to do so, the A ir For ce has ref used to send a spokesman fro m 

SA C he ad qu arter s or th e Pentag on to t hi s hearing.

I am confident that over th e next few’ m onths, all of us—the citizen s 

of the cou nty an d the State , the Save Lo rin g Com mittee, th e con ­

gressiona l deleg ati on—can make a most com pelling case on be ha lf of 

Lo rin g and can demo nstrate its value to the Na tio n fa r be tte r th an 

the A ir Force’s case so far again st Lo rin g.

W ith ou t fu rt her ado. let me ask Congres sman Cohen if he ha s an 

opening statem en t he would like to m ake.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. WIL LIAM S. COHEN, A REP RES ENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM TH E STATE OF MAINE

Con gressm an Cohex. Th an k you, M r. Ch airma n. I do n't intend to 

mak e a long speech because I th in k ou r mission here toda y is a fa ct ­

findin g one, an d we are here to bu ild a record. I wou ld share yo ur
3

concern and deep regret over the failure of the Defense Department 

to send a representative from Washington to participate in these hearings to answer whatever questions might be raised during the course of 

our investigation as such.

I know that you had sent a letter to the Defense Department complaining about this. I join you in that.

I would point out just briefly that there is some good news at least 

to be had in Washington. Tha t occurred on Friday. I was successful 

in joining with Tip O’Neill, the Democratic majority leader, to attach 

an amendment to the military construction bill. I am confident that 

Senator Hathaway and Senator Muskie will also be able to move in 

the Senate when the bill comes up for consideration and also attach 

a similar amendment.

Briefly, what it would do is delay any decision concerning Loring 

and other bases that would be affected for a period of 1 year from the 

date of notice.

Second, it would require the Department of Defense to submit 

detailed fiscal, economic, budgetary, and military effects which would 

include, but would not be limited to, the following: Unemployment 

compensation, manpower retraining and relocation expenses, military 

construction and rehabilitation costs.

The reason for this amendment is rather clear, tha t to date the Defense Department has argued or made the proposition that we are 

going to save some money by closing Loring.

Let me tell you what happened in the Boston Naval Yard just briefly. 

The argument was they would save $20 million. The cost now borne 

by the Federal Government to save the $20 million in closing the 

Boston Naval Yard has totaled over $25 million.

The unemployment benefits to the workers tha t were laid off was 

$11 million. They had retraining grants, $3 million. Department of 

Commerce; Economic Development Administration, $10 million; Departm ent of Housing and Urban Development, $60,000; Regional 

Commission, another $100,000.

In essence, it cost the U.S. taxpayers more to close the navy yard 

than it did to keep it open. This is just one example of the arbitrary 

decisions made by the Defense Department without adequate 

justification.

They have never had to justify before any congressional committee 

the reasons for reductions or closures or other substantial realinements.

This amendment would accomplish that. It is not the final solution 

to our problems, but it certainly is a strong tool we will be able to use 

in reversing the “preliminary decision” on the part of the Air Force.

I would simply conclude, Mr. Chairman, bv the reading of the 

conclusion of the 1975 impact statement submitted by the Air Force, 

where it s ays:

The yea r 1975 was a y ear of success for Loring Air Force Base. We expect 1976 

to be better in every respect. We are proud of Loring Air Force Base for many 

reasons. First, it is one of the best bases in the U.S. Air Force. Second, we have 

achieved many goals in 1975 through the efforts of our employees. Finally , and 

no less important tha n other achievem ents that we have made at Loring, our 

base has received excellent community support. We are proud of th is support, and 

with continued efforts on the pa rt of local civic lead ers and businessmen, our 

future success will be assured in our efforts to play a major role in the defense 

of our country.
4

I would say to Colonel Morton who is here that we agree. We think 

tha t Loring is one of the finest bases in the country. What we want 

to know is why, if all of these things are true, does the Air Force 

want to close it down.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you, Bill, Congressman Emery?

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID F. EMERY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MAINE

Congressman Emery. Tha nk you very much, Senator Hathaway. 

I have no formal opening statement, except to say I am glad to be 

back. I haven’t been back for over 2 years.

It appears th at the military has been hitting the Northeast very hard 

in recent months. We have had tha t situation in Maine where the 

Maremont Corp, may no longer be manufacturing M-60 machineguns.

We are now faced with the potential closing of Loring Air Force 

Base in Aroostook County. I think the Maine delegation as well as all 

Representatives and Senators from New England feel it is time the 

Congress exercise more control over some of these military decisions. 

We are dedicated to tha t principle.

The delegation has worked very well together as a unit. We have 

had some success and some failure. As Senator Hathaway and Congressman Cohen mentioned, our primary interest here today is to take 

strong interest back to the people of Washington, to the people who 

make the decisions.

The people of Maine and the county are not going to stand idly 

by on important decisions that are not justifiable from the economic 

standpoint and from the military standpoint.

We jointly call on the military to provide us with greater cooperation and more information so tha t we can adequately understand their 

decisons and try to help.

That is about all I have to say. T am pleased to see such an enthusiastic crowd of supporters here. I think it is very im portant th at people 

from this part of the State stand up and be heard. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Tha nk you, David.

Jim Case of Senator Muskie’s staff is here to deliver the statement 

on behalf of the Senator.

STATEMENT OF HON. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 

STATE OF MAINE, PRESENTED BY JAMES W. CASE

Mr. Case. Thank you. Senator Hathaway. I appreciate the opportunity to read Senator Muskie’s statement.

“Good morning, and thank you f or taking the time and trouble to 

join the Maine delegation in considering the social and economic 

consequences of the proposed cutbacks at Loring Air Force Base.

“I realize how immediate and obvious the consequences of this proposal are for each of you, and I appreciate your patience in assisting 

us to compile a record which we can bring back to Congress and to 

the Air Force officials in Washington.

“I would very much like to have joined you today, but my doctor has 

advised me not to travel at this time. As reluctant as I was to accept 

that advice, I could not avoid noting tha t the same advice might be
5

th e re su lt of t his h ea rin g to da y to the A ir F orc e—a prescrip tio n th at 

trav el is no t adv isable at th is time.

“W hen I met wi th you in March, sh or tly aft er th e A ir Force 

ann ounced the pro posal to reduce Lo rin g, I told you th at I had been 

prov ide d very lit tle in fo rm at io n as to th e str ateg ic or economic consid erati on s beh ind th e announ cem ent.

“I exp ecte d the n th at by th e time I return ed to meet with you fo r 

th is hearing, I wou ld have received more com plete in fo rm ation fro m 

th e A ir Force.

“O n th e contr ary , how eve r, ou r prob ing has prod uced no t in fo rmation bu t evasion.

“W e ask ed th e A ir Force five basic questions.

“1. W ha t str ate gic and economic fac tors led to th e pro posal th at 

Lor in g be redu ced?

“2. vVhat does the A ir Fo rc e propose to do at L or in g if t he r edu ctio n is imp lem ented?

“3. When does the Air Fo rce propo se to do th is ?

“4. W ha t ad dit ion al ex pe nd itu res an d/o r cost s aving s will be associated wi th the pro posed action ?

“5. Ho w can the A ir Fo rce gu aran tee ou r na tio na l security if the 

mission at Lo ring is so dr as tic ally redu ced?

“T he Air For ce respons e to those questio ns cam e in a le tter of Apr il 1, 

wh ich sta ted bas ically th at th e inform ati on req ueste d ha d no t been 

pr ep ared , bu t th at the A ir Force was pr ep ar in g an env ironm ent al 

im pa ct sta tem ent an d th at commen ts wou ld be solicited fro m the 

pub lic.

“T he A ir Force fu rt her infor me d us, ‘The ann ounce me nt with resp ect to Lor ing did n ot rep resent even a p relim inary decision.’

“T he onl y lo gically con sis ten t re ading of t he A ir Fo rce st ate me nts to 

da te forc es the cyn ical conclusion th at the A ir Fo rce is ca refully 

ev alua tin g the en vir onme nta l impact of th e ann oun cem ent, bu t they 

are un certa in as to wha t they ann oun ced or wh y they made the 

announcem ent.

“I fe ar that we are wi tnessin g a bl atan tly p ro fo rm a effo rt to meet 

th e technical req uir em ents of the N ational En vironm en tal Policy Ac t 

with ou t in tegr ating th e conside ration s ou tlined in th at act with the 

A ir F orce decisionmaking process.

“T he A ir Forc e po ints ou t in its letter of M arc h 18 to it s good fa ith 

during pu blic h earin gs on th e o ver -the-h orizon r ad ar p rojec t in W as hington County. I recall th at coo peratio n there came o nly a fter I went 

to th e floor of the Senate an d persua ded the Co ngres s to ena ct legislatio n specifically fo rb id in g th e A ir Force to pro ceed un til the y ha d 

de al t with the concerns o f M ain e citizens.

“T hat is no t a plea sant o r efficient w ay to do business. But when t he 

bu reau crats in th e Pe nt ag on persi st in igno rin g th e concern s of in di ­

vidu als and com munities wh ich are so dr am atically affected, the Congress has lit tle choice bu t to inte rvene.

“T he O’Neill-Co hen am end me nt which th e Ho use pas sed last week 

ag ain rep res ent s con gre ssional willin gne ss to inter vene and hal t the 

bu reau crati c process, an d to dem and th at th e fu ll rang e of huma n 

factors be given fa ir con sid era tion.

“I am pr ep ar in g sim ila r leg islation t hi s w eek an d will offer it as an 

am endm ent when th e m ilitar y construction au thor ization bill is consid ere d on the floor of the Sen ate.
6

“We have found considerable support and interest amon<r the delegation, and the prospects for the amendment look good. If we can 

succeed in finally enacting legislation requiring congressional review, 

we will all have the opportunity to fully evaluate the rationale behind 

such proposals and more effectively judge the impact and merit of 

each. “I am sure the comments which you offer here today will be of valuable assistance in tha t effort, and I look forward to reviewing the 

transcript. “I look forward with you to the successful resolution of this issue 

so tha t we can again direct all our efforts toward positive economic 

development in northern Maine.

“We have many past successes to build on if we are allowed the 

opportunity, but persistence in the course which the Air Force has announced threatens not only to make further progress difficult but also 

to undermine our past success.

“I am impressed with the efforts of the community, organizations 

and people of Aroostook County to reverse the course the Air Force 

has set. “The assistance of the Save Loring Committee has already proven 

most valuable. We are fortunate to enjoy their cooperation, and I 

thank you and them for tha t contribution.”

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much. Jim.

Before I call the first witness, let me say I would like to make part 

of the record the letter I sent to the Air Force on behalf of the delegation.

[The letter follows:] May 7, 1970.

Hon. Thomas Reed,

Secretary of the Air Force,

The Pentagon, Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Secretary: For our hea ring on May 10 into the economic effects of 

tlie proposed reduction of Loring AFB, we requested the presence of Air Force officers from the Pentagon who would be competent to answ er such questions 

as might a rise in the context of this hearing. I have been informed that the Air Forc e now refuses to comply with this modest requ est and intends instead to send only the Base Commander and one or two of his subordinates. Yet about 10 days ago, the Maine Delegation was assured 

th at a SAC officer would be dispatched from Washington to Limestone for this 

hearing. I urge you to reexamine th is decision. There will be many questions arising a t the hearing which, at tliis time, the A ir Forc e is most com petent to answer. This hea ring is ju st the sort of public partic ipa tion which the Air Force has touted 

since its proposal was announced on March 11. Colonel Morton, the Base Com­ mander, is a fine officer, but lie is on record as knowing nothing of the Loring reductions before March 11 and. therefore, will be of little use in responding to points on May 10 which require a Washington background and perspective if the 

concerns of th e people of Aroostook County are to be met. While the Air Force decision in a technical sense has not been made, your inten tions for Loring are patently clea r. In view of your calls for full public discussion of these proposed action s for Loring, you have stated a willingness and acknowledged a duty to pa rticip ate fully in this process. To duck it on 

May 10 is in my view inexplicable and unjustifiable to us and our constituents. Accordingly, for the Delegation, I req ues t an explanation of your decision to send no one from Washington to Limestone on May 10;. and I renew our previously gr anted request for such an officer.

For the Delegation,

William D. Hathaway, U.S. Sen ato r.
7

Senator H athaway. I would like to say a t the outset, too, t hat we 

have a list of 22 panels of witnesses, probably close to 60 or 70 individuals altogether. Time is extremely important. I want to giveeverybody a chance to express his point of view, but I think a synopsis 

would be appreciated wherever possible.

Also, I think as far as questioning by the panel is concerned, we 

should keep it on an inform al basis. Any time any member of the 

panel wants to ask a question, he should go ahead and ask.

Our first witness th is morning is Mr. Allen Pease, director of the 

State Planning Office.

We are glad to have you with us. If you have a written statement 

which you would like made part of the record, it will be done*

STATEMENT OF ALLEN PEASE, DIRECTOR, STATE PLANNING 

OFFICE

Mr. Pease. Xo. I do not have a written statement, Mr. Chairman.

I am really here in two capacities. The first is to reaffirm the concern of the whole executive department, from Governor Longley on 

down, that the efforts of the Save Loring Committee will lx? supported 

in the State capital, and we will make our contribution to it the best 

way we can. Second, as representative of the Maine agency responsible for overall economic planning.

A number of things have been done in establishing coordination and 

cooperation with this congressional effort, which is the first step— 

and I think the prop er one—which is to demand an accounting of 

the recent closing, or the proposed closing, and to require all the impact 

evidence tha t we can and as accurately and factually as we can.

At the State level we have joined that effort through a request bv 

Governor Longley to assist the SSRI in the university study of the 

impact. I do have a copy of the survey form.

All State agencies a re requested to identify the results of the proposed closing on their agency mandate, their operations. Although we 

do not yet. have the results of tha t survey for this preliminary report 

that SSRI will present today, tha t information will be shortly forthcoming and probably in time to be available, Mr. Chairman, for your 

2-week or 15-day closing time.

I would say also Governor Longley has requested consultant advice 

on the agenda for State government on how to proceed. The question 

was raised as to when the State should do certain things, how soon we 

make certain kinds of efforts.

We have a proposal t hat we have a State liaison coordinator to work 

with the local people in the Congress and State agencies. We have a 

proposal tha t there be created a State level coordinating committee.

These matters I think will be discussed in the next few days following the results of this meeting today, the inform ation tha t you folks 

bring forth. I think Governor Longley will be taking action within 

a few days to clarify any additional steps tha t we think State government should take to be more helpful to the work of the congressional 

delegation and the local Save Loring Committee.

Senator Hathaway. How many people are going to get the 

questionnaire ?
8

Mr. P ease. All of our commissioners, our agency heads. It is a State 

government questionnaire.

Senator Hathaway. That is how many altogether, about?

Mr. Pease. About 45.

Senator Hathaway. I f you need any additional time over that 15 

days, we will be glad to hold the record open.

Mr. Pease. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. I think that that information would be very 

important to have in the record. As a matter of fact, I think we would 

like to see one of the forms.

Mr. Pease. I do have the form. I will leave it here.

[The questionnaire referred to and a submission for the record from 

Governor Longley follow:]

State of Maine, I nter-Departmental Memorandum, May 3, 1976

To: All depar tment heads.

From : Governor Jam es B. Longley.

Sub ject: Imp act of Loring A ir Force Base cutbacks upon Sta te government.

Ed Schlick pointed out at the April Cabinet meeting that the Social Science 

Research Institu te of the University of Maine is gathering d ata to help eva luate 

Aroostook County’s status and prospects in light of proposed cutbacks a t Loring 

Air Force Base.

Attached you will find a que stionna ire designed to help us more clea rly define 

the impact of the possible cutbacks upon Sta te government and the people of 

Maine.

Please ans wer the atta ched question s and ret urn the questionnaire to the 

attention of Ed Schlick by May 10.

J. B. L.

[Attachment.]

Answer the following questions. Attached continuation sheets where necessary.

1. In wh at ways does th e existence of Loring Air Force Base affect the agency 

program a nd delivery of service?

2. Wh at are the prese nt costs (moneta ry and personnel) of such agency 

activity ? 3. In wh at ways will the proposed 83% reduction of activities at Loring Air 

Force Base affect the programs of thi s agency?

4. W hat are the anticipa ted future costs or savings (monetary and personnel) 

if any, of such a reduction to th is agency ?

5. How would such a reduction affect the demands on your service delivery?

6. How would such a reduction affect your operating budget in the next year? 

In the next five (5) years?
9

^ J A M E S B . L O N G L E Y

G O V ER N O R

5>taf e of If la in c 

^ x c r n t h x e d e p a r t m e n t 

JVu gujota.^H aine

June 21 , 1976

Honorable W illiam D. Hathaw ay 

U .S . Senator

Senate Office Building - Room 248 

Washington, D .C . 20510

Dear Bill:

I am most gra teful that as Chairman of the Loring Hearing on May 10, 

1976 you have left the record open to afford the State of Maine the opportunity 

to append the enclosed Sta tewide Economic Impact Cutback at Loring A ir 

Force Base, based on prelim inary evidence this study indicates the devastating 

results of the proposed cutba ck on the overa ll economy of the State. The 

Study was produced by the Ma ine Impact Forecasting Model (MEPAC) developed by the Maine State Planning O ffic e. For this analysis, the Loring 

personnel, wage and manning level data was taken dire ctly from the Loring 

A ir Force Base 1975 Economic Impact Statement.

Under the N atio nal Environmental Policy Act and the proposed 

Amendment to the 1977 M ilita ry Construction Bill the A ir Force no longer has 

the prerogative to summarily take the proposed a ctio n. As Governor of the 

State of Maine, I shall be insistent that the pro tec tion and provisions that 

the Congress of the United States have provided for in exactly a situation 

such as this, shall be fu lly complied with in lette r and spirit.

It appears that the A ir Force proposal to operate the Loring Air Force 

Base at a reduced lev el is not the result of any change in A ir Force strategy 

or operational procedures. Cle arly the only m ilita ry element in the decisionmaking process is the av ailable operating budget.

The Economic impact projections in the enclosed report indicate that 

the proposed 83% reduction at Loring .v:

ll cost the State of Maine over 6,0 00 

jobs and 120 m illio n dollars in Gross State Products. The dislocations and 

suffering caused by this cutback w ill be hig hly intense in a fra gile economy
10

like that of the State of Maine. This data leaves no'doubt in my mind that 

the Air Force should not proceed with their proposed reduction without 

giving far more serious consideration to the adverse impact on the State o f 

Ma ine .

Again , I would like to assure each member of the Maine Delegation 

that I am deeply appreciative of their efforts to conduct the Limestone 

hearing and for the ir outstanding cooperation on the Loring matter.

Very truly yours,

(lAMES B. LONGLEY 

JBL/sg Governor

cc: Allen Pease, Director, SPO

Charles Wyman, Office of the Governor

Enel: Statewide Economic Impact Cutback at Loring 

A ir Force Base - June, 1976
11

S T A T E W I D E E C O N O M I C I M P A C T

CUTBACK AT LORING A IR FORCE BASE

M ain e S t a t e P l a n n i n g O f f i c e

D i v i s i o n o f E c o n o m ic P l a n n i n g & A n a ly s i s

J u n e 1 9 7 6
12

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Lo rin g A ir Force Base 

Aroosto ok County 

Dow and Pre sque I s le Comparisons 

Impac t Assessme nt

S ta te Government .Revenues and Expen diture sSummary of P ro je ct ed Impac ts
13

B A C K G R O U N D

Boring Air Force Base

In 1946, the Strat eg ic Air Command rec eiv ed its orders to op era te as a 

major a ir command and the pla nning fo r a major base a t Limestone, Maine began 

imm ediately. I n iti a l co ns truc tio n of th e base on a 7,200 ac re land area too k 

sev en ye ar s, th e base becoming fu ll y op er atio na l in 1953.

A ir Force opera tions a t th e base have expanded consi derab ly oye r th e years* 

with st eadil y increasin g m il it ary and civ il ia n pa yr ol ls . Ea rly in i t s his to ry 

th e base became th e la rg est employer in the ar ea . At th e end of 1975, 3,765 

m il it ary personnel and 870 c iv il ia n s were employed a t th e base - th e to ta l payr o ll amounting to more than $45 m illion.

The bas e is loc ated pr im ar ily in Limestone, a town of only abou t 9,800 popu la ti o n , bu t its opera tio ns inv olve consi derab le impact on the county and sta te 

economies. However, closing would cause considerable economic shock to Aroostook 

County in part ic ula r.

Aroostook County

With a land are a of 6,450.7 squ are mile s, Aroostook is the la rg est county 

east of the Miss iss ippi Riv er and accounts fo r 21 percen t of M aine's to ta l lan d 

„ mass.

As th e county's econorry is hi gh ly sp ec ia liz ed , depending heavily on only 

th re e in dust ri es, i ts population has fluc tu ated with the fortu nes of these indust r ie s . Between 1950 and I960, the population of Aroostook increa sed from 96 to 

106 thousand, only to be followed by a de cline to 94 thousand by 1970. According 

to U.S. Bureau of the Census es tim ates , the county population has grown moderate ly in th is decade bring ing the po pulation back to its 1950 le vel by 1975.

73- 444— 76------2
14

The econorqy of Aroostook County re st s on three ba se s: fo re st ry , agri cult ure , 

and Loring A ir Force Base. In tu rn , two of th e s ta te 's la rg est in dust ri es, paper 

and lumber manuf acture, depend he av ily on th e cou nty. In 19*74, Aroostook accounted 

fo r 37 pe rcen t of th e S ta te 's to ta l sawtinfcer ha rvest and 20 perce nt of th e to ta l 

pulpwood pr od uc tio n.

The m ajor ity .of Main e's agri cult ura l pro duct, abou t 63 pe rcen t, comes from 

Aroostook County. Nearly a ll the s ta te 's $190 mill ion 1974 po tato crop was grown 

in th e county. Fo r anoth er measure of th is a cti v it y the average annual agri cultu ra l employment in Aroostook was over 4,50 0 in 1975. This is ne arly 15’ pe rcen t 

of to ta l employment in the county.-

Pe rso na l income b y source figu res produced by the U.5 . Bureau of Economic 

An aly sis prov ides an ex ce lle nt to o l fo r comparative measurement of the va rio us 

se ct ors of an a re a 's econony. Fig ures publish ed fo r 1974 show t h at 33.4 percent* 

o f Aroostook’s to ta l perso nal income ($421.6 mill ion) was att ri buta ble to ag ri ­

cu lt u ra l p u rs u it s, and ano the r 10.2 percen t was att ri bute d to fe de ra l m il it ary 

ope ra tion s. These two sources then , tak en toge th er, accounted fo r ne ar ly on eh a lf of th e co un ty's to ta l personal income.

Loring Ai r Forc e Base op eration s account fo r p ra cti call y a ll of Aroos took's 

pe rson al income from fede ral m ilitar y operation s and about 40 perce nt of the 

S ta te ’s' to ta l from th at source.

On March 11 , 1976 the United St at es Air Force announced pla ns to cut back 

th e le v el of a c ti v it y a t Loring Air Force Base by 83 pe rcen t. This massive cu tback vn ll cause so ci al and economic hardships and di sl oc at io ns th a t w il l be f e lt 

not only in Aroostook County, th e sit e of Loring, bu t throughout the en tire 

Sta te of Maine. The purpose of th is re po rt is to thoroughly and ca re fu lly
15

id e n ti fy the magnitude of these economic di sloc at io ns on th e Sta te of Maine as 

a whole.

Dow and Presque Is le Comparison

Maine has experienced m il it ary base clo sin gs be fore, bu t none invo lving 

anything approaching the economic magnitude th at Loring Air Forc e Base re pr es ­

en ts . There .were tiro inc ide nces of. major m ilitar y in sta ll ati o n shutdowns in 

Maine during the 196O's. Although both of the se caused se riou s 'economic dis lo ­

ca tio ns , neither in sta ll ati o n was as la rg e or as imp orta nt to th e en ti re S ta te ’s 

^economy as the Loring Air Force Base fa c ili ty .

The f i r s t of the se cl os in gs , announced in 1961, involve d th e Presque Is le 

Air Force Base. The ac tu al cl os in g of th is Aroostook County b ase occur red th e 

follow ing ye ar.

In 1964 the Defense Departm ent announced th at Dow Air Force Base in Bangor, 

Maine was to be closed as w el l. Fo rtun atel y, the area had fo ur ye ars to prepare 

fo r th is shutdown as i t did not actu all y happen u n ti l 1963.

The to ta l m ilitar y and c iv il ia n pa yr ol ls during the la s t ye ar of op eration 

of the Presque Is le and Dow bases were $2.5 million .and $17 m illion, respectiv ely, 

Although th e lo ss of pa yr ol ls from th es e in st al la ti ons is only one p art of th e 

to ta l economic impact of th es e cl os in gs , a pa yroll does re pr es en t th e major item 

in a base 's lo cal spending. Thus, as the Presque Is le pa yr ol l was eff ecti vely 

only about 5.5 percen t of the Loring bas e pa yr oll, and Dow's on ly 37 pe rcen t, 

the proposed cutback and eventual shutdown of Loring Air Force Base re pr es en ts 

a shock to the Sta te cconony of fa r gre at er magnitude than eit h er of these two
16

previous cutbacks.

I t is important to be aware of th is major di ffer en ce in order of magnitude 

and sc ale between the impact of the proposed redu ction at Lo'ring and the prev iou s 

cutbacks of m ilitar y in sta ll ati o n s in Maine.

Impact Assessment

The th ru st of th is re po rt is to go beyond th is comparative an alys is and to 

id en ti fy and qu an tify th e measurable impacts of th e proposed cutbacks on th e 

Maine St at e econony. Both th e dir ect and in d ir ect impacts are assesse d using a 

computerized economic model which was designed to measure ju st th is typ e of econ— 

'omic phenomenon.

Since a thorough an al ysi s of the lo ca l impacts of the proposed cutb ack is 

being undertak en by the So ci al Science Research In sti tu te a t the Un iversit y o f 

Maine, th is study focuses on the statew ide imp acts. This statew ide an alys is 

emphasizes the po int th at the proposed cutbacks a t Loring are important to th e 

St at e as a whole and are a major concern to a ll of the people of Maine.

In th e fi n al anal ysi s, the degree of impact th at the proposed cutb acks inv olv e 

is an em pir ica l problem. I t is a problem solved not by the ory and spec ulation, 

bu t by measurement. The Maine Impact Fo recasting Model (M5PAC), developed a t 

th e Maine St at e Planning Offi ce , is designed to accomplish th is ta sk of measuring 

th e sta tew ide impact of major economic expansions and contr actio ns such as th e . 

proposed cutback a t Loring .

Before proceeding to the pr es en tatio n of the re su lt s of the computer simula ti on of the proposed cutbacks using MEPAC, i t is important to make cle ar conce pt ua lly the economic na ture of th is cutback of Loring Air Force Base which has 

become integr ated with the lo ca l and st ate economies. The nature of a base
17

•cu tba ck i s no t li k e a cutba ck in a c tiv ity of a r e t a i l sto re or se rv ic e in dust ry . 

The se a c tiv itie s ar e dep end ent on s ta te income and i f one fi rm cuts bac k an ot he r 

w ill c e rta in ly f i l l th e vacuum b ec au se th e lo c a l m rk et is s t i l l a c ti v e . Howev er, L o ri n g 's op er at io ns depend on outs id e (F ed er al ) fun ds and one can not exp ect lo c a l fun ds to f i l l th e vacuum i f th e base is cu tbac k. We ca n, th ere fo re , 

p ro je c t a dec li ne in economic a c tiv ity throug ho ut th e S ta te eco non y, ca us ing sig ­

n if ic a n t d is lo ca ti o n s and har ds hip s fo r th e pe op le of Maine and th e magnitude o f 

th ese har dsh ip s must c e rt a in ly make a comp elling case fo r m ai nt ai ni ng f u ll op era ti o n s a t Lo ring A ir Force Base.

A cu tbac k a t Loring would hav e pro fou nd e ffe c ts on th e so c ia l and economic

"w ellbeing of th e peo ple of Maine. Altho ugh, fo r th e E ast , Maine i s a la rg e 

s t a te , geo gra phic al ly , i t has a sm al l and fra g il e economic ba se . The la rg e geogra phic dim ensio ns of th e S ta te , in co nj un ct io n w ith a sm all econon y, makes Maine 

s ig n ific a n tly more se n si ti v e to an economic dynamic suc h as th e pro posed cu tback 

a t L oring.

Be cau se Maine is a co m pa ra tiv ely la rg e s ta te , most pe op le spe nd a sig n if ic a n t 

per ce nta ge of th e ir income w ithin th e S ta te 's bo un da ries . Co ns equently, ta kin g 

inco me out o f c ir c u la ti o n , li k e th e Lo rin g cu tback would do , would a ffe c t th e 

le v e l o f a c tiv ity in su pp or ting in d u str ie s more sig n if ic a n tl y and in te n se ly in 

Maine th an i t would in a sm al le r, le s s is o la te d s ta te .

The im plica tions o f th es e s u b s ta n ti a l impacts are fu rt h e r magnifie d by th e 

f r a g i l i t y o f th e S ta te 's economy. Thi s f r a g ility has been w ell documented in 

te rm s o f th e low le v els o f pe r c ap it a income, high unemployment ra te s and re la -* 

tiv e sp e c ia li z a ti o n in th e str u c tu re of th e S ta te 's econony.
18

In 1975 Maine ranked 42nd among a l l th e sta te s in term s o f p er capit a in ­

come -with a le v e l of pe r ca pit a income a t 82 pe rc en t of th e n ati o n al av er ag e. 

3 ii n e '3 unemployment ra te , as of March 197 6, wad 14 .7 per ce nt hig her th an th e 

n ati o n al av erag e a t a le v e l of 9. 5 p erc ent. The prob lems ass ocia te d w ith t h i s 

re la tiv e di sa dv an tage d posi ti o n ar c fu rt h e r ex ac er ba ted by th e re la tiv e sp e c ia liz a ti o n o f th e S ta te ’s econ ony. Fo r ex am pl e,,3 2. 1 pe rc en t o f th e S ta te 's manu fa ctu ri n g va lu e of prod uc t was prod uced in one in dust ry ; pu lp and pa pe r.

’ C alc ula tions bas ed on a comprehensive an aly sis with th e MSPAC model show 

th a t a t o ta l o f 6026 jo bs would be lo s t ove r a tw o-ye ar pe ri od un de r th e prop osed 

83 per ce nt cu tb ac k pl an o f th e Departm ent o f th e U.S . A ir Fo rc e.

Thi s p ro je cti o n includ ed ar e c iv ilia n and m il it a ry pe rs on ne l a t th e bas e as 

w ell as th o se pe op le employed in su pp ort iv e seconder;.' in d u str ie s in th e S ta te .

A il of th e b asic dat a fo r th is impac t evalu ati on were de rive d from, th e 1979 

Economic Impac t Statem en t dev elo ped by th e s t a f f of Lo rin g A ir Fo rce Ba se.

Ta ble 1 p re sen ts a d e ta il e d breakdown o f th e economic se cto rs th a t would lo se 

jo bs be ca us e o f th e proposed cu tbac ks . Thi s ta b le als o pre se nts a d e ta il e d break' 

down o f th e pro je cte d impacts of a 100 pe rc en t re du ct io n in a c tiv ity a t Lor in g.

I f a 100 per ce nt re du ct io n were implemented th e to ta l jobs lo ss would in cre ase 

from 6026 to 789 0.

The prop osed 83 pe rc en t cu tbac k a t Lo rin g is exp ect ed to re s u lt in a 2 .1 

per ce nt re ducti on in Gross S ta te Pro du ct ; t h is amounts to 126 m il li on 1976 

d o ll a rs . I f cu tbac ks were to reac h 100 pe rc en t th is would cause 2. 5 pe rc en t 

re duct io n in Gross S ta te Pro du ct o r a re duct io n o f 160 m il li on d o ll a rs and in 

gr os s o u tp u t. The major in d u str ie s most aff ecte d by th e pro posed cu tbac k are
19

Gov ernm en t, S e rv ic e s, ’.Whole sale an d R e ta il Tra de , and F in ance, In su ra n ce and 

R eal E s ta te . The com bined lo s s i n th e se s e c to rs w ill amount to lB m illi o n d o ll a r s o f Gross S ta te P ro duct. T h is i s equiv ale nt’ to over 39 p e rc en t o f th e a g r ic u ltu r a l pro ducti on o f th e S ta te o f ll 3 in e. I t i s p e rc e p ti v e to n o te th a t th e 

a g r ic u ltu r a l in d u s tr y in c lu d e s th e f is h in g in d u s tr y . This im pa ct ca n be f u r th e r 

a p p re c ia te d i n ' th a t to t a l lo s s in G ro ss S ta te P ro duct i s e q u iv a le n t to 131 p e rc e n t 

o f th e income ea rn ed in th e le a t h e r in d u s tr y in 19 74 . Tab le 1 p re s e n ts a bre akdow n, by s e c to r, o f th e im pa ct on G ro ss S ta te P ro d u ct o f th e pr op ose d Lo ring 

c u tb a ck s. Each o f th e s e c to rs p re s e n te d in Table 1 w ill be im pa ct ed bec au se 

th e pro po se d cutb ack w ill d e c r e a s e 't h e le v e l o f inc ome in th e a r e a , th e re b y cont r a c t i n g th e purc hasi ng pow er o f a l l th e peo ple o f Main e. As demand in ea ch o f 

th e s e in d u s tr ie s d e c li n e s , th e y in tu rn w ill g e n erate le s s p e rs o n a l income as 

th e y d e cre a se th e amount o f wa ges p a id . Th is continuous pro cess w i l l ca us e a 

: m u lt ip le c o n tr a c ti o n in th e le v e l o f p e rs o n al inc ome en jo ye d by th e people o f 

M aine . The p ro c e ss o f eco nom ic c o n tr a c ti o n i s ex pec te d to d e cre a se th e le v e l o f 

inco me in th e S ta te by 111 m il li o n d o lla r s , o r wh at in 1976 i s p ro je c te d to be 

'1 .9 p e rc e n t o f t o t a l p e rs o n al in co m e. T his i s 94 p e rc e n t o f th e t o t a l income 

earn ed in th e lu m be r and ’.rood p ro d u c ts in d u s tr y in Main e in 1974 an d 50 perc ent 

o f th e t o t a l d ir e c t inco me ear ned th e same y e a r in i h i n e 's la r g e s t in d u s tr y , 

p a p e r an d a l l i e d p ro d u cts . T his im pact on p e rs o n a l income w ill, w it h o u t doubt, 

cau se sev e re h ard sh ip s on th e S ta te o f JJaine w it h i t s r e la tiv e ly lo w le v e l o f 

inco m e.

Th e im pa ct on unemploym ent o f L ori ng cu tb ack s can not be as a c c u ra te ly a s ­

se s se d a s th e e f f e c t on p e rs o n al income be ca use o f th e d i f f i c u l t y in p re d ic ti n g 

th e deg re e o f o u tm ig ra ti o n r e s u ltin g fro m th e cu tb ack s. A p re li m in a ry s e n a ri o ,
-however, can be developed to as se ss the short run Impact on the degree of unemployment in 

th e sta te th at could be att ri bute d to the proposed cutbacks a t Loring. This se nari o is developed in terms of the impact of a complete cutback a t Loring. Eased 

on h is to ric a l migration, behav ior pat te rn s, output of the IIEP AC model, and m ilitar y 

tr an sfe rs , the Sta te as a v.holc can expect the number of unemployed to inc rea se 

by 2,703. This is expected to increa se the sta tew ide unemployment ra te by '.6 

percentage poin ts . However, the Aroostook County unemployment ra te could reach 

as high as 18 perce nt to 20 percen t fo r a period of tim e. This is 7.2 percentage 

po ints above the March 1976 ra te of 11.8 perce nt, a 61 perce nt in crea se in th is 

co un ty's unemployment ra te .

Sta te Government Revenues and Expenditures

The proposed cutbacks a t Loring w il l si gnif ic antly dec rea se th e le vel of 

Sta te government revenue co llec tions. This co ntraction in revenue co lle ct io ns 

has two po ssible im plications. Either St ate ta x ra te s w il l have to be increa sed 

or th e le vel of Sta te services w il l have to be reduced. Eithe r of thes e options 

w il l caus e sev ere hardsh ip in Maine, a sta te which alr eady has an unusu ally burdensome ta x le v el, bu t ye t must supp ort ba sic pu bli c se rv ic es .

The sa le s ta x is the S ta te 's princi pal revenue ear nin g ta x. If th e Department of Defense follow s through with i t s present plans fo r an 83 perce nt cutback 

a t Loring, the Sta te government, based on re su lt s of the computer sim ula tio n, 

is expected to collect $4,831,000 le ss in sa le s ta x than i t would norm ally co lle c t.

7ne pe rson al income tax is the second most important source of St at e revenues 

th a t would be af fe ct ed by the proposed cutb acks a t Loring. The sta te personal
21

income ta x would gener ate $1,103 ,900 fewer dollars a fte r th e 83 pe rcen t red uctio n 

too k a ffe c t. Corporate income ta x revenues pr ojec ted to dec rea se by $300,000 and 

othe r ta x revenue co llec tions of th e Sta te government would dfecline by $830,000.

The t o ta l impact on S ta te revenue co llec tions a fte r the 83 pe rcen t re du ction is 

expected to be a de cline of $7,11 4,900, or 2.4 perce nt of ge ne ral fund ca lc ul at io ns 

fo r fis c a l ye ar 1975. This revenue lo ss tril l be fu rt her agrav ate d to th e ex tent 

th at fe de ra l tr ansf ers ar e dependent upon ta x co lle ctions and th e le v e l of popula tion.

The Loring cutback w il l no t only impact St ate revenues but w in increa se 

th e need fo r expanded Sta te expend itu res and programs to all ev ia te th is impact.

As a re su lt of a qu es tio nn aire se nt ou t to St ate agencie s by the Go verno r's of fice 

inform atio n on th es e pote nti al expend itu res is bein g compiled. Prelim inary re ­

su lt s from th e Maine Employment Security'C omm issio n (MESC) in di ca te th at th e in ­

cre ase in unemployment as a resu lt of the 83 per cen t cutback would dra in $1.66 

mill ion from th e Unemployment Ins urance Trust Fund which is alread y in debt to 

th e Federal Government. Ad ministrativ e co sts in MESC can also be exp ected to 

in cr ea se . Other agencie s whose programs are expected to be impacted by the proposed cutb acks ar e the Department of Human Service s, th e Department of Educa tion , 

th e Lo tte ry Commission, th e Sta te Development Office and the Office o f th e Secre ta ry of S ta te .
22

w

« « « « n * V r i - K U J K U T J S U S T A T E W I D E E C O N O M I C I M P A C T S

R E S U L T I N G F R O M .L O P . I N C A I R F O R C E B A S E C U T B A C K S

Gro ss S ta te P ro du ct 

Loss ($ m il li o n ) Employment Lo ss

Wage and Sala ry 

($ m il li o n )

Loss

INDUSTRY YR. 1« YR 2*» YR 1* YR 2«* YR 1* YR 2«*

A ll In d u str ie s 126 160 •.

<7 •

o

n

7, 87 8 72 92

M an uf ac tu ri ng 0 0 0 0 0 0

F .e ta il A W ho les ale Trade 24 31 1, 40 0 1, 70 0 12 16

Governme nt 44 56 3, 70 0 4, 900 42 53

F edera l 39 47 3,1 65 3,9 84 38 45

S ta te an d Lo ca l 4 8 535 916 4 8

S erv ic es an d Min ing 17 22 100 3C0 7 9

F in ance, In su ra nce, Re al E sta te 15 19 500 600 4 5

T ra n sp o rta ti o n , Com municatio ns,

A P u b li c U t i li ti e s 19 25 230 200 5 6

C o n tr act C o nst ru cti on 3 3 10 0 200 2 2

A g ric u lt u re 5 5 0 0 0 0

*Y ea r 1 - ass um es 83# cu tb ac k in L or in g o p e ra ti o n s 

*» Yea r 2 - as su nes 100* shutdown o f Lor ing o p e ra ti o n s
23

Mr. Pease. Also, our office has been in touch with David Pitman 

from the Federal Regional Council. The Federal Regional Council, as 

some of you may know, is an organization of the regional offices at the 

Federal level that deal with New England, deal with Maine.

Mr. Pitman has indicated tha t he would be willing at the Governor's 

•or the congressional delegation’s request to convene th at group of all 

the Federal agencies that deal with our State.

If we can, we would like them to. We have an agenda of questions 

•or proposals we would like them to be concerned with. So we have not 

•convened such a meeting. We hope to get more cooperation in that 

request than the initial ones to the Air Force.

That is really all I had to say, Senator.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much.

Next we have a panel of witnesses consisting of Jerr y Speers, Maine 

Senate Majority Leader; John Martin, Maine House of Representatives Speaker; Linwood Palmer, House Minority L eader; and Hayes 

Gahagan from the Maine Senate, District No. 31.

STATEMENTS OF JERKY SPEERS, MAIN E SENATE MAJORITY

LEAD ER; JOHN MARTIN, SPEAK ER, MAINE HOUSE OF REPRESENTAT IVES; LINWOOD PALMER, HOUSE MINORITY LEAD ER; AND

HAYES GAHAGAN, MAIN E SENATE, DISTRICT NO. 31

Mr. Speers. Thank you very much.

I am very pleased to be asked to make some comments here this 

morning on a matter which is o f vital concern to all of us in the State 

<of Maine.

Others will cite statistics as to the impact of the proposal on the 

pa rt of the A ir Force. B ut I appreciate the opportunity to emphasize 

most strongly that the concern that, we feel with regard to this proposal 

is not only here in Aroostook County but p articularly throughout the 

State of Maine as well.

Although this certainly is a concern that is felt on a bipa rtisan basis, 

I understand tha t the Democratic Convention th at recently convened 

in Augusta also adopted a resolution in its platform. I would like to 

read from the resolution adopted unanimously by the Republican Convention 1 week ago.

While we appreciate the need to reduce Federal spending and to eliminate 

needless military expenditures, we are not prepared to accept or condone the Air 

Force proposal for Loring because we are not persuaded tha t the proposal has 

merit. Furthermore, we demand a spirit of cooperation from the Air Force on this 

matter of vital concern to Aroostook County and the entire State of Maine.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to emphasize tha t the import and impact 

of t hat plank and Republican platfo rm is the expression th at this is a 

matter of vital concern not. only to Aroostook County but to the entire 

State of Maine as well.

While Maine is a large geographic State, it is a small State in terms 

of population and, most significantly, it is not a State with a strong 

economic base. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Particu larly in these 

times of economic hardship, Maine has had a very tenuous economic 

base.
24

While in other areas of the country a reduction of a facility the size 

and importance of Loring A ir Force Base could possibly be absorbed 

by the rest of the economy, in Maine a base the size and importance of 

Loring is in itself a major industry —not simply an adjun ct to the area 

but a major industry.

More importantly, it is a major industry in an area where there is 

very little diversity and very little opportunity to absorb the serious 

economic loss tha t would result.

In a State with as little an industrial base as exists in Maine at the 

present time there is very little diversity and very little opportunity 

to absorb the serious economic loss statewide as well as in the county.

As majority leader of the senate, I can attest to you how veiy 

difficult it is in a State of this great geographic size but small population and economic base to find the resources necessary to provide the 

services needed for the people of Maine: services for the elderly, for 

the education of our future generations, and for other needed programs 

as well.

When we are talking about economic resources in the State, we are 

not talking in most instances about millions of dollars or even in many 

instances about hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Mr. Chairman, other legislators who are here and will be testifying 

can well corroborate that particula rly in this last legislative session 

we had considerable trouble in even finding and identifying funds in 

amounts as low as $20,000 to $30,000, and for such worthwhile programs as cerebral palsv centers and cystic fibrosis programs.

We are talking in Maine of finding funds and operating a government on amounts which the Federal Government chops up as deficits 

probably hourly.

The impact of closing a base the size and importance of Loring, 

because in the State of Maine it has the impact of a major industry, 

would be an extreme detriment to the welfare and economic well-being 

not only of Aroostook County but the entire State as well.

Now, I urge those whose decision it is to make to understand the 

importance to the State and to consider the wellbeing of the State 

of Maine in its deliberations.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

John?

STATEMENT OF JOHN MARTIN. SPEAKER, MAINE HOUSE OF 

REPRESEN TATIVES

Mr. Martin. Thank you, Senator.

Nfr. Chairman, members of the committee. T appreciate the opportunity to speak to this committee this morning to relate some of the 

feelings of a large number of legislators that I represent.

The Maine House is extremely diverse, as the minoritv leader will 

attest to. B ut on this one issue we were unified and passed a resolution 

indicating th at we were extremely concerned with what was attempting to be done with Loring Air Force Base.

The resolution was unanimously adopted in both bodies and sent to 

Washington. I must congratulate the Save Loring Committee for 

having done what I think to be an outstanding job; and, second, con-
25

gr at ul at e the Maine del egation in havin g been unanimous in attempt ­

ing to w ork tog eth er to reverse the decision o f the A ir F orc e.

My ini tia l reactio n, probably fo r th ose o f you who know me, I would 

be late in s aying it was pu rely politica l, as I rel ate d an d ma de a comme nt th at I suspected no thing wou ld be done wi th Lor in g unless we 

ha d a change in the Presidency or the Se cre tar y of Defense .

I th in k th at Bill Cohen has successfully chang ed my mind th at he 

is in a position to cha nge th e decision of the Se cretary of the Air 

For ce. I ho pe tha t we can do t hat co llectively.

Other eve nts came fo rth aft er the ann ounce ment which conc erned 

me, an d I th in k th at we must be active in attempt ing to reve rse th at 

decision. Th ere are two basic concern s I t hi nk all of u s as Am eric ans 

ou gh t to have. One, the m ili ta ry im pa ct; and, second, th e economic 

impac t.

Fi rs t, military. It seems ra th er strange to me th at in 1975 we are 

to ld by the Defense Dep artm en t and others th at Lo rin g is badly needed 

and is one of the most im po rtan t bases in this country , and the n the 

fol low ing y ea r a red uction is ordered w hich wou ld to tally c rip ple the 

base.

Second, and more im po rtan t fo r me at this po int since I rep res ent 

part of Aroos took County, is economic. Aro ostook Co unty in the las t 

10 year's ha s lo st a g rea t m any people, and we have atte mpted to rem ain 

stab le an d hav e a rel ati vely stable economic base wi th two ma in indu str ies—one, fores try and th e oth er, farm ing . An d th e th ird th at 

goes a lon g w ith these and h as been an impo rta nt force in attempting to 

m aintain some sta bility in Aroostook County has been Lo rin g Air 

Force Base.

I f L or in g is cu rta ile d the wa y th at is presen tly o utl ine d by the Air 

Force , or is closed, the economy in Aro ostook Co unty ma y well never 

recover. Thi s school, th is co mm unity, this coun ty, and even this State, 

as Se na tor Speer s has po inted out, will he drastic ally affected.

I th in k th at as we lis ten to the res t of the panels, th e res t of the 

peo ple w ho will l>e speaking toda y, it will become obvious bv th e fac ts 

th at w ill be p resented , w ha t this effect will be upon Aro ostook C oun ty. 

I will leave it to them t o giv e th e details and the specifics.

B ut th e one la st point th at I w an t to make is, speakin g as a le gis lat or 

and as a citizen in ou r relations hip wi th the F ed eral G overn me nt, that 

I don’t mi nd being tre ated t he same as anyone else acro ss the cou ntry, 

if red uctions are go ing to be ma de, bu t I fra nk ly object to bein g tre ated 

any w orse and to be single d o ut as this cou nty has been by th e proposed 

red uction.

Se na tor H athaway. Tha nk you, John .

STATEMENT OF LINWOOD PALMER. MINO RITY LEADER, MAINE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. P almer. Se na tor Hat ha way , Congres smen Cohen and E m ery : 

Se cretary Sim on had said in reference to the Lim estone closing th at 

big gove rnm ent and its accomp anyin g spend ing is basic ally social a nd 

politica l, not economic.

Not only is this a n ov ers implistic way o f loo kin g at o ur economy, it 

is no t true as it relates to Lim estone . Ce rta inly th ere are social and
26

politi cal overton es in the pro posed c losing. But we are no t here tod ay 

because of overtones.

Th e closing at Limestone is a real and substan tia l economic blow to 

this State , no t only in Lim estone but in towuis an d cities as fa r sou th 

as Po rtl an d.

Th e local civil and mili tary pa yroll is more th an $45 mi llio n an ­

nua lly. Th is is an impact 20 tim es gr ea ter th an th e loss of Presque 

Isle A ir Base in 1961.

Aro osto ok County has a hi gh unem plo ym ent rate, a hi gh welfare 

rate—one of the h igh est —and ha s not too stable a n economy. Th e Ai r 

Base has been one o f the sta biliz ing influences.

I am no t a military str ateg ist , no r do I prete nd t o be. I will take it 

on good fa ith th at the re was a real m ili ta ry need to e sta blish an Air 

Base with 4,000 military perso nnel and th at there is some military 

justifi cat ion for mak ing a reduction.

Bu t I am cap able of disti ng uish ing wh at is or is no t a bon a fide 

jus tifica tion fo r bringing imm ediate economic disaste r to a part of th e 

Nation.

Re duction of big govern me nt and its acco mpany ing sp endin g is not 

such a justifi cation. Th e Fe de ral Government, on its own, poured 

hu nd reds o f millions o f do lla rs into t he crea tion of th e Lim estone A ir 

Base.

W he ther th e citizens of th is are a like d it o r no t, th ey, over the course 

of the ye ars, were forced in to an economic de pendency on th e A ir Base. 

Jobs developed to service t he b as e; ap artm en t un its an d othe r housing 

were mad e and built for th e airm en ; and serv ice network s and oth er 

businesses were bu ilt to give sufficient qu an tities of lif e’s necessities 

and some of its lux urie s to those mi lit ary personnel.

Th is com plex a nd w ide-rang ing economic relatio nship to ok ye ars to 

develop. Now the Government t hat g iveth in it s in finite wisd om would 

take th awa y w ith one blow.

Th e com ing and going of larg e mili tary insta lla tio ns does not 

happen in a vacuum. Citizens who pay t axe s to s up po rt the m ili ta ry — 

whose pr im ar y fun ction is to defen d th is Na tio n fro m des truction, 

de privati on , and destitut ion —can them selves be made de stitut e by 

economic as well as m ili tary actions. Ex pa nd in g welfare, unemployment, an d social decay can be as costly to this Governm ent as m ilitary 

co nfrontation .

Th e Government which would pick up and pull ou t of Limestone 

with a handshake and a pa t on the back, is th e same Government that 

dev elop ed the Ma rsh all plan, po ured investment ca pital fo r economic 

dev elopment int o Korea, Ja pan , Germany , Vietn am So uth America. 

Central Am eric a, and Africa, an d deve loped a Pea ce Corps to help 

undeveloped nations th roug ho ut the world, and alm ost singleha ndedlv supp orted the Un ite d Nations fo r th e same purpo ses since 

1948.

W ha t makes Aro ostook Co un ty any less deservin g of economic recovery. especia lly when a need fo r that boost would be caused by 

Government action ?

If the base is to be closed, let it l>e done gentl y and grad ua lly . Let 

the Government develop an economic plan whereby m ili ta ry jobs can 

be repla ced by p riv ate sector jobs.
27

I can’t believe the Government is being so spiteful it is giving people 

what they are asking for by immediately taking our military bases and 

then saying, “I told you so. We can’t do it without a large military 

budget.”

The Federal Government has a solemn responsibility to be more 

responsive and concerned than considering it as a labor-management 

dispute where if it gets to be too much you simply pick up and leave.

The military cannot separate itself so neatly from the rest of the 

Government. I t is not just the Department of Health, Education, and 

Welfare which is to pick up the pieces and provide the social conscience; it is for every branch of Government and every civil servant, 

military and otherwise, to be 100 percent concerned over what happens 

to the citizens of this country—whether they be social, political, military or economic actions to correct.

If the Government thinks th at Limestone and the su rrounding area 

could recover in 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years, then it hasn’t studied the 

economy of the area very well. I t is no answer at all to say, “Well, we 

gave you several more frigates at Bath to work on.” So the people are 

to move down to Bath and become shipbuilders just like corporate 

executives move from place to place.

The Federal Government, all of i t—not just Health, Education, and 

Welfare, and Social Security—has a commitment to prevent economic 

decline. Its purpose is to serve the people, not rationalize tha t what is 

good for the military is good for the country.

We in Maine will not let the Government forget its commitment. 

Whether through this meeting, or another or another or another, or 

whether through legal action or social or political action, we will insure 

tha t tha t commitment is not forgotten and economic stability will be 

brought to this area.

Senator H athaway. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF HAYES GAHAGAN, SENATOR, MAINE STATE 

SENATE

Mr. Gahagan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Senator Hayes 

Gahagan of District No. 31. I am speaking this morning as a State 

Senator representing many of the constituents of Maine, the citizens 

of the local area who were not able to be here this morning because of 

their jobs.

I hope you will not take this as any indication they are not interested. I believe the people who are here this morning are representing 

many who could not be here. I am also speaking as a private citizen.

However, at this time I would like to make a few comments in reaction to some of the things that have been said this morning by the delegation and perhaps bring a different perspective to this issue.

I think tha t we are very appreciative of the efforts that the congressional delegation has made to date to articulate our shock at what is 

going on here at Loring.

I think also the efforts of the local business community and the Save 

Loring Committee are most appreciated by the citizens who are in this 

district.
28

Many of the statistics which you will be provided with today I think 

will demonstrate tha t the economic impact will be severe. However, the 

larger issue which I feel, and this is a personal observation, the comments th at Senator Hathaway made this morning, for example, when 

you indicated that this was not a final decision of the Air Force, when 

you indicated that what they want is not what they will g et ; you also 

indicated that the A ir Force was either unable or unwilling to supply 

information or personnel for this hearing.

I go on to Congressman Cohen’s remarks of his disappointment tha t 

the Air Force did not send a representative and tha t the mission of 

fact-finding was here, that this was our hearing.

Congressman Cohen has been able to go to the Congress to fight, in 

his words, for an amendment to the Military Construction bill.

One other comment which I think is appropriate is th at Congressman Emery has stated tha t the m ilitary has been “h itting” the northeast in the past few years and that we are going to have to fight.

We won’t stand by, Congressman Emery said, while people who 

make these decisions destroy the economy of Aroostook.

My point, Mr. Chairman, and members of the delegation, and for 

the record, is tha t it seems to me something has gone wrong in this 

country when the Congress of the United States is having to fight 

with the bureaucracies, having to take a stand to reverse decisions 

which have been made by the bureaucracy.

I thin k we are experiencing what is really government by bureaucracy and not government by the citizen, not government by the elected 

representatives.

I have saved quite diligently all the press material that has come 

out. Without going into much detail right now, I have read conflicting 

statements that it was a policy decision of the Department of Defense; 

I have read that it w as a budgetary decision of the Office of Management and Budget; I have read i t was a policy decision of the D epartment of the Air Force.

It w-ould seem to me tha t it is the Congress of the United States 

that is supposed to establish policy, th at it would be the Congress of 

the United States tha t would be responsible primarily for making 

decisions of strategic importance to the U.S. Government.

This should not be, in my opinion, an attack of the military on the 

economy of the northeast. I t seems to me that the Congress, or perhaps 

all politicians—this is particularly true in the State level also— 

politicians tend to say to the bureaucracy, “You run the Government 

and we will run for reelection.”

What has happened is tha t an adversary relationship has developed 

in which the bureaucracy is making policy, making budgetary decisions, and the Congress in response is having to fight to build up its 

power to counterattack the power of the bureaucracy which has been 

building up over the past several decades.

It leads me to ask the question, and I think many people, as I have 

been in Caribou and Presque Isle in the past week, just who is in 

charge in Washington ? Is it the bureaucracy or is it the Congress of 

the United States? What can we do to stop this adversary relationship which exists between elected officials and appointed officials ?
29

I wou ld recommend this morning , Mr. C ha irm an, t hat th e Congress 

take a ca refu l look at this gr ow ing adversa ry relatio ns hip between 

the b ure aucra cy that the Congress i tse lf c reated ; an d inste ad of building the po we r of the Congress to make the burea ucrac y prov ide the 

in fo rm ation as to why the y are go ing to mak e these decisions, instead 

of bu ild ing the pow er of tlie Congres s to try to find ou t wha t is goin g 

on in th e bu rea ucr acy , pe rhap s yo u co uld consider dec rea sin g the pow er 

of the bu rea ucrac y which ivas crea ted .

It is an ad minist rativ e g overn me nt. I t is r un by pr ofe ssional ad mi nistrat or s w ho are ap pointed, w ho serv e a t the ple asu re of the C ongress.

It seems to me th at th at p ow er s hould be decreas ed, because witho ut 

it we w ill be losing o ur go ve rnmen t by the c itizen.

If the Con gress does not act to decrease the pow er of th is Fe deral 

burea ucrac y an d if the St ate leg islatu res do not act to decrease the 

pow er of t he State burea ucr acy , then we ha ve lost o ur gov ern me nt by 

the citizen.

1 th in k it is un fortu na te, althou gh I do appre cia te the efforts of th e 

Save L or ing Comm itte e; I th in k it is un fo rtu na te th at we s hould have 

to ge t m oney from the local citiz en s; to have citizens, b usinessm en and 

any inter ested peop le pu t money in to hire a law’ firm in th e St ate of 

Maine who ha s in tu rn hired a law’ firm dow n in W ashing ton ju st so 

th at we can find out where the d ecis ion was m ade to close Lo rin g, how’ 

it was made, a nd why it was made.

Whil e I appre cia te the effo rts of the Save Lo rin g Com mittee, and 

I will su pp ort it, it seems to me, Mr. Ch airma n and members of the 

delega tion, th at the Maine deleg ati on itself to the Con gress sho uld be 

the Save Lor in g Committee.

I rea d in th e Po rtla nd Su nd ay Teleg ram yeste rday the efforts th at 

are going on by the Save Lo rin g Com mittee. It is quite interesting 

th at in the same article it tal ke d about the amount of money th at is 

being pa id to the Fe de ral Con gressm en, tho usands and thou sand s of 

dollars.

I will quo te from th is editoria l by Bill Caldwell. _ .

Congressmen and would-be Congressmen shout about economy in g overnment— 

when they are on the stump. But unless Congress rew rites its laws, Congressmen 

are in line to collect thre e pay rais es in a yea r's time. Th at could raise their 

salaries to $60,000 or more.

Members gave themselves a raise to $44,600 a year last fall.

They also are expected to get anoth er pay raise of five or six p ercent in October.

I note th at Congr essman Coh en did oppose th at au tomati c pay 

increase.

Next spring a special Presidential commission will make recommendations for 

ano ther pay raise. Some rumors say they will recommend a 50 perce nt hike. If 

the new Pre sident keeps it down to a 20 percent hike, th at could mean $10,000 

a year more to a Congressman.

The thi rd rais e would come in th e fall of 1977. Congress passed a law giving its 

members and all Federal employees auto ma tic cost-of-living increases each year. 

The f ringe benefits also add up.

In addition, a Congressman gets about $250,000 a yea r to hire personal staff in 

the House—and over $750,000 for staff if he is a Senator.

The cost of the four-man Maine Deleg ation works out to about $3,000 a day, 

seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a y ear.

73- 44 4— 71 3
30

Aly point is what better Save Ijoring Committee could we have, what 

better funds could we have than the funds the taxpayers are paying 

now to the Maine delegation.

Mr. Cohen. I would like to interrupt you here. F irs t of all, I point 

out the Maine delegation is a Save Loring delegation and committee.

The Maine delegation did not initiate the committee. This was initiated by the local people to have further input. AVe are happy to work 

with them.

I would point out th at the entire Maine delegation is working as a 

unified, cohesive force. We were successful in passing an important 

amendment in the House. I think it will pass in the Senate. I just want 

to point out we are a Save Loring delegation.

Mr. Gahagax. Thank you. I am glad to hear that from you. Congressman Cohen, and from all the people affiliated with the Maine 

delegation—vour staff, et cetera.

The main point I want to make this morning is t hat the Congress 

should take action to decrease the power of the Federal bureaucracy 

because I think that is where the decisions are made. I think they have 

entirely too much power. Our job as citizens should be to support you 

in your job.

Mr. Cohex. Thank you.

Mr. Martix. I think Senator Gahagan has raised a question which I 

want to pursue in a different light. I suspect that is not surprising to 

him or anyone else.

First of all. I quite agree and I am concerned about the rise of the 

bureaucracy. That rise of bureaucracy is not only true at the Federal 

level bu t it is true also at the State, and to some degree, in the local 

community.

But I th ink th at the efforts on saving Loring ought to come from the 

citizenry most affected by it. I think the role of our congressional delegation is to give us that supp ort if we maintain that tha t is what we 

want them to do.

I think too often as politicians we tend to assume what people want. 

AVe really don’t know. AVe make guesses. I think what is taking place 

here today, what is taking place in the formation of the Save Loring 

Committee, is the proper role; and then it is the role of our congressional delegation to assist us in making that fight possible.

Mr. Cohen. I would like to just respond briefly to Lin Palmer’s 

statement about 20 percent. It will be 20 percent more severe in the 

cutback of Loring than it was in Presque Isle.

It seems to me if this 83-percent reduction were to go through, you 

would have the worst of both worlds. A t least in Presque Isle and the 

City of Bangor when they closed Dow* a few years ago we got the 

property. They turned it over to the city for a dollar.

Then we had very creative and enterprising people who said, “AATe 

can’t afford to let Bangor’s economy drop out.” They formed a committee and got the airport in.

But to cut it down by 83 percent, leaving a skeleton crew, leaves the 

worst of both worlds. You have a skeleton crew and the Department of 

Defense still owns the property and you can’t do anything with it. That 

is one of the factors that has to be emphasized.
31

Second, you ta lk about a Marshall plan fo r Aroo stook Co unty. 

I think it is i m po rtan t to keep th at concept in mind, th at th e Defen se 

Manpower Com mission in Apr il of 1976 subm itted to Congress an d 

to the Presiden t a reco mm end atio n th at there be at leas t 3 ye ar s’ 

adv anc e notice of an y substan tia l red uction or closure.

I hope th at the Presiden t and the Congress will keep th is in mind, 

th at we do hav e to have adv ance notice and pl an ni ng so t hat we ca n 

pro pose alt erna tiv es—bu t not this short, ab ru pt term ina tio n of ones 

existence which wou ld kill this en tir e com munity .

Mr. P almer. Three years would be even too s mall.

Mr. Cohe n. Th at is ju st advance notice.

Mr. P almer. Th at is r ight.

-Mr. Cohe n. W e have been told by the m ili ta ry , the y tri ed to soften 

the death blow by saying it is only a pr elim inary rec om menda tion , 

th at you a re merely only a “cand idate.” Those are the w ords to sof ten 

th e blow.

It is pr etty mu ch a foregone conc lusion, 1 think. I think Mr. 

Ga ha ga n is quite corre ct. While the decision is not final, it has lx'en 

set in concrete. I t is ou r e ffort t o bre ak th e concrete at th is stag e o f the 

game.

Mr. E mery. I f I cou ld mak e a sta tem ent. Th ere are some am azing 

pa ralle ls between the M aine deleg ation’s trea tm en t from t he A ir Force 

an d the tre atmen t th at we have received from the Army o ver the gun 

sit ua tio n in Saco.

Th ere is the decision to deploy and it is ann oun ced, and af te r it is 

announced we find conflicting i nforma tio n com ing from v ari ous a gencies and departm ents. We find analy sis and o th er pro ble ms conflicting 

in itself, th at we really c ouldn ’t rely on the inform ation th at we were 

rec eiv ing from t he Army.

So we arc co ns tantly faced with thes e bu reau crati c inconsistencies. 

It rea lly becomes a difficult pro blem to determine exactly what the 

ratio na l reasons m ig ht be fo r such a red uction an d what is merely 

po litica l w ind ow -dr essing to ease the decision.

Ce rta inly it h as lx'en an eye-ope ner to me as a freshm an member of 

the delega tion, an d it is very cle ar th at some of th e commen ts S en ator 

Gah ag an made alxmt th e burea ucrac y taki ng c ontrol of the C ong ress 

ar e very well take n.

I th in k there h as been a change in the a tti tu de in the last year or so. 

Members of Con gress who might not hav e been too concerned alxmt 

th is p ar ticu la r pro blem are b ecom ing more and more, aware of it.

Cohen -O’Xeill am endm ents w hich wo uld req uir e congressional oversig ht and congressio nal decisions a re bein g accepted where previo usly 

they would have been pas sed off. So I do see a change in att itu de ,

Mr. Gahagan. I ha ve one final question, M r. C ha irm an . In th e sta te ­

ment which Lo rin g A ir Fo rce Rase issued to the Congress, which 

ap pe ars in the Congressional Record, u nd er i ts com ments on basis fo r 

the pro posed action, I re ad :

The imperative need to manage the resources of the Air Force with less while 

maintaining the deterrent value of the Strategic Air Command has led to a 

critical review of all base-operating functions, activities, and installations. The 

Congress has also been mindful of the possibilities of further economies, and the 

Senate Appropriations Committee has recommended that these economies be 

taken in support areas, not combat units.
32

JMy question, Mr. Chairman, to any member of the delegation, is 

those of you who have been in Maine government know frequently when an agency of the Government is unhappy with the budget allocation that it received, it will threaten tha t an institution may have to 

be closed or that cutbacks may occur. In this session of the legislature, we were threatened with the strike in the prison at Thomaston. The department felt it was underfunded. 

We were threatened with these things. Is it your opinion or the opinion of the members of the delegation 

tha t the Department of Defense feels tha t its appropriations were not 

sufficient and is therefore dropping these little hints—let's call them 

hints for now; they may be very serious actions of the Department of Defense—whereby they would say, “Perhaps we will have to close 

Loring so tha t the Congress will react and give them more money 

for the Department of Defense” ? Is there any truth to this?

Senator Hathaway. I doubt very much that there is. In the first 

place, the defense appropriation has not yet been passed upon this 

year. Therefore, the budget resolution which has l>een adopted is on 

the high side, or at least it is on the administration side as far as 

defense expenditures are concerned.

Mr. Gahagan. So you are saying tha t the comments-—-

Senator Hathaway. What I am saying is that they are not thre atening a reduction or closing unless we support higher military expenditures. So far the administration has its own way on this.

Mr. Gaiiagan. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. You are welcome.

Tha nk you all for your statements.

Senator Hathaway. The next panel is Paul Haines, chairman of 

the Save Loring Committee, accompanied by attorney -Scverin 

Bcliveau. . • . . v •

■ . ■ • | •• ; >d

STATEMENT OF PAUL HAINES, CHAIRMAN, SAVE LORING COMMITTEE, ACCOMPANIED BY SEVE RIN BELIVEAU AND KENNETH

HAYES - ; 'j ' J ' • ; . . . « t t «.

Mr. H aines. Senator Hathaway, Congressman Cohen and Congressman Emery, I am pleased to app ear before you this morning as spokesman for the Save Loring Committee to express our appreciation for 

the support tha t we have received from you and your staff and for 

your willingness to particip ate in this public hearing. We truly believe that this hearing will be the beginning of a successfid effort to convince the U.S. A ir Force that its decision to curtail its commitment to Loring Air Force Base by 83 percent is unsound militarily, technically, economically, and socially. As you know, on March 11,1976, the U.S. Air Force announced an 

83-pervent reduction in military and civilian personnel and inactivation of the 42d Strategic Bomb Wing. The reaction in Aroostook County ranged from shock to outright 

indignation since the announcement was totally unexpected and never 

anticipated. Af ter several days of inform al discussions and meetings between 

governmental and business leaders of the county, we decided to form 

a committee to analyze the problem and to recommend a positive
33

course of action. We also recogn ized the need to ge ne rate com mu nity 

su pp or t fo r ou r position an d fo r the fina ncia l reso urces require d to 

wage an effective effort.

Th e com mittee conc luded th at it s hou ld retain legal, economic, and 

mili tary e xp erts to assist y ou in an aly zin g t he ra tio na le offered by the 

Penta gon. We are encourage d by the str on g exp ressions of financia l 

su pp ort from sev eral m un icipalities and businesses th at will be direc tly 

affected by the cu rta ilm en t at Lo rin g. We are also plea sed with the 

overw hel ming effort being m ade by the citizens of Aro ostook C oun ty in 

su pp ort of ou r decision to pro ceed in a positive manner.

As a res ult of our decision to seek outside experts, the com mittee 

has retaine d the services of the Soc ial Science Research In stitut e of 

the Unive rsi ty of Maine at Oro no. The ir p relim inary report, h as been 

cir culated to you. The In st itut e ha s initiated an extensive analy sis of 

the economic and social costs re su lti ng fro m an 83- percen t red uction 

at Lo rin g. (The rep ort ap pe ars in the appendix, p. 129.)

The ir findin gs include th e f ol lo win g:

Th e s ho rtru n impact will be one of serious economic dislocatio n.

The long run imp act will affe ct th e fu ture grow th and viab ility of 

all the com munities in no rth ern Maine. Th e base du ring 30 yea rs of 

existence has become integrated in the busin ess stru ctur e of no rth ern 

Maine;

Spe cifically, local businesses ar e dep end ent upon Lor in g A ir F orc e 

Base fo r 20 perce nt of th ei r di rec t sales.

An estim ate d 12,000 jobs will be lost if th e pla nn ed red uctio n of 83 

percen t occura.

Th e economic impact will be felt much more seve rely in com munities with in 15 miles of the base.

Social in sti tutio ns inc ludin g chu rches and local ch arities wdll be 

gr ea tly impac ted. In 1975 A ir Fo rce person nel contr ibute d $100,000 

to local church es and $50,000 to the U nited Fun d.

Real est ate values, pr op erty ta xes, local gov ern me nt ta xi ng sources, 

cou nty taxe s, and State tax es will all lx* adversely affected.

O f g reatest importance will be the redu ced income fro m loss o f jobs. 

Th e In st itute estimates th is figure to be abo ut $120,000,000 pe r yea r, 

not includin g base pers onnel.

Se na tor H athaway. Does yo ur stu dy show the ne t effect ? The reduc tion in tax es is presum ably a red uct ion in services.

Mr. H ayes. It does not reflect t ha t.

Se na tor H athaway. Bu t i t will ?

Mr. H ayes. It will, ho pefully.

Mr. H ain es. The Social Science Re search In stitut e c on clu de s: “Suc h 

a ma gnitu de of job losses sup erimp ose d on a ch ron ica lly high -unemployment area will spe ll economic di saste r.”

Add ition ally, the com mittee ha s retain ed the services of O'C onnor 

and Han na n, a Wash ing ton , D.C .. law firm, and Belive au and Be liveau, an Aug us ta law firm, to assist us in assurin g th at all Fe de ral 

laws, D ep artm en t of Defense direc tives, an d Air Force regu latio ns are 

fullv com plie d w ith.

We hav e also ret ain ed a 'Wash ing ton consult ing firm to r eview the 

m ili ta ry and strateg ic reasons a dvanced by the P en tago n to ju stify t he 

pro posed curt ailme nt.
34

W e are also greatly concerned with the apparent Federal policy to 

move military installations out of the northeast to the south. In a 

memorandum prepared for Xew England Congressional Caucus, Jill 

A, Schuker states:

T h e re gula ri ty of m il it ary fa cil it y clo seou ts in th e n o rt h east ov er th e past 

♦decade an d th e Fed er al em pl oy men t sh ort fa ll in th e n o rt h e a st part ic ula rl y su gg e sts th a t su ch a co ns er ted po lic y may un de rlie th e d ec isi on s. N orthea st m il it ary 

cl os ur es h av e re su lte d in mu ch re du ce d ci vi lian em ploy me nt.

We urge our delegation to support whatever legislative initiatives 

that are available to assure that social economic consideration play a 

role in Federal policy in this area.

We also deplore the obvious shortfall in Federal jobs in New 

England and encourage our delegation to assure tha t Maine receives 

its fair share of Federal civilian employment.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, we are hopeful that the extremely favorable 

relationship that has existed since 1953 between Loring, its civilian 

and m ilitary personnel, and the citizens of Aroostook County will continue for an indefinite period of time. It is important to remember 

that unlike other military installations, Loring has never experienced 

any difficulty from special interest groups in opposition to its presence 

in Limestone.

Again, we greatly appreciate your presence here today and we are 

certain tha t the combined efforts of our congressional delegation and 

our committee will result in the continuation of Loring Air Force 

Base at its present level of operation.

STATEMENT OF SEVERIN BELIVEAU

Mr. Beliveau. Mr. Chairman, members of the Maine delegation, I 

must expand briefly on what Paul Haines has stated. Our role in this 

effort would be limited to reviewing very carefully the procedure that 

the Air Force is required to follow under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 19G9.

As you know, and it has been mentioned several times here this 

morning, the Air Force is required to tile an environmental impact 

statement. In his letter of April 1 of this year. Major General Maclioni 

outlined generally what the Air Force intends to do to comply with 

the statute.

We intend to make certain tha t the Air Force complies in every 

sense to the letter of the law.

We also have reviewed and are reviewing all of the Pentagon directives. the Air Force regulations, to make certain th at the manner in 

which the Air Force proceeds in this case complies fully with the 

Administrative Procedure Act.

And. of course, if we conclude at some point that there is a basis to 

P’ oceed in court, we will not hesitate to do so.

Our involvement with the committee is limited solely to a review of 

the statutory and regulatory areas that apply in this case. We will 

continue to consult and advise the committee regarding the leiral 

remedies.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

Mr. Beliveau. We have Prof. Kenneth Hayes here, in the event you 

have any technical questions relating to the preliminary report that 

Paul Haines has alluded to.
35

Senator Hathaway. Xo. I just want to say tha t we will make the 

preliminary report a part of the record. (See appendix, p. 129.)

When would you have the next phase of the study available?

Mr. IIaines. Our target is June 15. The completion date is probably 

June 30.

Senator Hathaway. That would be very good.

I want to assure the Save Loring Committee the delegation intends 

to work with you and cooperate in a common effort. We have so far, 

and I thin k it has worked very well. We look forward to continued 

cooperation. Thank you very much for your testimony.

Mr. Haines. Thank you, sir.

Senator Hathaway. Our next witness is Mr. Emilien Levesque, 

Commissioner of the Department of Manpower Affairs.

STATEMENT OF EMILIEN LEVESQUE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AFFAIRS

Mr. Levesque. Thank you, Senator Hathaway, and distinguished 

members of the Maine delegation. My name is Emilien Levesque. I 

am Commissioner of the Department of Manpower Affairs in Augusta, 

Maine.

1 am deeply honored and welcome the opportunity extended to me 

by this committee to say a few words on the economy of Aroostook 

County—especially in light of the proposed cutback of operations at 

the Loring Air Force Base.

I would like to begin by stressing that it is impossible to overstate 

the impact tha t Loring has on the health of the economy in the area. 

It has been reported that over 80 percent of the military personnel at 

Loring will be transferred out of Maine, with over 70 percent of the 

civilian work force to be laid off.

According to figures provided by Loring, the economic impact 

would run into many millions of dollars, as alluded to earlier this 

morning. Prelim inary investigations reveal that approximately 2,500 

indirect jobs in Aroostook coidd be lost in addition to the announced 

proposed 650 layoffs of civilian personnel.

Also, it is believed th at Aroostook would lose between 500 and 700 

housing rentals from military personnel. Close to 1,500 children of the 

military would be removed from local schools.

Limestone, with about 1,000 students, would lose half a million 

dollars now provided their school system by the Federal Government. 

If the reduction had taken place last fall and with all other things 

being equal—that is, no furth er economic development or special Federal assistance—the unemployment rate in February would have probably been at 21 percent of the work force in Aroostook County rather 

than the 12.6 percent as it was in February 1976.

One out of five people in the county’s labor force would have been 

out of work. This would mean a drain of an extra $2 million from the 

Unemployment Insurance T rus t Fund and an additional cost of $500,- 

000 in Federal unemployment insurance benefits for 1976.

The heavy payout from the State unemployment insurance program 

would certainly result in a large increase in taxes, especially for individual firms in trade, services, and construction. The possible impact 

as just outlined is real and should be taken seriously.
36

An understanding of the important role that Loring has on the 

economy of Aroostook can be gained by a brief look at the evolution 

of employment patterns in the area over the past 20 years.

The most dramatic change, and the one with the most far-reaching 

effects, has been the shift from potato production and ha ndling practices tha t required large numbers of workers, both seasonal and yearround, to highly mechanized practices that have resulted in a sharp 

decrease in agricultural employment.

From the time of the base’s establishment in Limestone in the years 

following the Second World War, Loring has been a key element in 

the Aroostook economy, functioning as a stabilizing influence in an 

area undergoing pronounced changes in its employment patterns.

While the manufacturing sector received a boost beginning in the 

early and mid-sixties with the construction of several potato processing plants in the central Aroostook area, as well as several other manufacturing firms, such gains in employment opportunities were more 

than offset by the influx into the labor market of large numbers of new 

entrants.

One effect of this situation was. therefore, an outmigration rate for 

the county during the 1960's o f about 27 percent. It should be noted 

further t ha t per capita income for the county du ring this period has 

consistently laggexl behind tha t of the State as a whole.

Unemployment in Aroostook has been above statewide levels during 

the sixties and seventies. Unemployment in the county during 1975 

averaged 10.9 percent of the labor force.

During these two decades, Government has been a mainstay of 

county jobs. During this period, Government workers have regularly 

constituted a larger percent of total employment in the county than in 

Maine as a whole.

In 1970, these workers constituted 19 percent of all employed worke r in the county compared with 13 percent statewide. It should be 

noted that the Loring Air Force Base was one of the largest single 

employing establishments in the county for a least a decade.

While all of the figures I have just mentioned, coupled with, the 

possible closing of Loring, are indeed very sobering, to me they spell 

an alarm for a renewed, concerted effort by all of the citizens of Aroostook to lobby against a cutback at Loring, and a renewed effort to 

attrac t new industry bv selling the assets of a unique lifestyle, a highly 

productive labor force whose integrity is second to none, and the vast 

and beautiful resources of land unmatched in few other places in this 

country.

Congressmen and Mr. C hairman, this concludes my prepared text 

for the benefit of the delegation and the people here this morning. 

However, I have a strong personal interest in what may be happening 

to Loring, for the simple reason tha t when we refer to th e county, of 

course it is understood that it is Aroostook County.

I have an idea that what the Department of Defense may be planning here is not something totally new to Aroostook County. I think 

the people in the milieu of Government in Washington—and that is 

the center of Government in Washington for those who are outside of 

the county—the people of this area have been known for their industrial capabilities as well as their being able to get along with people.
37

I am very much afraid that the Department of Defense is trying to 

do something here tha t in a national election year may be just tha t— 

an indication of what is going on in the milieu of Government in 

Washington. A few of things th at are unique to this area of Aroostook County, 

and for some of you this may sound familiar and to others it may not, 

Loring is situated on one side by the community of Caswell and on 

another side is Connor, Sacred Heart, and Caribou.

It wasn’t until the mid-forties or after th at I knew just where Caswell was, although I was lx>m and brought up in A an Buren; and I 

didn’t know too much of where Sacred Heart or Connor was in 

Aroostook County. And I will tell you the reasons why. Caswell to those of us who were 

born and brought up here was referred to as Cache Candille, better 

translated for those of you are not aware of what it may look like, it is 

a refuge for somebody running away, rum-runners or whatever you 

may call it.

Mr. Levesque. That covers the Caswell side of Loring Air Force 

Base. On the northwest side of Loring we find what we used to refer to as 

Portage de Caribou. Th at is presently Connor, Sacred Heart, and 

North Caribou. So we can take this as an indication that there were mandates in the 

area in 1946 and, earlier, in the Webster-Ashburton Tr eaty that made 

the dividing line between the two high grounds, that made the State 

of Maine, and tha t these refugees were there for tempo rary purposes 

and that the military in Washington are using Loring for the same 

emphasis tha t Aroostook is a refuge or temporaiy asylum for some 

people, and that at somebody’s whim they are going to s ay : “We need 

the SAC Air Force Base for the protection of the continent as a whole 

and to help the NATO countries and for the protection of the North 

Sea,” and all of a sudden by virtue of a national election year we find 

ourselves in a position that 83 percent of this strategic area is no 

longer of any use to the people of the country or to the rest of the 

world. Having been l>orn and brought up in this area, of the county, I find 

this most amazing, that the Department of Defense would use our 

congressional delegation, prior to an election year, for this kind of 

arm-twisting with 60-millimeters or even the atomic bomb which we 

are supposed to be using for the defense of the country’.

So if this has an impact on the people in Washington, tha t this is 

the way that they are going to treat the delegation of Maine, as an 

arm-twister for the delegations to come our way. then I think, do we 

need Loring at all? If that is the case, then Loring should be maintained by the Department of Defense.

If we are only going to have a 15-percent. maybe 17-percent. security 

force a t Loring, we don’t need this 17 percent or 15 percent to maintain the hydrants or guardin g the steel wire fences around Loring.

The question I am posing to the Department of Defense is either the 

country and the nations of the w’orld need Loring or else we don’t 

need it at all. So, keep it going or else close it if we don't need it.

I will be glad to answer any questions of the delegation. Thank you 

very kindly.
38

Sena tor H athaway. Th an k you very much .

The next witness is T homa s Mc Gillic uddy, Di str ict Di rec tor of t he 

Small Business Ad minist ratio n.

STATEMENT OF THOMAS McGILLICUDDY, DISTRICT DIRECTOR, 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Mr. McGillicuddy. Good mo rning. Se na tor Ha thaw ay, Co ngres smen Cohen and Em ery. I than k you for invitin g me to the hearing.

The p roposed red uctio n in force at Lo rin g A ir Fo rce Base will have 

a devasta tin g effect on Aroo stook County.

Aroostook has a bas ically ag ric ultural economy. Most of t he m ajor 

industrial fac ilitie s are potato processing plants. Recogn izin g the 

dangers of an economy based upo n a single ag ric ult ural pr od uc t, 

county leaders have sou ght to bro ade n the county's economic base. 

Unfortuna tely, the c ounty has achieved little success in attrac ting new 

ind ustry to the no rth east corne r of t he U ni ted States.

Consequ ently. Aroostock Cou nty d epends to an ino rdinate d egr ee on 

Lo rin g A ir Force Base as the ma ins tay of its non ag ric ultural economy. 

Lo rin g is the co un ty’s hugest and most stable employer.

Aroostoo k C ounty has experienced an ala rm ingly hig h o utmigratio n 

fo r many years —some thing on the orde r of 26 or 28 per cent in the 

1960's.

The reduction of several tho usa nd base personnel would cause ma ny 

oth ers n ot direc tly emp loyed by Lo rin g to lose t he ir jobs.

Eve n af te r an exo dus from th is spai-selv populated county, to da y’s 

une mploym ent ra te of 11.8 percent would seem low by com parison .

The Small Business Ad ministratio n is please d to have ha d a role 

in helping Aroosto ok’s busin ess com munity . Since 1970, SB A has 

work ed with are a banks to pro vid e $3,743,560 fo r 13 Comm unity 

Economic Development Proje cts in Carilxni alone. We have also partic ipa ted in fin ancin g 27 other Caribou business loans to ta ling 

$2,733,000.

In P resque Isle , SB A has h elpe d to pro vid e $4,661,000 to local bu sinesses since 1970. In Van Buren, SB A has provide d $935,000 since 

1970.

SB A has mad e or guara nte ed a total of $19,378,210 in loans to 

Aro osto ok County businesses since 1970. Cur rently, we ar e ser vic ing 

126 loans in the co unty, with an o utsta nd ing S BA ba lanc e of $6,803,481. 

Th is figure does not include the exposure of coopera ting banks.

We at SB A have wor ked closely with indu str iou s people of Aroostook. Fo r exa mp le, we are pleased to h ave pla yed a role in Ca rib ou 's 

impressive dev elop ment over the las t few years.

The citizens of Ca rib ou can be jus tifiab ly proud of th ei r urba n 

renew al program which has t rans form ed a ra th er d ila pid ated ce ntral 

business di strict into a modern, attrac tiv e, and busy cen ter of com ­

mercial activ ity .

The future success of man y busin esses in Ca rib ou and th ro ug ho ut 

Aroostook County is hea vily dep end ent upon the conti nuing mag nitude of Lo rin g's pu rcha sin g power. Ma ny county resta uran ts, con ­

tra ctors, automobile dealers, and other businesses will fail sh or tly 

af te r the pro posed Lor ing red uction takes effect.
39

Other Government agencies will try to fill the gap created by the 

possible Air Force decision to trans fer Loring personnel. Fo r example, SBA will probably be able to provide low-cost Government loans 

under its base closing economic injury loan program. EDA would be called upon for low-cost loans and outright grants. Unemployment compensation outlays will escalate. A key question tha t must be answered is: “Will the projected savings by the Air Force be offset by additional expenditures of other Government 

agencies?” Even with massive Government aid to Aroostook County, economic stability would not return to the county for many years, if ever. We would ask the Air Force to thoroughly study all economic aspects of their proposed reduction before taking an action tha t threatens to disrupt the lives of thousands of Aroostook County citizens.

Senator Hathaway. Th ank you very much. I would like to develop 

one good point. The Government is going to have a lot of losses over the Loring savings if it goes ahead with the phaseout because defaults and costs to other Government agencies will eat up and exceed all of the savings which might be made by the Air Force at Loring.

Mr. McGilijcuddy. Yes, sir. We will have losses on loans that are 

outstanding. But I think beyond that, Senator, the Government will be called upon to provide additional help to the people of Aroostook County, and I expect we will help. I think that Government expendi­ tures will be many, many millions of dollars. Even with this I question 

whether we could rebuild the county to what it is today.

Senator H athaway. Could you give us any figures or good estimates 

on the cost for all Government agencies?

Mr. McGillicuddy. I would have to pick a number out of the sky. 

I couldn’t do it.

Senator Hathaway. I mean for the record later on.

Mr. McGillicuddy. OK. T can do some research, Senator.

[Mr. McGillicuddy supplied the following in response to the above 

request:]

I ha ve as ke d Dan Koe hler of SB A's W as hi ng to n office to su pp ly es tim at es fo r SBA . My under st an din g is th a t th e Main e Con gr es sion al D el eg at io n is re qu es ting si m il ar in fo rm at io n from o th er F ed er al ag en cies di re ctly .

Mr. Cohex. "Would you be in a position to project how many of 

the loans would lx* defaulted? Outstanding loans now. How much 

would be defaulted?

Mr. McGillicuddy. Tt is difficult to guess. Congressman, but I would 

guess something on the order of half the loans would be in serious 

jeopardy. One of the things, the SBA. as with most Government agencies, cannot be involved in is pirating of industry from one State to another, except when we have a base closing. When we have a base closing and SBA recognizes the economic issue, declares area businesses eligible for base closing economic injury loans, we can help businesses move 

out of the affected areas.

Mr. Cohex. How many businesses are in jeopardy with the preliminary announcement? In oth er words. I would assume businessmen are having some difficulty deciding whether they should replenish their inventories and exactly what direction they should go as far as expansion or reduction. Is tha t causing a problem right now?
40

Mr. McGillicuddy. We don’t see it yet, Congressman, bu t I thin k 

will see it very shortly. Loan applications have not fallen off, but 

I would expect they will very shortly.

Mr. Coiiex. What will SB A’s reaction be to proposed loans pending at the resolution of saving Lorin g? In other words, suppose we 

liave a number of applications coming from the general community 

to your office. What restrictions are you going to be under now as a 

result of that?

Mr. McGillicuddy. I would be very reluctant to approve a loan 

application for a new business tha t would be heavily dependent upon 

the purchasing power of the people at Loring A ir Force Base.

Mr. E mery. What alternatives do you see realistically possible, if 

the proposed cutback should in fact occur, economic alternatives?

Obviously, this is going to l>e a very, very serious blow. It would 

seem to me the key in such a case would lie to plan for private sector 

jobs. What do you see? What possibilities are there to place at least 

a portion of the job market ?

Mr. McGillicuddy. I don’t think the prospects are very good at all, 

Congressman. I have heard comments comparing the closing of Loring 

to the closing of Dow Air Force Base in Bangor and the base in 

Presque Isle.

The reduction of Loring is of much, much greater magnitude. The 

dollars brought in by Loring are a much higher percentage of the 

total area economy than was the case at Bangor or Presque Isle.

As I said earlier in my testimony, recent efforts of industrial development have not been very successful in Aroostook County. Even if 

the Air Force were to turn the base over to the citizens of Aroostook 

County, I think we would find it very difficult to bring in attractive 

industry.

You are correct, perhaps. Congressman, that we should start planning for that eventuality. But it is such an awesome eventuality that 

most o f us hate to think it might happen. I think most of us would 

rather have an all-out fight to show reasons why the base should be 

maintained at its present level of operation.

Mr. E mery. There is absolutely no question that the delegation 

feels very strongly tha t should lx* the case. We intend to fight tooth 

and nail to see this cutback doesn't occur.

I guess my question is prompted by the overall economics with or 

without the base. Obviously, there is a need for industrialization and 

more jobs.

I guess maybe one of the main problems is that of transportation, 

the fact that the Loring area is so far away from the markets for 

potential products.

With th at question, do you see the possible use of the base for maybe 

export of potato products or importation of other goods?

Mr. McGillicuddy. I should think if we do find that the base must 

lie closed we certainly should explore those possibilities. But I was 

involved in industrial development in Houlton for a couple of years 

in the early seventies.

We explored exporting and we explored increased trade with Canada. I must admit very frankly that our efforts were not particularly 

successful.
41

Mr. E mery. So the conclusion that you draw without question is it 

is absolutely vital this base be maintained.

Mr. McGillictjddy. Absolutely.

Mr; Emery. This is really the only alternative we have.

Mr. McGiijacuddy. I don’t think tha t the Government could compensate for the closing of the base. I don’t think ED A/Fm JIA , SB A, 

all the civilian Federal agencies put together, could compensate for 

the effect of the Air Force reducing the personnel of Loring.

Mr. Emery. Thank you very much.

Senator I Iatiiaway. Thank you very much. Tom.

The next panel consists of Daniel J. Kearney, national vice president, New England Region, American Federation of Government 

Employees, accompanied by Mel Grecnier of the Loring local.

STATEMENT OF DANIEL J . KEARNEY, NATIONAL VICE PRESIDENT,

NEW ENGLAND REGION. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, ACCOMPANIED BY MEL GREENIER, LORING

LOCAL

Mr. Kearney. Hav ing been involved in base closures, such as the 

Boston Naval Shipyard, which you mentioned, your figures arc somewhat low. For instance, in their shop, which may be the only chain 

shop in the world, the. machinery is worth $40 million alone, and tha t 

machinery is lying there idle. The Navy doesn't have a place to obtain 

chain. I would also like to congratulate Congressman Cohen for <he 

O’Neill-Cohen bill. Down in Massachusetts that is what we call it. 

Up here I realize it is the Cohen-O’Neill bill. But, at least, congratulations. I have every hope it will pass the 

Senate and certainly slow down some of the economic impact.

My statement is t hat , and I would like to congratulate all of you 

for being concerned with the employment of Loring Air Force Base 

where we represent some (500 civilians. We much appreciate it.

I have some attachm ents which concern themselves with what is 

happening with the DOD employment in the Northeastern States, 

which includes New Eng land , New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 

and Delaware. I did a study. I am going to enter this in the record.

[The information follows:]

American Federation op Government E mployees,

First District Headquarters.

Dorchester, Mass., May 7 ,191G.

Hon. Edmund S. Muskie.

Hon. William D. Hathaway,

Hon. William S. Cohen,

Hon. David F. Emery.

Gentlemen : Your tho ugh tful concern for the employment of the Loring Air 

Force Base where we represent some 600 civilian employees, is very much a ppre­ ciated. I have some attachme nts which concern themselves with what is happen­ ing to DoD civilian employment in the northeas tern states, which includes New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware. You can see from these charts that while the employment in the north east has been dra stic ally 

cut, the south h as been growing in DoD population.
42

It is, indeed, a tragedy when an Air Force Base like Loring, located in th e 

^northern reaches of Maine where the re is little industry, is orde red closed. The 

'economy of the a rea will never be able to absorb the skills of those who will be 

separated. The Defense Department has a tremendous responsibility to see that 

such locations as Loring, are protecte d as much as possible because they have 

draw n a “skill bank” into the ir act ivity and the people who a re involved do not 

have the type of training which would lend itse lf to the little private industry 

there is in n orth ern Maine.

Yes. DoD will tell you they will attem pt to find jobs for displaced civilians but 

that means if their atte mpt is successful, people will have to pull up stakes, 

disturb their family situations and move, quite possibly to th e south or southwest. 

From my experience, all I have had are promises a nd promises and the Defense 

Department has proceeded to dismantle the e ntire Defense capability of this part 

of the country.

I would like to suggest th at a meeting be held with the Secretary of Defense 

with you gentlemen in attendance, to explain the situ ation and hopefully keep 

Loring at its present level of employment.

Sincerely yours,

Danie l J. K earney, 

National Vice President.

Attachments.

DOD M IL IT AR Y EMP LOY MEN T*

NO RT HE AS TE RN ST AT ES

1960 1965 1970 1974

Total United St ate s. ........... .. .......... ..................— 1, 553, 527 1, 641, 244 1,754 , 545 1,392,521

Co nnec ticu t............. . . .................................................. ..... 6,12 3 3,69 5 4,6 00 4, 528

Dela war e....... ........................................................................ 7,814 7,22 2 6,3 96 5,299

Maine___ ___________________ __________________ 14, 113 12, 246 6,5 00 5, 572

Mas sach uset ts____ . ________ ____ _______________ 35,716 30,4 50 21,617 11,863

New Ham pshire....................... ............................................ 8, 352 7,714 5,45 6 4,764

New J er sey................. ......... . .................................. ............ 41,097 36, 857 52,6 96 26, 233

New Yo rk. . . . ................................. ................................... 40,519 35,097 22,441 18,463

Penns ylvania.................... .................................................... 15,284 15, 593 14,565 9,27 3

Rhode Islan d................................ ............................. ........ 7,398 6, 550 7,07 6 3,664

Verm ont........... ....................... ............................................... 607 287 204 161

To ta l.......................... ........... . ................................... 177, 023 155,711 141,551 89, 820

As p ercent of total U.S. m ilitary employment- (1 1. 4) (9. 5) (8 .1 ) (6 .5 )

• Source : Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Comptroller.

Tota l United States.

Ala bama ...........

Ar ka ns as ......... .

Florida ..............

Geo rgia .............

Ke ntuc ky .........

Lo uisia na .........

Maryland.........

M is si ss ip p i.... 

North Car olin a. 

Sout h Car olin a.

Te nn es se e.__

Virginia______

West V irg in ia ...

To tal.

DOD M IL IT ARY EMP LOY MEN T* 

SO UT HE AS TE RN ST AT ES

As percent of total U.S. military employ men t.

1960 1965 1970 1974

1,553 ,527 1, 641, 244 1,754, 545 1,392,521

22,249 24,016 30,295 23,367

9,172 9, 898 8,834 9,649

56,248 69, 969 76,276 63,675

69,147 93,980 76,533 47,188

46, 739 48,901 43,804 45,585

20,371 34,334 33,803 26,955

37 ,56 7 38, 246 44,522 30,264

22,083 21,302 19, 863 19,602

72 ,37 8 86,815 104,018 93,141

46,971 50,197 52,745 49, 289

17,288 18,428 14,912 11,100

52,176 59, 604 59, 668 52,195

708 528 349 500

473,097 556,218 565,6 22 472,510

(S 0- 5) (3 3.9 ) (3 2 .2 ) (3 3. 9)

Sou rce : Office of the Assistant Secretary of De fense for Comptroller.
43

DOD CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT 

NORTHEASTERN vs SOUTHEASTERN

SOUTHEAST ERN STATES

----------------------------------—

1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974

Ala ba m a.............................

Arkan sa s............................

F lo rid a .............................

Ge orgia................................

K e n tu c k y .. .......................

Lou isiana .......... .................

M ary la nd............................

M is siss ip pi.........................

No rth Car olina....... ..........

Sou th Carolina..................

Tenn ess ee ....... .................

V irg in ia -------------------------

West V irgin ia ....................

......... 35 ,7 30

......... 3,11 0

23, 589 

. . . 31 ,954

. . . 11 ,302

5,88 4 

. . . 22 ,697

5,565

......... 9,994

. . 14,295

........... 6,643

. 44 ,388

......... 1,0 53

35, 384

4,4 04

24 ,1 74 

34 ,160 

12 ,215 

7,4 17 

t 24 ,187 

5,74 7 

10 ,183 

15, 313

6,637 

46, 636 

863

33 ,1 47

4,126

24, 475 

32, 393 

11, 548 

6,63 8 

» 25 ,152 

5,900 

10 ,133 

14,722 

6,23 9 

44, 273 

982

31,986

4,44 5

30, 301 

43, 437 

17 ,027 

7,992 

28 ,182 

7,3 49 

13, 335 

18 ,676 

7,153 

52, 337

1,160

26, 040

4,216

32, 468 

42 ,612 

16, 658 

7,7 02 

29 ,6 75

7,184 

14 ,035 

19, 302 

7,272 

53, 350

1,1 05

23 ,492

4,6 7 6

29, 347 

38 ,2 23 

15,434 

7,4 45 

26, 705 

7,859 

13,216 

18,642 

7,420 

48, 493 

1,4 47

25, 200

4,40 0

28, 300 

37 ,100

15.900

7,70 0

26 .900

8, 500

13 .900 

17,800

7.500

49, 200

1.5 00

25,35 7

4,94 8

30, 226 

35 ,296 

16 ,264 

8,27 6 

23 ,795 

9,70 4 

14, 333 

18, 305 

8, 269 

51 ,130 

1, 533

T o ta l....................... ......... 21 6,204 227, 320 219, 728 263, 380 261,619 24 2,39 9 24 3,900 247, 436

> Es tim ated .
44

DOD CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT 

NORTHEASTERN STATES

to

ISGO — 194,771 

1962 — 198,702 

1964 — 184,147’ 

1966 — 179,330 

1968 — I 78,459 

1970 — 161, 526 

1972 — 155,586 

1974 — 142,596

k

8

o

I

Connecticut____

De law are______

Ma ine.................

Ma ssa chusetts..

New Hampshire.

New Je rs ey .___

New Yo rk............

Pen nsy lvan ia...

Rhode Is la n d .. .

Vermont...............

T o ta l....

DOD CIV IL IA N EMPLOYMENT 

NORTH EAS TER N STATES

I96 0 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974

2, 494 2,76 1 2,9 83 3,663 4,029 4, 511 3,08 8 3,25 4

1,249 1,2 42 1,25 8 1,4 23 1,659 1,828 1,9 00 2,10 5

11,574 11,13 7 9, 087 10,037 10,13 2 8, 779 7,60 0 8,16 7

25, 400 26, 495 23, 310 22 ,652 21 ,688 19, 334 18, 700 12. 859

679 960 994 971 877 1, 196 1,3 00 1,396

26, 434 26,65 1 24, 674 26, 648 29, 691 27, 672 26 ,300 25, 867

51,678 52 ,267 47,011 32,984 30, 758 26, 002 25 ,400 24, 415

66,741 68, 935 66, 032 71,301 69, 268 62,13 1 60, 000 57,51 3

8,44 0 i 8,194 i 8, 733 9,58 6 10 ,258 9,60 1 10, 8 00 6, 499

82 60 65 65 99 472 500 521

194,771 19 8,702 18 4,14 7 179,3 30 178,4 59 161,526 155,588 142 ,59 6

■ Estimated.

Mr. K earny. Civ ilia n emplo ym ent in South eas tern States in 1960 

was 216,000—there are 10 Sta tes na med h ere—to 247,000 in 1974; while 

the poor No rth east, in the 10 St ates in the No rth east tie r, wen t from 

194,000 down to 142,000—and it has gone even fu rthe r. T hat doesn't 

reflect the Bos ton Navy Yard an d some o f the o ther in sta llatio ns.

You can see wh at has been ha pp en ing in the No rth east. I t seems 

the clima te is bette r fo r the m ili ta ry in the So uth —the go lf courses 

are be tte r. Th e arr angeme nts an d lux uri es of the vario us bases must 

at tr ac t the m because th ei r decisions have been to move south.

Fo r instan ce, they pulle d th e fleet out of the Newport Na val Base 

in Rhode Isl and. T hat fleet o f ships they pu lle d out ha sn ’t go t a place 

in No rfo lk to tie up at the pier. You can see how ha sty the y were 

when they reduced the em plo ym ent there.
45

I don’t know how fa r this is going to go. how successful it is going 

to be. But we certainly hope tha t your efforts will be recognized. I 

know, the congressional delegation from Maine is solid on it. I know 

they will work hard on it. They certainly have a lot of influence. I 

would like to say thank you very much.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you. Mel?

STATEMENT OF MEL GPvEENIER, LORING- LOCAL, AMERICAN 

FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

Mr. Greenier. I am president of local 2943. We represent roughly 

GOO civilians at Loring. But what is bothering us is they haven’t conic 

out to say in any way which people they are going to take as far as.on 

this 70 percent. Are they going to keep cooks or keep janitors? Who 

are they going to keep?

I am a tradesman. I have been there for 20 years. I work in power 

production. So the question has always come up to me, whose job 

is going to stay and whose job is going to go?

Senator H athaway. We don’t know tha t, either. That is one of the 

questions we have asked the Air Force. As soon as we do hear from 

them, you will know’ about it.

Air. Greenier. So that is about the comments I have been told.

Mr. Kearney. L et’s hope very much none of the jobs go. That is 

what we have to hope for today. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thanks to both of you.

The next witness is Jim Barresi, Northern Maine Regional Planning Commission.

STATEMENT OF JAMES A. BARRESI, EX ECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHERN MAINE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

Mr. Barresi. Good morning, Senator Hathaway, Congressmen 

Cohen and Emery. It is a pleasure to have l>een invited to be here this 

morning. I am going to discombobulate part of my presentation in an 

effort to be more brief and not recidivous and repeat other things 

people have said, and because of the variety of testimony that you have 

already heard here today.

The Regional Planning Commission would like to make the basic 

statement tha t the people in northern Maine do not want to lose this 

military installation now or ever.

Second, the regional economics have been changed because of the 

presence of the military in our region, since the forties, from a basic 

economy of forestry and agriculture, to a basic economy of forestry, 

agriculture, and military installation support.

Whole series of spinoff businesses have been developed to support 

the military installation segment of this triple-economic foundation. 

New skills, methods of business operation, and types of financing have 

had to grow to service this foundation. Extensive financing, refinancing, and growth has taken place in the accomplishment of this total 

regional effort.

The loss of one-third of our economic foundation, this foundation 

which feeds our children, would surely destroy 35 years efforts th at 

have been pu t forth by the people of northern Maine to build such an 

infrastructure.

73 -4 44— 71
46

In addition, the sociological impacts would be devastating. People 

cannot, live with a group such as the Air Force base community for 

30 years or more without being sociologically married in sp irit to such 

a group.

The aforementioned fact is hea rtfe lt and of real concern to the 

people of north ern Maine, and to the Northern Maine Regional Pla nning Commission these facts bring us to our last set of beliefs.

What would we do with the facility if, in fact, we were to lose the 

Air Force? Many people have said we would survive, and we agree. 

But many question today i f it would level our economic stability and 

base.

It is our belief t hat the crippling effect would have a deeper depth 

than anyone in this auditorium could believe. The redevelopment of 

the Presque Isle A ir Force Base is often touted as a harbinger of what 

would happen at Loring.

We disagree, though such a development could take place at Loring 

which would take many, many more years than it did at Presque Isle 

or Bangor for the following reasons:

1. The national economy at the time of the Presque Isle redevelopment was in a position of tremendous growth, which it is not today.

2. Maine did not have a corporate income tax, and property taxes 

were at a medium effort in comparison to State corporate income taxes 

being in place today and the prop erty tax effort being maximum today.

3. The Presque Isle installation was of a size tha t a single community could absorb it and pay for its proper upkeep with its local 

taxes until such time that the facility could be marketed properly.

Loring is so large that there is great doubt that any single community could take over the facility, mothball for an extended period 

of time those facilities that could not be quickly marketed, and maintain sewer, water, and electrical services for an extended period of 

time w ithout massive State and Federal assistance.

So I guess what we are talking about is a completely different kettle 

of potatoes than what the case was in the closing of the Presque Isle 

Air Force Base.

We must maintain this installation, for if we do not, the agony in 

trying to maintain, recoup, and expand the economic ability to live 

of our people would be like a slow-growing cancer tha t gnaws away 

at your innards, robbing you of life 1 inch at a time.

I submit to you that there is no lack of interest of local people, 

nor a lack of will to combat those who w ould see this installation taken 

from us.

The Regional Planning Commission pledges its continued assistance 

to those who are c arrying the ball in this effort: the save Loring committee, the congressional delegation and the Research Institute at the 

University of Maine. We urge the best effort possible as a group.

That is the Commission’s statement. But I would like to follow’ it 

with a personal observation. I have heard this morning from the delegation a few questions that would lead me to think or understand th at 

you gentlemen would like to know what we see as a scenario of events 

that would take place on the demise or the curtailment of the installation here a t Loring.

I would say to you tha t economic development has not been as unsuccessful as some think it may have been in the past 20 years. You
47

know that since 1960, approximately seven major potato processing 

installations have been opened in this county. They have employed 

over 4,000 souls.

The most recent one, the French company at Washburn, Maine, 

is employing today nearly 200. With great hope an d expectation, we 

will continue to help them and they will employ up to 400 ultimately.

I think that you must understand that the Economic Development 

Administration, which we service through an economic development 

district through the Northern Maine Regional Planning Commission, 

has pu t into the economic lifeblood of Aroostook County in loans, 

economic development park projects, $25 million since 1965 when the 

Economic Development Act of 1965 was passed by the Congress of 

the United States. That is no small amount of money.

Certainly they have had thei r failures. They took a beating for $12.5 

million at Easton. But people are working very hard on the Easton 

sugar beet plant. We think t ha t $12.5 million investment in the people 

of northern Maine may yet prove to be a very, very sound Federal 

investment in a group of fine people.

We see a scenario of Loring going something like this : The base 

closing; Government, Mr. Levesque’s office, declaring this area an 

area of sudden rise in unemployment: the SBA. the EDA, the FHA , 

all of these people going in here practically with disaster-type industrial development money—all of these things being put to bear.

We say to you gentlemen it will cost you more in what you are going 

to have to do afterwards than what it would cost to keep it open.

What may be economic f or the Department of Defense—and I, like 

you, must trust their figures—could in fact be quite uneconomic for 

the Government.

After all, is our Government now so big that the left hand cannot 

understand what the right hand is doing, much less what it might cost 

them ?

I would like to finish on this note. We have heard some talk about 

the bureaucracy—all bad. I woidd like to say this. Bureaucracy is no 

different than the military, no different than private business. There 

are good businessmen and poor ones. There are good people in the 

military and poor ones. There are good Senators and Representatives 

and poor ones. And there are good bureaucrats and poor ones.

I thin k our effort should be directed to be working with the good 

ones and getting the bang out of our buck, counting on the faith and 

the promise of our people and their ability to re coup; but never, never 

deserting them.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Senator Hathaway. Tha nk you for you r statement, and thank you 

also for the work that you and the Plan ning Commission have done 

over th e years for the economic expansion of the county. I hope you 

continue the good work.

I might inject a note of optimism at this time by pointing out to 

you the fact tha t the Kitte ry Base was slated for closing back in 1965 

and was supposed to be phased out by 1970, and it is doing more business now than it has ever done before in its lifetime. "We kept it open, 

and we are hoping we can do the same thing for Loring.
48

Mi’:-Barewu. I h ad to chu ckle a t Mr. Leve sque ’s comments about the 

ha rb or in g of crim inals. I ha d a fellow fro m the En vironm en tal Pr otec tio n Agency who said th at 1 mu st be ha rbor ing the m all at my 

camp now, so people at Cas well, we have tak en over fo r you.

Se na tor Hathaway. I th in k the cafeter ia is rea dy to serve lunch, 

so we will be in recess un til 1 p.m.

[W hereu pon, at 12 :20 p .m., the subcomm ittee was recessed, to reconvene at 1 p.m. this same da y.]

AFT ER RECESS

[The subcomm ittee reconvened at 1 p.m.. Se nator W illiam D. H at hawa y pre sid ing .]

Se na tor H athaway. We would like to get sta rte d on ou r witnesses 

for th is aftern oon.

Our next panel is M artin K ra ut er , Tow n Manager of Lim estone ; 

Daniel Booth by, Su pe rin tend en t of Schools, Lim estone; Richard 

McKean, Lim esto ne Ch am ber of Com merce; Thom as Cy r, Cy r's 

Dep artm en t Store: Mel She lby , and Da vid Kilmer.

STA TEM ENTS OF MA RT IN KR AU TER, TOWN MAN AGER OF LIM ESTONE; DANIE L BOOTHBY, SUPERINT EN DE NT OF SCHOOLS; LIM ESTONE; RIC HARD McKEA N, LIMESTONE CH AMBER OF COMMERCE;

THOMAS CYR, CY RS DEPARTME NT STORE

Mr. K rauter. Se na tor Hatha way , my name is M artin Krauter. I 

am tow n ma nager of Lim estone a nd also a member of th e Save L oring 

Com mittee. I realize th at a gr ea t deal of wh at I could be say ing is 

rep eti tio us, so I will be relativ ely bri ef.

F ir st I would like to expre ss the appre cia tio n of the citizens of 

Lim estone fo r the tim e and effort expend ed and the interest shown 

by each of you in th is e ntire affair.

I would like to fu rthe r exten d th at appreciat ion t o each ind ividual 

who is tak in g th ei r time to ap pe ar here today. T th in k the su pp ort and 

the com mu nity of effort shown in the face of t his proposed can did ate 

act ion to be no thing s hort of amazing.

In m y few s ho rt y ears o f inv olvement with local g overn me nt, I have 

nev er kno wn or h ear d of the coo per ation and ded ication as shown by 

the cities a nd towns t ha t are involved in th is project. F or an exam ple, 

Lim estone held a special tow n me eting to ap pr op riate fund s t o defra y 

the expenses o f the Save L or in g Com mittee. In a form o f gov ernment 

th at ha s been known in th is St ate to artme fo r an ho ur over the dog 

con stable’s salary, the ap pr op riatio n fm* the Sav e Lo ring effort was 

appro ved by the Lim esto ne tow n me eting wi thin 10 minutes —alm ost 

unanimously. By almost un anim ously 1 mea n in the or de r of some 

80 to 1.

Th e rea sonin g un de rly ing th is ded ication I believe can be traced 

to the en ormity o f the im pact such an action wou ld hav e, not only on 

the c om mu nity but on Aro osto ok Co unty an d the State of Maine.

Th ere is no doubt th at the town of L ime ston e will surviv e. As it is 

pointed out to me by a few of ou r local citiz ens, the tow n was here , 

alive and well, b efore Lo rin g, an d will be here af te r it is gone.
49

The only question remaining is what is going to lx? the extent of 

damage to those towns, schools, businesses, and individuals tha t have 

grown to depend on Loring over the last 30 years ? Those in my age 

bracket cannot remember a time when Loring was not a part of the 

community.

The full economic impact of such a cutback is being thoroughly 

analyzed by Professor Kenneth Hayes and the Social Science Research 

Institute, and their preliminary findings have been presented to you 

today.

The overall impact is staggering in terms of total dollars and total 

effect. The impact to the town of Limestone is perhaps not so impressive when taken as a gross figure. So I would like to present a few 

of the effects as they are viewed by a small community as percentages 

of our totals.

The most obvious effect within the community will be to the school 

system. Mr. Dan Boothby, the superintendent of schools, will address 

this area, so for my purposes I will ask only that you keep in mind 

that some 75 to 85 school personnel will no longer be needed by the 

system.

There are some 140 Limestone residents who are civil service employees at Loring. If the percentages run true, approximately 100 of 

these people will no longer be needed. These are positions with an annual salary averaging near $10,000. 

The vast majority of these people were born and brought up in this 

area, with every intention, before March 11, of remaining here.

Now. what are. their alternatives? To compete for civil service positions at other military installations in Alabama or Mississippi or 

California? You will note I did not offer a choice closer to home. At 

the rate we are going, it appears that vefy soon there will be no military installations in New England of any description.

Or is the ir choice to be to find employment again in their hometown? Well, gentlemen, they might as well forget tha t possibility 

because aside from the potato industry and Loring Air Force Base, 

there are no industries in Limestone. Agriculture might possibly 

absorb a very few of these workers: but even if it does, keep in mind 

they will be no more than entry level positions, paying at or below 

poverty level wages.

The third alternative and the most likely for many of these civilians 

will be unemployment compensation—unemployment compensation, 

food stamps and welfare. I would hope the cost to every level of government of these forms of relief will lie Balanced against the savings 

expected by the Air Force.

When the proposed candidate action was announced, mv office did 

a quick survev of local businesses to determine the impact on our 

community. While it is nowhere near as complete as tha t being conducted by the SSR I. it did bring out several important points.

Speaking Strictly off the top of their heads, the 20 local businesses 

questioned estimated a loss of military-connected business in the area 

of $ l3

/i million.

While this may not seem tha t staggering to those dealing on the 

national level, to the local businessman that represents a percentage 

range between 20 and 97 percent of his business, with an average loss 

of some 45 percent.
50

Fi ve of those questioned fe lt the y would be forced to close; and 

two indica ted they would face imme dia te bank ruptcy. Th ey also indic ated a cutbac k in th eir wo rk forc e of some 25 employees.

Alth ou gh 1 am fa r from an expert in th is field, it ap pe ars to me 

th at take n wi th the red uction of civ il service employees, school pe rsonnel, an d military employees, th at the unem plo ym ent percen tages 

in Lim esto ne will rise from the orde r of 12 perc ent to prob ably better 

th an 30 percen t. Tha t is o nly an e stim ate on my pa rt, an d I am not an 

expert.

The ne xt greates t impac t wo uld be felt by the rea l est ate ma rke t. 

A quick survey of the rental marke t ind ica ted 102 un its cu rre ntly 

ren ted to military fam ilies. Thi s rep res ents ove r hal f of the units 

available w ith in the com munity .

One land lord has ind ica ted th at he, too, face s b an krup tcy. An oth er 

will retre nc h by bulldozing the majo rity of his ap artm en t building s 

to avoid th e taxes and ma intenance on em pty building s.

Th e sale of homes has alread y been affected. W hil e the normal 

numb er of homes is rea ch ing the ma rke t, very few sale s are being 

made due to the con fusion an d un certa inty of the job ma rket.

Th e town of Lim estone was schedu led fo r tax reevalua tion this 

ye ar b ut wisely p ostpon ed the reap pr aisa l u ntil the situation stabilizes, 

llow do you make ap praisals in a marke t with all sellers a nd no buy ­

ers? I wou ld pose the qu estion as to the num ber of buil ding s and businesses th at the Fed eral (io vernme nt will acquire th ro ug h de fau lt on 

F II A , SB A, VA. and other type s of Federal Ioans should this reduction become a fact.

Loc al gov ern me nt would also feel a severe impac t. A dir ect loss 

wou ld be of S tate and Fe de ral reve nue s ha rin g dollars. Bo th of these 

sources of revenue are based lar gely on population . A t such time as 

the St ate and Federal Go vernme nts ad just th eir form ula s to reflect 

the loss of military an d th ei r dep end ents. Lim estone will be faced 

with a combined loss of ap prox im ate ly $100,000 in revenu e sharing 

dollars.

Bas ed on ou r prese nt budget, this wou ld rep resent an imm ediate 

increase in the local pr op erty tax rate of 10 mils, an increase of more 

th an 30 perce nt to the hom eow ner and businessman.

In directly, the mun icipality will face a b udg et red uction, necessitating a layoff of em ployees, with a red uction of serv ices an d, at the same 

tim e, facing increased we lfare costs, an incre ased perce nta ge o f uncollectable taxes, and a gen era l decrease o f all other revenues.

On a rel ative basis, the small com munity of Lime stone will face 

th e gr ea test imp act of any in Aro osto ok Co un ty; an d ye t t he absolute 

im pact makes the proposed act ion a matter of concern to all o f Aro ostoo k C ounty and the entir e S ta te of Ma ine.

I feel t h at if the Congress of the U nited S tates and the De partm ent 

of Defense have any com mitment w hatsoever to th e concep t o f enviro nme nta l an d economic im pact, th at this pro posal will no t become a 

reality . Tha nk you.

Se na tor Hathaway. Tha nk you very much.

Mr. Boothby?
51

STATEMENT OF DANIEL BOOTHBY. SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, 

LIMESTONE. MAINE

Mr. Boothby. Senator Hathaway, members of the delegation, my 

name is Daniel Boothby. I am superintendent of schools in Limestone, 

Maine.

On behalf of the Limestone School Department, I want to thank 

the delegation for the opportunity to lx* heard on this proposed reduction of personnel at Loring Air Force Base.

Most assuredly. 1 do not have the knowledge necessary to actively 

evaluate the military decisions as related to the strategic importance 

of this air base.

However, I can assure you that the proposal that has been published 

by the Air Force lias already caused inestimable damage to our school 

system.

Ten years ago when I assumed this position I found th at Limestone 

had staff, building, and curriculum problems. In short, we were not 

prepared to provide the comprehensive programs tha t Air Force 

dependents had received in other parts of the country.

Senator Hathaway, when you were on the Hill, I am sure you received complaints which were forwarded back through to us regarding failures in this system. A calculated growth program was 

instituted that has resulted in educational opportunities for our 

students at least equal of any to be found in the military.

Our curriculum has been vastly expanded. We now have the buildings to house our programs, and our staff has developed the pride and 

confidence in our system that is so necess'ary for the development of 

the school. We are all very pleased with the program th at we are presently offering. We still have our curriculum and our building, hut 

the morale of our staff has been decimated by the uncertainty that the 

proposed reduction at Loring has created.

Many of our staff members a re actively seeking employment elsewhere. Unfortunately, only our most able staff members will succeed 

in finding new positions.

No matter what happens, as far as Loring is concerned, our system 

will suffer losses that we can ill afford. If the reduction at Loring 

occurs as presented. I project the following:

Our present student population of 2,015 students will decrease to 

1.028. W ithin the above numbers, our so-called A students will drop 

from 1,250 to 300. O ur school utilization will drop from four presently—this closes the Ha rrison Building, which is not fully employed 

at the present time—to two, or possibly one. Our staff positions from 

175 tha t we presently have on our payrolls to 85. Our total school 

budget from $2,037,846 to $900,000.

Included in the above are staff salaries, which presently are $1,492,- 

682. to $725,016. Our curriculum would return to a skeleton college 

preparaton’ orientation. Quality educational opportunities that are 

presently available to all of our students would no longer exist. The 

proposed reduction of personnel at Loring Air Force Base has already 

damaged our staff and will, if implemented, decimate our entire school 

system.
52

Planning for as short a period as 1 year is difficult. We are having 

a town meeting tonight, and we are supposed to have a budget, and 

we do have one, but it has to Ik* based on the assumption tha t we have 

the entire student body to educate for next year. So this is being 

presented on that basis tonight.

There are many, many small areas that do not come into focus, 

such as the student handbook or the student yearbook. The yearbook 

in itself is about a $15,000 endeavor which is self-supporting. But if 

we set this up for 500 or more yearbooks and we end up with selling 

only 200, then the school system has to lx* ready to absorb maybe a 

$5,000 deficit.

The entire system is wrought with this type of problem. In short, 

we are in trouble. We need your help, and most assuredly, any help 

that is forthcoming will be appreciated.

Thank you for the opportunity of being heard.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much. Mr. Boothby.

Are other members of the Limestone panel here? Mr. Richard 

McKean; Tom Cyr? Why don't you come up to the table now.

We also have Mel Shelby and David Kilmer who should be up 

at the witness table.

Mr. Kratjter. T don't think they will be here today.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD McKEAN, LIMESTONE CHAMBER OF 

COMMERCE

Mr. McKean. Senator Hathaway, members of the delegation, first 

of all. I would like to welcome all of you here on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, of Limestone, and we do appreciate the time and 

effort you are putting into this. Believe me, we need all the help we 

can get.

I could probably come up with a lot of statistics, and T am also very 

certain that these same statistics are going to be provided in the impact 

studies, of which there are many of them being prepared, by the Air 

Force and also by members of the Save Loring Committee.

I am going to save the statistics because you can get bored with 

them. Simply stated, an 83-percent reduction at Loring would create 

an economic chaos in this community. This has all been pointed out. 

and T thin k real well, by people who have come before me. I would 

like to dig a little deeper, iff may. sir.

When L oring was commissioned in 1040. from the infonnation that 

T can gather from old records and talkin g with some of the older 

residents in the community, we had approximately 240 good production farm s in the area.

The base opened up, and of course, the lure of good pay and secure 

positions lured a lot of fanners away from the farm and onto the 

base. T don’t blame them, because farming is a hard life.

Right now from the infon natio n I can gather. I understand that 

we could count approximately 100 farms in the same area.

What we are saying is we are going to reduce the size of the base by 

83 percent. We are going to take a lot of these people, who were on 

farms before and we are going to say, “You go back to the farm.’’
53

That is all easier said than done. Back when he got out of the 

farming business to get into a high-paying job, the cost of a Harvester 

would have been approximately $14,000, possibly $20,000 for the best. 

He is lucky right now if he can touch one for $40,000.

The wages are good; yes, sir. But they are not so good he could save 

enough money where he could go back into the farm ing area. This is 

going to create a liability to the Government—no doubt in my mind 

about that.

The land which he farmed has been subdivided in most instances. 

We have homes on the land, and these homes were created to take up 

the slack of housing which the base created. What do we do with this ( 

What do we do with the empty homes? Wha t do we do with the land 

which has been subdivided ?

('an he go back and purchase the land back at the price he got for 

it ? I don’t think so. This is another thing to thin k about. W hat do we 

do with the land area which is going to be quite a bit ? He can't afford 

to put it back to the plow.

They mentioned before, Mr. Krauter did. there were five businesses 

involved th at were closing. I am well aware of it. I am one of them. 

So I have a personal standpoint in this also, you see.

But my case is not unique in Limestone, in this surrounding area, 

also Caribou. 1 am a retired military man. I retired here in 1972 from 

Loring. I retired mainly because of the base and the facilities that it 

has to offer here—as did about 400 other people that I know of.

I bought a small business, which, if the base goes, it will go, too. 

Now what happens? If I pull up stakes and leave, who is going to pay 

for it ? I t is going to have to be me. If I lose my business, I won't have 

the money to do that, either.

The reason I point this out is I am not the only one tha t is in this 

predicament. There are a lot of us.

What then do the Maine jM'ople do who will be directly affected ? 

Are they going to pull up and leave ? And where are they going to pull 

up and leave to? Where are they going to get the funds that will be 

required to go back into another business ?

Would it be feasible to go into a business with an 83-percent reduction on base ? I don’t think so. It may be feasible if they don’t leave us 

in limbo.

In other words, you are talking about 83 percent. You are taking that 

much of our income away. But you are keeping the land area. You are 

keeping the buildings.

What can we do with it ? Nothing. We can't say we are going to tax it 

because it belongs to the Federal Government. So we have lost funds 

there, which Mr. Krauter pointed out.

We can’t say, “All righ t, all of you who are in the area, go find a 

job in the area.” Jobs aren't there to be found. They are not going to be 

here. So what are we going to do ?

I have a proposal which may or may not work. Sometimes in the 

football game, as any other game, a good offense is better than a defense. This base is strategically located. I f it isn't, then somebody has 

l>een lying to us since 1946. and that is a long time to be prone to a lie, 

bel ieve me.
54

T d on't believe that there has been any c han ge in the lead tim e th at it 

would tak e ou r crews on Lo rin g to g o to a poten tial targ et. I believe 

the y still have the lead time—bein g on the base. I am well aw are of 

the past O R I an d the M-set and othe r tes t results they hav e ha d on 

base.

As long as I have been in this are a and as long as T was asso ciated 

with Lo rin g Air Force Base, T do n’t know of any tim e whe n their 

capabil ity to resp ond to an em ergency has dr opped .

So th ere is a question in my m ind : Wh y? W hy all of a su dden do you 

wan t to tak e a strate gic base? W hy do you want to tak e a base th at 

passe s just alxm t e very insp ection th at comes along ? Why do you want 

to pull aw ay fro m us? Are we not using ma nned bom bers ? I don’t 

think so.

When Se na tor Muskie was h ere, he tol d us th e t riad system was still 

a viable syste m.

Lo rin g, as fa r as we are concern ed, has very lit tle environme nta l 

prob lem. W e don't have the housin g s itu ate d so close to th e bas e where 

the ai rc ra ft la nd in g and taki ng off ap pe ar to be a hazard. As long as T 

have been here. T know of only three m ajor aircr af t accidents. None of 

them involve d civilian facilities. We had a KC-135 th at w ent off t he 

runway. We had a B-52 t ha t cra she d throug h du rin g a n O RI. An d we 

had one th at burned on the pa d on the base. Ag ain rem ember, no 

civ ilia n fac ilities .

We ha d no civ ilia n landowner th at said. “Look what you d id to my 

land. I am going to sue you fo r ev erything you have got.”

We do n’t have those problems here. As fa r as ai r po llu tio n, the 

prev ailin g winds in this area are to the east. An d to the east of here. 

T do n’t believe ai rc ra ft would pose any prob lems. T am not an expert 

in this area, bu t just looking at the ma ps as an ave rag e citizen would 

do.

So T s ubmi t t o you. not only wou ld I tr y to save L or ing fro m reduction by 83 pe rce nt, but I Ixdieve that I w ould go all o ut. con sidering all 

of the s tud ies th at ha ve been made o n the environme nta l im pact in t his 

are a, I belie ve T would go all out fo r the B -l prog ram righ t here at 

Loring. T ca n’t th ink of a finer in sta lla tio n fo rt heB -1 .

How ma ny bases do you have aw ay from a com pacted are a? Not 

man y. And then? are not many situ ated like this one where you d on’t 

hav e the env ironm ental problems th at you have alo ng th e east coast. 

So w hy not p ush for the B -l here ? T here is no finer place fo r it. T ha nk 

you very mu ch fo r your tim e.

Se na tor H athaway. Th an k von.

Mr. Cy r?

STATEMENT OF THOMAS CYR, CYR'S DEPARTMENT STORE

Mr. Cyr. Mr. Ch airma n, othe r me mix'rs of the delega tion, as you 

drove into tow n tod ay, you pr ob ab ly notice d a hig hw ay s ign on Route 

89 which r eads as follows : “’Welcome to Lime stone, home of th e w orld’s 

best potato es, la rge st bombers, fas te st figh ters , a nd m ighties t ta nk ers.”

Ou r concern , ge ntle men , is how it will read a y ear o r two fr om now.

Let’s t ra ce first wha t has happ ened to the economy in Lim esto ne in 

the las t 30 yea rs. Pri or to Lo rin g, th is town was geared pr im ar ily to 

ag ric ult ure. In fac t. Lim esto ne ba d alxmt 140 ind ivi dual farm opera ­

tio ns which employed h undreds of w ork ers year -round.
55

Today Limestone's farmers total 30; yet they till the same number 

of acres but with only about 10 percent as much labor.

We had 25 shipping operations down the tracks 30 years ago. Today 

we have three. We had three starch factories. Today we have none. 

And no new industries have come in since.

Then came Loring and jobs were created and businesses were started 

and expanded because of Loring. Central Aroostook stands today 

precariously on a liA-leg economy. It has relied on Loring and on 

farming. Other industry simply has not come in to any g reat extent.

That leaves us with nowhere to turn if we lose Loring. There is 

simply nothing to take up the slack. Once the total spin-off effect 

is felt, like a loss of 4,000 Loring jobs, the loss of 70 school personnel, 

the resulting loss of other jobs such as retail jobs, the erosion of the 

tax base, the disruption of our schools, and the loss in pro perty values, 

the personal hardships that will result, then I th ink the word “devastating” is not too strong a word to describe the loss of Loring.

It would be. my guess tha t nowhere in the entire United States does 

a military installation have such a profound effect on the economy of 

the surrounding communities.

If underneath us someone is really looking fo r a severe impact, then 

I suggest they will find it right here in central Aroostook; because if 

today we stand shakily on iy 2

 legs and somebody is tryi ng to take 

one whole leg away from us, then what will it be like next year?

So I ask you, how should th at highway sign read a year from now ? 

IIow is this for a try : “Welcome to Limestone, home of the world's 

best potatoes, the State’s highest unemployment rate, the greatest 

number of unoccupied buildings, and the highest tax mil rate in the 

State of Maine.”

Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF DAVID KH ME R

Mr. Kilmer. Senator Hathaway, and others, mv name is David 

Kilmer. I am an apartment house owner here in the town of Limestone.

It is estimated 95 percent of all the apartments in Limestone are 

rented to military personnel and the ir families. The results of a cutback at Loring would obviously resu lt in the emptying of these ap art ­

ments and possible default by the apartment-house owner.

I concur with the testimony that has been previously given here, 

and I support it. There is one point that I would like to make, and 

that is the senior citizens.

If the proposed cutback does take place, the. burden of the property 

taxes will be passed—it is my feeling—to the senior citizens and the 

farmers; with possible reduction of services, true, but with inflationary 

trends that property taxes will probably remain at about the same 

level.

So I would ask you to consider the senior citizens very seriously in 

this aspect. Than k you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much.

I want to thank all of the members of the panel for very helpful 

testimony.

Senator Hathaway. In our next group is Terry St. Peter, Caribou 

city manager, and Bill Johnson, Caribou Chamber of Commerce.
56

STATEMENTS OF TERRY ST. PET ER. CARIBOU CITY MANAGER, AND 

BILL JOHNSON, CARIBOU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Mr. St. P eter. Sen ato r H atha way , Congres smen Coh en and E me ry, 

I am Te rry St. Pe ter . I am city ma nager of Caribou.

I wish to than k you fo r holding this hearing here tod ay, although 

I must say th at I fran kl y wou ld pr efer the need fo r such a he ari ng 

di dn ’t exist.

Th e mere fact th at it ha s been ann ounced th at Lor in g A ir For ce 

Base is a prop osed ca nd idate fo r reduct ion has s ent tre mo rs th ro ug hou t th e com munity of Carib ou, and has alr eady cau sed an economic 

distur bance. Sho uld the base actua lly be reduced as prop osed, the re 

would, of course, be severe adv erse consequences t o the centr al Ar oostook area.

I am una ble tod ay to present very m uch ha rd d ata on wh at effect the 

propose d reduction of Lor in g would have on Caribou. As y ou know, 

an economic impac t stud y is underway, so the final doc umentatio n 

is no t ava ilable at th is tim e. There are, howe ver, some po ints of inform ation 1 would like to pres ent to you.

Th e city of Caribo u has a population of 11.102 people, according 

to a U.S . Census Bu rea u estim ate fo r 1973. As the c losest comm ercial 

an d retail com munity to Lo rin g, the proposed red uction of this base, 

which h as a listed po pu lat ion o f about 11,000 people, wou ld obivously 

have sub stantial adverse effect to the cit y of Caribou.

Th ere are a num ber of busin esses whose very existence depends on 

the c ontinued vitality of L or in g Air For ce Base. T he resu lta nt failuiv 

of these businesses would ad d fu rthe r to the d ecline of em ployment to 

wh at the layoff's at L oring i tse lf w ould cause.

'fhe increase in unem plo ym ent would cause ot he r local concerns 

to have to reduce th ei r size and employme nt. Th is ag ain would have 

a fu rt her damp ening effect on the economy, a sp iralin g pa tte rn 

down wa rd.

Gen tlem en, the are a is alread y experienci ng an above-average unem plo ym ent rate. 'File u nemp loy me nt figures for Marc h, the last time 

for wliich th e figure is av ailable, is 12.7 perc ent in th e ce ntral Aroosto ok 

County area.

Alth ou gh there are some very pos itive and encoura gin g thi ng s 

ta ki ng place in Caribo u, the are a does experience some lon gtime negative co nditio ns and a red uction o f L oring as propo sed would exacerbate 

the a lre ad y disap po intin g co nditio ns.

I m ight also note th at th e we lfare burde n to the city of Car ibou 

alone, pu ttin g aside any Sta te w elf are p rog ram s, by the bes t estim ate 

I am able to come up w ith is 10 to 11 perce nt.

As cit y ma nag er, I am. of co urse, concerned about tax es in t he commun ity . in add itio n to the general economic welfar e of p eop le in the 

area. W hil e again the com plete da ta is not in. let me share with you 

some o f the info rm ati on we do have.

A quick check of ou r tax record s shows th at we have 110 mobile 

hom es owned by m ili tary people. Wh ile these are cu rre ntly tax 

exe mp t—a nd that is the reason we were able to come up with a figure 

so quick ly—the figure does suggest two thin gs.
57

One, the proposed reduction would mean the definite loss o f 110 

families in Caribou who undoubtedly do much of their shopping and 

purchasing in Caribou. Two, the prop erty on which the mobile homes 

are located—which generally is taxed—would lose the revenue produced by the lot rentals.

Indeed, without having checked with each mobile home park owner 

in Caribou—there are seven of them—I would think the chances of 

survival for these parks are highly doubtful. One trailer court, I know, 

has 60 of its 72 lots rented to Loring personnel.

Also in the housing area, a telephone survey of apartmen t owners 

in Caribou revealed that approximately 25 percent of the apartments 

in Caribou are rented by military or civil service employees.

These apartments, gentlemen, would be vacant, revenue drains ra ther 

than revenue producers in the Caribou area if the proposed base reduction takes place. Of 700 apartments in Caribou, 177 are occupied by 

base-connected people. These apartments are taxpaying properties.

Let me cite some specific examples. One property owner has 17 

apartments he rents out. All 17 are occupied by base people. Another 

landlord who has 26 units has 16 of those rented to base people.

In many Gases, if not all, these properties are mortgaged, and the 

income generated helps pay off the mortgage. These units, too, produce tax revenues for the community.

I could go on. I could cite the loss of jobs to teachers in Limestone, 

some of whom have homes in Caribou they would have to give up, 

thereby adding to the tax burden for the remainder in Caribou.

I could cite the contracting firms in Caribou who relv on base needs 

to supp ort their business. I could cite the stores in.Caribou now— 

on which taxes are also paid—whose very existence is threatened bv 

the proposed reduction. . . .

Hut these stories have been presented to you at other times during 

this hearing.. . » •.-.•• •

I would like to make one other comment, though. I recognize that 

the military has as its prime function the defense and protection of 

the United States. I recognize the argument tha t military) decisions 

cannot be based on the effect on a local economy alone^ or even 

primarily. t.i!

Hut I would submit tha t the military has a larger obligation, and 

our Government—civilian and military—must conside r: its actions 

very carefully. The economic consequences of such decisions could lx4

as drastic, at least to some people, at least to an area, as.military or 

diplomatic consequences in other circumstances.

If the Military Establishment never considered northern Maine 

to locate a base, if the area did not offer certain advantages for defense, 

this area would have been none the worse off. People would have lived 

here, farmed, gone about the ir routine ways. The local economy would 

have been in balance.

But tha t is not what has happened. More than 25 years ago the 

U.S. Government deemed it wise and necessary to locate a Strategic 

Air Command base here. I t did so, I gather, to establish a significant 

deterrent aimed at the Soviet Union.

This was fine. The local people, for the most par t, welcomed the 

base here, seeing i t as necessary to the defense of their country and
58

en joy ing the social, cu ltu ral, an d economic benefits such a base 

pro vid es. ’ •

Inde ed , I think ma ny m ilitar y people at the base will agree—as I 

have he ard them say—the area people made them feel at home and 

gave th em a good reception.

A t the same time, ma ny area p eople, an d peop le who m oved to the 

are a, tie d th eir livelihood into the existence o f th e base. Why sh ou ldn 't 

the y ( The base was here. Base perso nnel ne eded services; people seized 

op po rtu nitie s.

H ad the base no t been here, local peop le would no t have m ade in ­

vestm ents here; they wou ld no t have tie d their live s to th is area. Because th e base was here, howe ver, they did.

Th e military does have an obl iga tion then. It ca n't dism iss its offsp ring th at were cre ate d solely because the base was here, any more 

th an a m ili ta ry ma n o r any one else can igno re his illegitim ate ch ild ren 

who were created because of his presence. Th e cond ition caused by 

th ei r presence mu st no t be dism issed as no t t he ir res ponsibility un de r 

the gu ise th at it is not p art of their mission.

i subm it the n th at the m ili ta ry h as a serious ob lig ati on t o con sider 

the loca l effects of t he ir pro posed action—no t ju st a pro cedural obliga tio n—and th at if the y sinc erely det erm ine th at B-5 2’s at t his base 

are no lon ger necessary , then the y look at othe r ways th at the y can 

prod uctiv ely utilize t his base.

In th is vein, let me ad d an oth er point . As taxp ay ers, we hav e a 

subs tantial investment in th is base th at ou gh t no t go to waste. All of 

us, as ind ividuals, an d com pan ies, occasionally wish to move on. In ­

deed, 1 read an artic le ov er the week end th at sug ges ted some companie s wou ld like to le ave M aine because of an inc rea sin g tax burden, 

but because of the ir in vestm ents here co uld not do so.

We all have investme nts—in ves tment s in o ur homes or in our plan ts 

or busin esses—th at we ca n' t su rre nd er an d do n't con sider it pr ud en t 

to do so.

1 would hope ou r Go vernm ent is not so im pr ud en t as to abando n 

an inv est me nt of some hal f billion dollars. I t s ure ly is an investm ent 

th at can be reta ine d and used to the benefit of th e area i t helped grow 

and to th e N ation as a whole.

A gain I than k you fo r listeni ng .

Se na tor H athaway. Th an k you v ery much.

STATEMENT OF BILL JOHNSON, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 

CARIBOU, MAINE

Mr. J ohnson. S en ator Hatha way , mem bers o f the delega tion , I am 

here tod ay both from th e Ca rib ou Ch am ber of Com merce and from 

the Maine State Ch am ber of Commerce.

Fir st , I would like to re ad p ar t of a state me nt fro m the Maine Stat e 

Ch am ber of Comm erce. I will give you copies of th is to pu t in the 

reco rd .

[T he statem en t a ppe ar s a t p. 59.]

Air. J ohnson. Th e Main e St ate Ch am ber o f Com merce is concerned 

over th e proposed red uc tio n in force at Lo ring A ir Fo rce Base and 

its possible effect on ou r defe nse postu re, as well as its very serio us 

impact on Aroostook Cou nty and the en tir e S ta te of Maine .
59

The chamber's board of directors reviewed this proposal at some 

length at a meeting held in Augusta on March 24, 1976, and at that 

time voted unanimously as follows:

That the proposal to cut back the Loring Air Force Base facility 

is opposed if it represents a reduction in the Nation’s defense capacity. If it is not a defense capability cutback, the Maine State Chamber 

of Commerce requests a thorough-going analysis of the impact be made 

giving full consideration to the responsibility of the Federal Government to the economy of the area and the financial commitments 

made by the private sector in anticipation of the continued existence 

of the base and the need for the services and facilities being provided 

by the private sector.

1 would like to add a few personal comments to this statement that 

is given by the Maine State Chamber of Commerce and something 

they allude to, tha t the base has been here. 1 think we figured, close 

to 30 years.

No businessman makes a decision to expand his business or to go 

out and build a new building and take on a larg er mortgage in a 

temporary situation, because lie takes this mortgage on usually for a 

period of 15, 20 years, li e bases it on something th at he expects to last 

15 to 20 years.

In this area, we have been led to believe for many, many years that 

Loring was going to be here probably as long as any of us were because of its strategic location where it was at.

We all realize we can move men and we can move airplanes. We 

were led to believe Loring was going to be here for t hat one reason, 

if nothing else—for its location.

So the Loring Air Force Base created a demand when they opened 

up that base. Now the economic system operates on the supply and 

demand system. The Air Force created this demand. They have asked 

the Aroostook people, the business of Aroostook County, to meet these 

demands, to supply their needs.

1 tliink Aroostook County has done a fantastic job of meeting their 

needs. I can look at my own community of Caribou, and over the past 

few years we have seen the downtown a rea almost completely rebuilt. 

We have seen new shopping centers going up on the outskirts of town.

Everyone did this in anticipation tha t they were going to be able 

to depend on the base. They have taken on the mortgages. They have 

bought new buildings. They have introduced new products.

Now, all of a sudden, the Air Force decides they want to move 

Loring. In effect, they have used Aroostook County to an extent to 

supply their needs for as long as Loring Air Force Base has been 

there.

I think the Air Force and the Government has a responsibility 

more than just to say th at ‘‘You have met our needs for 25-odd years. 

Thank you. We no longer need this. Goodby.”

I think they need to do a little bit more than that. I th ink they have 

an obligation to all of us here in Aroostook County. Thank you.

[Mr. Johnson's prepared statement follows:]

Statement of th e Maine State Chamber of Commerce

The Maine State Chamber of Commerce is concerned over the proposed reduction in force at Loring Air Force Base and its possible effect on our defense 

posture as well as its very serious impact on Aroostook County and the entire 

Sta te of Maine.
60

The Chamber’s Board of Directo rs reviewed this proposal at some length at a 

meeting held in Augusta on March 24, 1976 and at th at tim e voted unanimously 

as follow s: That the proposal to cut back the Loring Air Force Base facility is opposed if it represe nts a reduction in the natio n’s defense capacity. If it is not a defense capability cut back, the Maine State Chamber of Commerce requ ests a thorough­ going ana lysis of the impact be made giving full considera tion to the responsi­ bility of the Federal government to the economy of the area and the financial commitments made by the private secto r in anticipa tion of the contin ued exis t­ ence of the Base and the need for the services and facilitie s being provided by 

the private sector. Knowing of the Federal government’s earlier request for additio nal facilities and services from the priv ate sector, we emphasize the need for consideration by the government of the investme nts made in anticipation of the continued need by the Base and its personnel for the services and facilities th at only the private 

sector can provide. We call upon the Maine Congressional Delegation to obtain a detailed examina­ tion of the reason the proposal was made to cut back the force at Loring Air 

Force Base.

Senator Hathaway. Next we have a panel of witnesses from 

Caribou: Donald Collins, S. W. Collins Co.; Sam Hamilton, Briggs 

Hardware; George Baltzer, J. C. Penney Co.; Brian Harper, County 

Moving & Storage; Jeff Frost, Caribou Chamber of Commerce; and 

A1 Cyr, Cyr Bros. Meat Packing Co.

STA TEM ENTS OF DONALD COLLINS, S. W. COLLINS CO.; SAM

HAM ILTON, BRIGGS HARD W ARE ; GEORGE BA LTZER. J. C. PE NN EY

CO.; BR IA N HA RPER , COUNTY MOVING & STORAGE; JE FF FROST.

CARIBOU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Mr. Collins. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Cohen, and Congressman Emery, my name is Donald Collins. I am a resident of Caribou. 

1 operate the oldest business in tha t community. Incidentally, I am 

vice chairman of the Save Loring Committee. Th at business is a 

lumber building material business that was started in 1844 by my 

great grandfather. I share with others a concern for economy in government .and, at 

the same time, recognize the need for a strong defense system.

1 read yesterday with dismay a statement by the prestigious Institute for Strategic Studies, which said: “The Soviet Union now has 

more weapons than the United States, and the Kremlin’s.continuing 

arms buildup threatens detente.” . > •

Of course, I am aware th at “detente" has been removed.from the 

vocabulary in this country. However, my purpose today is primarily to submit my views on 

the impact of a substantial reduction at Loring on the economy of 

Caribou and, in particular, to the local building industry.

A survey in Caribou conducted immediately after the announcement of the Loring reduction, and responded to by 215 business firms, 

indicated tha t 28.7 percent of the business done by these firms was 

attributable to Loring. The survey furth er indicated th at 363 jobs would be lost in Caribou 

if the reduction took place, and 20 businesses said they might have 

to go out of business. In the construction industry, one business stated that 90 percent 

of their sales or $2,700,000 was done directly with Loring Air Force
61

Base in 1975. Other construction contractors repo rt business at the 

base accounts from 20 to 45 percent of their total volume.

In addition to direct Air Force business, contractors and homebuilders will, of course, be affected by a reduction on the demand for 

homes as the ripple effect takes place.

Beal estate values will tend to decrease as they have already since 

the announcement was made. The general net effect on the city of 

Caribou as the most affected community in the Loring area would be 

catastrophic.

Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Mr. Hamilton ?

STATEMENT OF SAM HAMILTON, BRIGGS HARDWARE CO.

Mr. H amilton. Senator Hathaway, Congressman Cohen, Congressman Emery, and members of the Maine congressional delegation, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify at this hearing this afternoon. 

I am Sam Hamilton of Caribou. I own and operate Briggs Hardware 

in the downtown mall in Caribou.

My purpose for testifying before you this afternoon is to let you 

know, as you probably are already very much aware, the drastic effect 

the 83-percent proposed cutback of Loring Air Force Base would be 

on my business as well as many other retail businesses in the CaribouPresque Isle-Limestone and surrounding area of central Aroostook.

As n ear as I can estimate, we get anywhere from 35 to 40 percent 

of our business from Loring Air Force Base. 'Phis is not in contract 

business such as direct purchases from Loring Air Force Base but from 

the personnel and their dependents.

A cutback as drastic as proposed would not only cause the serious 

economic impact but make an already serious unemployment situation 

even more critical.

The latest unemployment figure, which was March of 1976, for the 

Aroostook County area is around 11.8 percent; and for our area, central Aroostook—Presque Isle. Caribou—it is 12.7 percent.

If this proposed cutback becomes a reality, I would be forced to 

reduce my work force from six employees to probably around three 

people working for me. This I am afraid would be happening in a lot 

of the other retail businesses besides my own.

In 1970, the city of Caribou started an urban renewal project which, 

if we knew then that Loring Air Force Base was to close in 1977, 

would never have gotten off the ground. A lot of us sold our modem 

buildings to urban renewal who asked us to relocate in heavily financed 

buildings th at we were asked to build.

This move was certainly predicated on the supposition tha t Loring 

Air Force Base was to be a big pa rt of our future business picture.

The Federal Government and Air Force have always made very 

clear indications in the past of how very important Loring was and 

is to the overall defense picture—so that this possibility of ever happening was certainly a very critical one to this entire area.

I have spoken of the heavy financial burden tha t these new buildings have created upon us. This would not have been possible if it were 

not for another arm of the Federal Government, the SB A, which 

has come to our assistance in our urban renewal project.

73-444— 76------ 5
62

Since 1970, SBA has helped to provide almost $4 million for 13 

community economic development projects. They have also participated in 23 other businesses, totalin g another $2*4 million.

Eig ht in the downtown mall area where I am located, approximately $70,000 has been used of SBA money. I account for about 

$25,000 of that particu lar amount.

Some figures from the chamber of commerce, although not completely up to date, b ut back around 1973—Caribou and the surrounding area is one of the 30 economic districts in Maine—in 1973, Caribou 

ranked seventh in th e total sales and showed a 49-percent growth rate 

increase. This is from the Bureau of Taxation figures. Certainly without Loring, these figures would never have been a reality.

In 1974, two businesses opened their doors in Caribou. They employed over 830 people and added an increased annual payroll of $5 

million.

The end result of all of this showed 1,000 jobs created during the 

past 5 years, resulting in an annual increase in payroll of more than 

$6.5 million.

Gentlemen. I have tried to show you with my figures and my comments just exactly how drastic this particu lar shutdown closure would 

be upon all of us in the retail business and in just about everything 

else. I hope that in your dealings with the Federal Government you 

take this all into consideration.

Thank you again for an opportunity to testify this afternoon.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you. Mr. Baltzer?

STATEMENT OF GEORGE BALTZER, J. C. PENNEY CO.

Mr. Baltzer. Mr. Chairman and members of the Maine delegation, 

my name is George Baltzer. I am the J. C. Penney Co. manager in 

Caribou.

Let me also welcome you to Aroostook County and Limestone and 

Caribou. Back a few months ago when the Air Force made the 

announcement of the proposed cutback, it came as an earthquake to 

all of us.

T. for one. after rationalizing what had happened, was very anxious 

to dig into some of our records. On October 1. 1926. J. C. Penney Co. 

first opened its doors in Caribou. Maine. Therefore. T feel that I can 

speak with a little bit of authority as to how it will affect our own 

personal business.

Looking at our business as it is today, as compared to when we 

fii“st opened, you have to take a lot of things into consideration. One, 

the growth in the economy because of the airbase, and also the growth 

in general. You also have to consider the impact that the airbase has, 

the ripple effect that you have heard so often spoken of today.

If the airbase were to close, it would mean, in volume of our business. a 30-percent reduction, coupled with the spinoff effect.

We feel that it would be very realistic to consider our volume to be 

reduced bv half. I f this were the case, and if our business were reduced 

in half, natu rally the salaries would have to be reduced somewhere 

in tha t neighborhood.

This is going to eliminate jobs. This is going to reduce the tax base.
63

The th ing tha t concerns me even more than all of the things I have 

just remarked about—and this is strictly speculation on my part— 

but Penney’s, not unlike our competition, is constantly looking at 

locations, trying to invest their money where they feel they would get 

the best retu rn on an investment.

I have a feeling if this were to happen, that it could ultimately be 

the demise of the Penney store as we know it in Caribou.

Thank you very much.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you, Mr. Baltzer. Mr. Harper?

STATEMENT OF BRIAN HARPER, COUNTY MOVING & STORAGE CO.

Mr. H arper. Senator Hathaw ay, members of the delegation, I want 

to thank you f or giving me this opportunity to speak to you this afternoon. I am B rian Harper, president of County Moving & Storage in 

Caribou.

On Janu ary 26, 1976. my wife and T opened a moving and storage 

company on the access highway in Caribou. We employ four full-time 

and five part-time employees.

We opened this business for the purpose of moving personnel to> 

and from L oring Air Force Base. But right now it just kind of looks 

a little bit bleak.

If Loring Air Force Base cuts back the 83 percent, I will have no 

alternative but to close my doors and to sell my equipment and to lay 

off all of our employees.

After the moving is done from Loring Air Force Base and it is a 

bitter memory, I would say tha t only one moving company would 

remain in operation in Aroostook County. We would be very, very 

busy for the next 2 years. But after that, with only about 500 people 

stationed here on Loring Air Force Base, one mover could accommodate all the moves into and out of Loring.

Also, T would have a very hard time trying to sell the equipment; 

and at the present time, I do not know whether to buy equipment. I 

don’t know whether to expand. There is a need right now for more' 

equipment to handle Loring Air Force Base. I need to expand my 

warehouse. I need to hire more employees.

But when you invest hundreds of thousands of dollars in tractortrailers and equipment, and then someone comes up and says. ‘’You 

are going to have to close in 1 year,” you just cannot get rid of this 

equipment. It just will not sell.

All of the movers in Aroostook County are faced with this very 

same problem. So I hope t hat you can do something to help us and 

help the other movers, my colleagues in this area.

I thank you very much for speaking to you this afternoon. Thank 

you again.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

Mr. Cohex. Could I ask Mr. Collins a question? Just one question.

I think you are connected with the banking community as well. What 

would he the projections as far as defaults in mortgages? Have the 

banks done anything about th at in this area?

I am trying to project what will happen to the default on mortgages.

Mr. Collixs. They have done a lot of worrying about it.
64

Mr. Cohe n. An y surveys?

Mr. Collins. A t the present tim e, no. I don’t think the re is any 

question but the bank ing i nd ustry would be a dversely affected by this 

type of a dro p. I would suspect th at am ong the are as first to be hurt 

would be the f ina ncing of mobile hom es; the second area, on fixed real 

estate. But at th e prese nt time, t here is n o p rojec tion as to ho w serio us 

th is will be.

Mr. Cohen. Tha nk you.

Se na tor H athaway. Mr. Fr os t?

STATEM ENT OF JE FF FROST, CARIBOU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Mr. F rost. My nam e is J effrey Fr os t. I am presiden t o f th e Ca rib ou 

Cham ber of Comm erce.

Se na tor Hatha way , members of th e congres sion al del egation, I 

wa nt to th an k you person ally fo r ho lding this con gres sion al he aring 

and giv ing us a chance to be h eard today.

Th e Caribou Cham ber of Commerce conducted a pr elim inary stu dy 

tif businesses in th e Caribou are a ju st af te r the ann ounce ment of the 

pro posed red uctio n of pers onnel at Lor in g Air Force Base.

We lea rne d in th is preli mi nary survey th at num erous busin esses 

wo uld have to lie closed or seve rely cu t ba ck ; and , as a res ult , many 

peo ple would lose th eir jobs.

Th e Fe de ral Gov ernmen t, th ro ug h the Small Business Ad ministrat io n and the Ur ba n Renewa l Aut ho rit y, has spent several million 

in the Ca rib ou area alone. Th e SB A, fo r inst ance, has made man y 

loans to businesses in th e Caribou a rea . M any of these businesses would 

lie ha rd pressed to continu e doing business with the dr am atic d ow ntu rn in the economy due to the r eductio n in pers onnel at Lo rin g. Th us, 

the SB A loans would be in severe jeo pardy.

Tt seems iro nic to me th at here we hav e the SB A and the Urb an 

Renewal A ut ho rity pump ing vi tally needed fund s into Ma ine and , 

on the o ther h an d, we have an othe r aim of the F edera l Gover nment — 

the Air Force —wh ich could de str oy the economic grow th which we 

hav e all worked so ha rd to achieve.

Th e Ca rib ou are a over the years ha s greatly expanded to meet the 

needs of Lor in g Air For ce Base. Ov er the pa st 5 year s alone, at least 

60 new businesses hav e open ed th ei r doors. Ju st commonsense would 

tell you th at a m ajor po rtion of th ese 60 new businesses would not ha ve 

opened if they ha d known Lor in g might lie reduced in size.

We hav e been led to believe, and it has been sta ted man y times, th at 

Lo ring would rem ain at its presen t personnel level, it mi gh t even he 

expanded, because L oring is so vital to the defense o f o ur co untry , due 

to its s tra tegic location. Bu t now fo r some sti ll unexpla ine d reas on we 

are told i t is excess baggage.

The very fabric o f t he Caribou str uc ture w ill be affected. Chu rches, 

fo r instan ce, hea vily dep end on the su pp ort of the Lo rin g com munity. Ma ny chu rches will hav e to gr ea tly cu rtail th ei r services, and 

some m ay even ha ve to close the ir doors.

Th e Uni ted Fu nd , as an othe r exa mple, likewise dep end s h eavil y on 

the financia l supp ort from the base. I could go on and on.

In s um ma tion, I know T spe ak fo r the great major ity o f the people 

in Caribou when I say th at we are ho peful th at the A ir Fo rce will
65

reconsider the contemplated action. The curtailment of Loring Air 

Force Base without a doubt will be disastrous to Caribou, Aroostook, 

and the Sta te of Maine.

Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much, Mr. Frost.

Next we have a panel consisting of Burt Tompkins, city councilor, 

Presque Isle; John Tiernan, Presque Isle businessman; and Tom 

Gagnon, president, Presque Isle Auto Dealers Association.

For the information of the audience, although Colonel Russell 

Morton, the Base Commander, is not on the list, he will testify 

following this group.

STATEMENTS OF BURT TOMPKINS, CITY COUNCILOR, PRESQUE ISLE;

JOHN TIERNAN , PRESQUE ISLE BUSINESSMAN; AND TOM GAGNON, PRESIDENT, PRESQUE ISLE AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION

Mr. Tompkins. Senator Hathaway, Congressman Cohen and Congressman Finery, my name is Bu rt Tompkins. I am a member of 

tiie Presque Isle City Council.

First 1 want to express our appreciation to you for taking the time 

out of your very busy schedule to come up and conduct this meeting 

in our interest.

1 would like to also say it is very difficult following the other communities to avoid repetition because much of what von have heard,, 

particularly from Terry St. Peter and Bill Johnson—Caribou city 

manager and chamber of commerce executive respectively—applies 

to the city of Presque Isle as well, although not to the same degree.

We have 180 military families at Presque Isle living in the military housing complex attached to Loring. Tha t is about 550 people. 

It involves a payroll of $1.727.000—a great proportion of which is 

spent at Presque Isle retail establishments.

There are also 61 citizens of Presque Isle who earn their livelihood 

at Loring Air Force Base. Together with the ir families, they comprise 

about 225 people, and that payroll is $733,000 a year.

I am unable to provide factual evidence regarding the indirect 

effect. However, as Caribou did, we conducted a survey of businesses 

immediately following the announcement on Loring. /

With your permission. I would like to read the results or summarize 

the results for the record. I will not name the individuals. However, 

I will describe the category of business.

The first one I have is a trailer or mobile home sales organization. 

The owner savs that if the base cutback occurs, an excessive amount 

of housing will obviously he available in Aroostook County, so it will 

mean he will have to relocate his busniess in either central or southern 

Maine—2 employees involved.

The next one I have involves a moving van line organization. The 

owner in this particular instance says that if the cutback occurs— 

not closing. but the cutback occurs—it would probably result in 

liquidation of his company, unless substantial replacement business 

became available. That would have to be almost immediately, and 

obviously almost impossible—8 employees involved.
66

Another one involving a storage service corporation, and his result 

after a survey indicates there would be liquidation—2 employees. The 

fourth one I think is interesting in tha t he predicts no loss of employees, but because he is in competition with companies who do work 

on Loring Air Force Base, he would expect the competition to be 

keen enough to reduce the demand for his services.

He says, “I t is my feeling tha t the indirect effect would be substantial in our competition with those who are allowed to bid for work at 

Loring.”

He is unable to bid for work at Loring due to small business setaside restrictions, which I am not familiar with but you perhaps are. 

It would probably mean several lost jobs.

This one involves a highway paving corporation. They have seasonal employment of 65 people. They would expect a 30-percent cutback in tha t, and a loss of 15 to 20 of those people.

The next is a franchise or regulated trucking firm who would expect 

to lose an average of a truckload a day and would also expect to cut 

back from 3 to 4 employees from their present 45.

I have one here from a small retail office equipment and supply 

organization which presently has eight individuals employed. They 

would expect, as a result of a loss of 10 percent of their business, to cut 

back at least one.

I have two more. One of those involves a very large diversified 

farm er cooperative which does $16 million in business annually. Only 

about 4 percent of it comes from Loring. lie says he would probably 

have to reduce his force by three people.

One final survey result, a transportation organization. They employ 

25 to 28 people. They would expect the cutback at Loring to reduce 

business by 30 to 35 percent, and expect to lose six to nine employees.

Presque Isle, of course, has been through this thing and some of us 

here today were involved there. We were very fortunate in having an 

(excellent pool of manpower which was led bv two or three very excellent individuals, including James Kief who is well known to our congressional delegation.

However, in Presque Isle, the problem was not one-tenth the magnitude that it is here. I would point out tha t it took 10 years from the 

time we initiated action there until we got where we are today. Only 

very recently have we been able to fill all of the vacant storefronts tha t 

resulted from the closing of the Presque Isle Air Force Base.

And, of course, we are facing a very strong probability of some more 

vacant storefronts if this is allowed to happen.

Finally, I would like to make just one observation. It is very difficult 

for me to discern the logic in a country tha t is so generous tha t it 

willingly reconstructed half the world while at the same time it sits 

by and watches the devastating effect on a small area like Aroostook 

County of allowing a military establishment to walk out and leave the 

economic support monster they created and the pieces for the local 

citizens to pick up. It is hard for me to understand and believe that 

the welfare of Aroostook citizens can be of such little importance to 

the Federal Government.

We know and are sure that you gentlemen, the congressional delegation, will use every means at your command. We have confidence in
67

that. We hope very sincerely th at it is going to be enough. We thank 

you very sincerely for your efforts.

Senator H athaway. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF JOHN TIER NAN , PRESQUE ISLE

Mr. Tiernan. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Cohen and Congressman Emery. I am John Tiernan. I am the owner and operator of the Coca-Cola Bottling Co. which is located in Presque Isle. We are a manufacturing wholesaler who distributes throughout Aroostook County and all of Washington County. But our main operation is here in Aroostook County. I came to the community in 1953 and picked up what was then an ailing business. The basis upon which I predicated my move into this area, very frankly, was the fact th at Loring Air Force Base would provide the necessary economic th rust to the area to create what I would consider a viable economic entity , in view of the fact the potato industry had just during the spring of t hat year suffered a very dra­ matic decrease in the price of potatoes; and our principal industry, which is potatoes, suffered from 1953 onward until the last 4 years. 

There were many lean years. I prepared some remarks so th at I would not take too much time and so I would be sure to stick to the point. I was reminded in listen­ ing to Mr. Boothby that the Presque Isle school system is also going to suffer a loss of the people from Loring Air Force Base, with its con­ sequent impact on the funding and filling of the schools and the available funds. Incidentally, I happen to be a member of the board of SAD. We base our decisions on the fact th at we assume people will remain in the 

community. Since I feel other people will supply you with a statistical analysis of the Loring closing, I will confine my remarks to the effect on my small business in terms of: the closing of Presque Isle A ir Force Base 

in 1961. The general operating consideration of a small business; and the relative contribution of two broad categories of business; namely, the basic resource producers or satellite industries. Those of us who were operating in 1961 remember painfully the dramatic slowdown of business tha t accompanied the closing of the Presque Isle Air Force Base. We were affected directly at tha t time because we had the contract to supply soft drinks to the base. In addition to the obvious loss of these sales, the loss of people and income from this small base caused a dramatic loss in overall sales 

to the community at large. Keep in mind that we are considering this problem against a small population base of 100,900 people in an area tha t since 1953 can be 

classified as economically depressed. The question then arises, how can a businessman respond to a de­ crease in sales resulting from factors completely beyond his control ? The alternatives are, basically, Xo. 1, to go out of business. This is kind of like printing the instructions on opening a case of nitro­ glycerin. Open it with a sharp blow of a hammer? You can get it open, 

but the results sometimes are unfortunate.
68

So he can go out of business. l ie can increase his prices or he can 

reduce costs.

The first alternative is too drastic to require our consideration. 

The second, a price increase, would obviously be economic suicide at 

a time when sales are declining and the community is suffering an 

economic depression.

The only reasonable hope for survival is reduction of costs, which 

leads me bo the second aspect of the general operating conditions of 

a small business.

My observation is that a businessman builds his business slowly and 

with much effort over a long period of time. I think it important to 

stop and emphasize the long-term nature of the business environment.

As a business develops, the operator will reach the point where an 

investment in equipment is necessary. This frequently will increase 

capacity, cost more than the equipment which is being replaced, requires borrowed capital and will take several years to recover the costs.

Any successful enterprise will require a group of competent, devoted 

employees. Again, this type of organization is built slowly over a long 

period of years. All the requisites for building, selection, training, 

supervision, development of leaders with experience, takes place 

slowly.

However long it has taken to build the investment and organization, 

its fragility is illuminated by the contemplated reduction at Loring 

Air Force Rase.

When the businessman went to the bank to borrow the money for 

the investment, when he hired and trained the people who comprise 

the organization, he made his long-term investment against the background of the known economic environment and his own projection 

of this into the future.

Indeed, it is improbable that his banker would advance the necessary 

funds for investment unless the banking community considered the 

long-range economic prospects to be at least stable.

So 1 day afte r he has done all of these things some outside force 

reduces his population by 10 percent and his available income base 

by 25 percent.

Where does he turn? He turns to his only available alternative— 

reduction of costs. He can’t reduce his taxes; that is. his sales taxes 

and property taxes. He can’t reduce his power costs. He can’t reduce 

the cost of his supplies. Gasoline is going to continue to cost as much 

at least. Ilis bank expects to be paid on schedule.

The only area of cost reduction over which the businessman has 

immediate effective control is personnel. He must reduce payroll to 

survive. It is the only alternative available to him.

There are two general tvpes of businesses for this consideration: 

those which produce or add value to a basic resource and sell mostly 

outside of the economic area where this takes place, and those types 

which I will term satellite or supportive industries which will basically 

provide a service or product within the local community.

It is th e latter of these satellite businesses who will be drastically 

affected by Loring’s reduced status. They are by far the most numerous. They provide most of the employment for the area, and curtailment of employment in this group would be self-destructive in nature.

Indeed, one can sense how each payroll reduction would feed on 

itself until the community was reduced to tha t number necessary to
69

prov ide t he need s of those su pp orted by the b asic resource ind ust ries.

W ith ou r lim ited po pu lat ion and lim ited reso urce indu str ies , the 

pro posed red uction of Lor in g would be an economic catastr op he to 

those of us in the business com mu nity who hav e ma de lon g-range 

comm itm ents to pro vid e goods an d services to the to tal com munity . 

Tha nk you.

Se na tor H athaway. Tha nk you very much, Mr. Ti erna n.

Mr. Ga gnon?

STA TEM ENT OF TOM GAGNON, PRESIDEN T, PRE SQU E ISLE AUTO 

DEA LER S ASSOCIATION

Mr. Gagnon. Se nator Hat ha way , Congressman Cohen, an d Congressm an Em ery. I rep res ent the eig ht automobile deale rs in Pre squ e 

Isle. We ra n an inhouse sur vey in the las t few day s tr yin g t o get an 

ide a of wha t th is wou ld do to us.

We came up with some figures th at the firs t initial im pact would 

have on us, an d th at would be about a 15-percen t loss of busin ess— 

ap prox im ately $2 m illion to t he eig ht o f us. Also, $100,000 loss in the 

St ate sales ta x ; prob abl y 20 to 25 employees loss—which y ou are t al kin g of a pa yroll of a coup le hu nd re d tho usa nd.

We all agree d on these figures. I do n’t th in k there is any question 

th at th is mu ch would happen.

Then we get into the snow balling effect th at is going to be beyond 

th is initial impac t. It looked so severe we d id n' t care to come up with 

any figures.

I wonder, with Caribo u es tim ating 30, 40 p ercent, and of co urse we 

wo uld n’t be affected near as bad on the initial thing. Bu t I think if 

th is s now balls to the point th at it could, we get the outflow of people 

lea vin g Aroostook County, 1 th in k we could be affected by at least 

30 percen t.

That wo uld be real severe. Fi ftee n percent, we could cu t some co rners 

an d survive. Thi rty percen t, I do n’t think the re is any question there 

would be hal f as man y of us wi thin a 1- or 2-y ear period. Tha nk you.

Se na tor H athaway. Tha nk you very much.

Our ne xt witness is the base com mande r, Col. Bussell S. Morton.

STATEMENT OF COL. RUSSELL S. MORTON. BASE COMMANDER, 

LORING AIR FORCE BASE

Colonel Morton. M r. Ch airm an , mem bers o f the deleg ation, as you 

know. I am Colonel Mo rton, the base com mander of Lo rin g. I have 

also been ask ed by the Air Force to rep res ent them at th is hearing.

In th at capacit y, I wish to res pond to questions th at you might, 

hav e th at you feel maybe the A ir Force hasn't answered before, and 

any other general questions anyone might have.

Se na tor H athaway. A re you in a position to give us th e basis for 

the pro posed closing?

Colonel Morton. I feel I am.

Se na tor H athaway. Would you like to sta te wha t it is?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. As I un de rst an d it, and it is totally 

br ou gh t about by fiscal restraints, t he A ir For ce ha s a req uir em ent to 

reduce ap prox im ate ly 10,500 perso nnel— 7,500 m ili ta ry an d 3,000 

civilians.
70

They took a complete look at all bases in the Strategic Air Command. The look was at all bases. They narrowed it down to singlemission bases, which Loring is one of, and the proposal was, and still 

is, to reduce Loring by those percentage figures which you have seen.

Senator Hathaway. How has that strategic mission changed in the 

last year or so from what it was?

Colonel Morton. I think to the strategic value aspect, we have to 

go back to 25 or 30 years ago when Loring was initially constructed. 

The airc raft that we had in the inventory at tha t time did not have 

the range of the B-52, nor were they refuelable. I am refe rring to 

the B-36.

Since that time we have perfected the 135, the refueler, and we have 

also come along with the B-52, which has a considerable range.

I don’t believe the Air Force is saying tha t the strategic value of 

Loring has decreased. I f they felt it was no longer strategically valuable. I think the proposal would have possibly been for closure.

We recognize the need to keep Loring here as a tanker operation, 

with 10 tankers on alert and capable of supporting other contingency 

operations as may come up.

Mr. E mery. How has the mission of Loring itself changed, if I can 

continue on with Senator Hathaway’s question, how has the mission 

itself changed so that the Air Force feels it can cut back this facility 

without weakening our national defense or strategic posture?

Colonel Morton. The way I understand it, the strategic posture will 

not change in the sense tha t we are not eliminating any B-52’s from 

the inventory. We are merely redistributing them. In essence, we are 

cutting down support costs. The proposal is to reduce the cost of 

supporting two B-52 wings, one of them being Loring.

The aircra ft themselves will still be available for use. and they 

will l>e dispersed at other bases. Ours will be dispersed throughout 

other similar model aircraft bases in the Strategic Air Commands.

Mr. Emery. I have always understood one of the advantages of 

having a military Air Force base in the northern part of the country 

was that it was closer to the potential enemy targets and gave the rest 

of the United States the capability, let’s sav, of flying defensive or 

■offensive flights based to the south. At the same time, we have seen 

a gradual trend over recent years with the military installations, 

whether Army or Air Force or Navy, moving toward the Southern 

States. We have seen this very drastically recently.

There have been cutbacks for Devens, which is not Air Force, and 

Loring, and even some in the President’s home S tate of Michigan.

It seems contrary to the longstanding Air Force policy to move 

facilities away from the northern tie r of States, away from potential 

targets. Can you comment on that ?

Colonel Morton. I felt I did initially, but T will try and expand a 

little bit.

The strategic capability of SAC is such now that we can flv our 

airplanes from anywhere, basically. Originally, practically all of the 

Strategic Air Command bases, or the majority of them, were built 

in the north ern tier. After the war when we had the B-36, even those 

bases that weren’t built on the northern tier tha t had B-36’s. those 

aircraft staged through Loring to fly their mission. That requirement 

no longer exists.
71

Your comment as regards the d rif t to the south I don’t feel is quite 

correct as far as the Air Force is concerned. I have a map tha t shows 

in the last 10 years what has happened as far as closures and major 

reductions of Air Force installations. I realize those don’t address 

such things as F ort Devens and naval installations. This is only the 

Air Force.

If you would like, I can have a copy of tha t provided for you.

Air. E mery. We would appreciate that very much.

[The map referred to follows:]
Alask a VI-‘

P a in e Fid-—-•i-vj/j, £ WA 

L ar so n ATp

H a m il tb n

AFB

* - A’d a ir A F s'A

*

.Gale na APT 

* Xinc? Salmon APT

Gla sgo w AFB 

1 — '

^ X in g y le y FLD ■

JUT

Tr ua x FLD» / s - H /

C uste r AFS,' \ fNH'

3

C ' 1IY

O x n ard ■—X..-« 

AFB

Sio uxV Cif>\ (AAJL-.-V^/ ipA * 'y : J ~ * I Oil. j "" L in co ln . AFB -* V.A_____ > Bak al ar A FB

!------------ Acr'o C har i * U -* 'r il in td n Cotw

« -* “ Iafb ks v ,„

v ct? 7^ - x ^ j S c h i l l i r i g A F ^ f I ' <. IL t~ '" ' V&.-

_____‘.._ _

F ° r b e s A 1 D v 

kv____ •••• Nc^y C l'i- nto n Sher m an J \F B ------i 

—,

J ■ * S te w a r t AFB

J :• -z

sj^ O K D av ijs FLD fiuimph is IA P ‘

P e r r i n — * G x. e.«n vi llo AF & }i MS i - AL \ y QK jJX-i

* Majo r I n s t a l l a t i o n s C lo se d 

o r Re duced to 'Mino r Sta tu s 

FY 4/ 66 - 4/ 76

0W AFS 

Topsh am 

AFS

— G r e n ie r

__ FLD

O t i s AFB

r a d le y FLD S u ffo lk c o . re w a rt:A rB

^O lm st ed AFS

H un te r AFB

- ’ - T urn er AFB

f \ L . , k*

\ El lf.ng tort^ L> -j ■'— FL

VA/' B ate s FLD*

'/'X Conn al ly AFB ,{ TJacO 12AF.Hq

. X — McCoy AFB

U "S '- Orlando AFB 

dr oo kl ey AFB \

S J

-F.a.mey AFB^\ 

Puerto Rico
73

Mr. Cohex. As I understand it, Colonel, you say tha t the reason tha t the SAC mission as such has Ixien altered somewhat is that the 

planes today have longer flight capabilities ?

Colonel Mortox. Not necessarily longer flight capabilities. W ith air 

refueling, they have longer flight capabilities.

Mr. Cohen. Which reduces the need for a base like Loring?

Colonel Mortox. It decreases the location problem.

Mr. Cohex. That would not be true of the B -l bomber, would it? 

That has a very short flight time.

Colonel Mortox. No, sir. Tha t is a refuelable airc raft, so its range 

is relatively unlimited.

Mr. Coiiex. Flying at supersonic speeds, it has a very short capacity, 

does it not ?

Colonel Mortox. Tha t is true. Ju st like the SR-71. It has to slow 

down for refueling.

Mr. Cohex. Have you had any transfer of military personnel from the base since the announcement of the proposed reduction at Loring?

Colonel Mortox. I need to explain that a little bit. Yes; but let me expand. Not any more so than normal. We have the normal amount of 

people leaving and people coming in.

Mr. Cohex. You have people coming in ?

Colonel Mortox. Yes; certainly.

Mr. Cohex. Buying homes in the area ?

Colonel Mortox. No. I don’t lielieve they are buying homes in the 

area. Which is not really wise at this time.

Mr. Coiiex. I understand. What accounts for their coming in? For 

what purpose would they be coming and for how long?

Colonel Mortox. The normal replacement. Most personnel, when they come up here, don’t have a specified time on how long they are 

going to be here.

Mr. Cohex. So you are saying that it is consistent with past years.

Colonel Mortox. Yes. sir.

Mr. Coiiex. The outflow and the inflow are consistent. Do you have the numbers, or could you make them available for the record?

Colonel Mortox. Yes, sir. I don’t have them with me, but I can get you the projected losses and gains by month, this year as compared 

to last year. Would that be sufficient?

Mr. Cottex. Last year and perhaps 1 year before that, too.

Colonel Mortox. If we have those, certainly.

[The information requested follows:]

LORING PERSONNEL CHANGEOVER SIN CE MA Y 1975

In Out

1975:

Ma y........... .....................................................................................................................................- ........... Jun e____ _______ _______ ______ ____________ . ______ _______________________________ Ju ly............................................................................................................................- ................................

Aug ust__________________ _______________ __________________ ____________ _________ Septe mb er................................................................................................. ...............................................

October______________ _______ _____ __________ ______ _____________ __________ _____ Novemb er_________________________________ ______________________________________ Decemb er...................... ........................... .....................................................................- .......................

1976:

Jan u ary .......................... ................................................................ ...........................................- ..........

February___________________ _____________________________________________________ Ma rch ____________________________ ________ ______ _____ _____ _____________________ Apr il.............................................................................................................................................................

125

119

185

209

143 229

224 132

171 210

149 156

99 168

98 162

173 140

135 140

134 89

147 115
74

Fig ure s in preceding table represent ac tual transf ers for all personnel serviced 

by the Loring personnel office. Those following are projected figures for the following 90 days.

In Out

May 1976........................................................................................................................................................ 49 85

Ju ne .................................................................................................................................................................. 67 107

July ................................................................................................................................................................... 96 131

Of significant value to these figures is the reduction of 179 author izations 

since March 1975 associated with the reduced flying hours and reconfigured 

ale rt stru cture. This figure represen ts 65 officers and 114 enlisted.

Mr. Cohen. How abdut reassignments of B-52’s? Do you still have 

the same number of B-52’s on base?

Colonel Morton. We are authorized 14. We don’t have that many 

here right now. We have one in depot and one on loan.

Mr. Cohen. What is the normal amount you have?

Colonel Morton. About 12, sir. That is one of the things that this 

proposal is all about is to build each wing up to its 15 strength and. 

when you have to send one off to depot—the B-52’s are gettin g quite 

old. Ours were made in the late fifties. When you send one off to 

depot for modification, then in effect the wing is minus an aircraft. 

It makes it tha t much tougher for the wing commander to support 

his mission.

Air. Cohen. Why can’t you have them transferred up here to make 

the 15?

Colonel Morton. They could be. But the number of aircraft is only 

sufficient to support lesser squadrons than we have now at the 15 level. 

By building up the other wings, then we could possibly eliminate the 

support costs and the overhead.

Mr. Cohen. What type of costs do you expect to achieve through 

this reduction? You still have the same cost of main taining the B-52. 

There is no change there. You will have the same cost in maintaining 

the KC-135’s. I assume you have the same cost in heating Loring.

Colonel Morton. There would be some reduction because we would 

not have as many facilities open.

Mr. Cohen. You do have centralized heating, though, don’t you?

Colonel Morton. Mostly. Well, all of our housing is individually 

heated. There are several buildings on the base than have their own 

furnaces.

Mr. Coiien. So you contemplate shutting off all the heat to those 

buildings tha t are not in use?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Well, let me clear tha t up just a moment. On a contingency operation, if we have to maintain the capability of supporting the large 

influx of personnel on a temporary basis for x number of days, then 

T would have to keep the buildings in a semi, what we call a pickled 

state, with a reduced heat—45°. 50°—so we could warm them up.

Mr. Cohen. Have you identified the areas where you are going to 

save—not you. but the Air Force—you would save $24 million?

Colonel Morton. Xo, sir. I am not familiar with exactly where those 

figures come from.
75

Mr. Coiien. I would assume they would have to contact you or 

someone under you to come up with recommendations as to how much 

money they could save by making certain reductions and cutbacks and 

in what areas.

Colonel Morton-. For the exact figures, we would have to play a 

pa rt; yes, sir.

Mr. Cohen. Have there been any environmental impact statements 

prepared to date?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. The tentative target date is for the statement to be released by Jul y 1, the dra ft statement.

Mr. Coiien. So no statements have been prepared or released, to 

your knowledge, as of yet?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. Th at is rig ht ; there have not been.

Mr. Coiien Have you seen the environmental narrative?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. Tha t comes from my oflice, or one of my 

agencies.

Mr. Coiien. What was the purpose of this, sir?

Colonel Morton. This was started about 2 years ago. Each and 

every base in the Air Force is doing this, has one of these. We have 

been busily updating ours since the announcement.

Mr. Coiien. When was this prepared? Two years ago?

Colonel Morton. I think I released th at last January, February, a 

year ago.

Mr. Cohen. It indicates on page 9 that “This tab,” meaning A-l, 

environmental narrative, “was intended for, No. 1, preparation of 

environmental assessments; No. 2, preliminary planning for base mission changes, realinements, and closures.”

Hid you have any notion 2 years ago tha t Loring would be scheduled 

for reduction?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. Like I said, it might be a little misleading, as I can see. It was done at every base, tha t booklet.

Mr. Cohen. Have you updated this statement ?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir, we have.

Mr. Coiien. Is that the information tha t will be supplied for the 

environmental impact statement?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. Tha t is a major portion of the statement 

will be extracted from that.

Mr. Cotten. If I could, I would like to turn to page 18. I noticed 

in skimming this earlier tha t in paragraph 2.23, you indicate tha t—

Plan ning is based upon maintaining and modernizing the exis ting facility. No 

new mission has been assigned to the base. Expansion is not contemplated, nor 

is reduction, except removal of excess of obsolete buildings, as the need arises.

I am wondering about expansion is not contemplated, or reduction.

Colonel Morton. That is the way it existed at tha t time, sir.

Mr. Cotten. That is January of 1 his year ?

Colonel Morton. No : last year. January of last year.

Mr. Coiien. So as of tha t time you had no notion of expansion or 

reduction ?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. I am not real sure of the exact date. Put 

it another wav: That book was put out initially with no p rior knowledge t ha t this installation had any plans for any reduction.
76

Mr. Cohen-. I notice on page 26 also, in paragraph 3.4, you indicate 

that “There is no threatened or endangered species.” You might have 

to revise that on the environmental impact statement.

Senator Hathaway. Colonel, the refueling capacity has been available for some time, since the early sixties, hasn't it ?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Senator Hathaway. Why wasn't this change made a long time ago ?

Colonel Morton. I can’t really answer that, other than the way I 

see this thing, the A ir Force really doesn’t want to close any base. It is 

just we have been directed to reduce support costs. We have got to see 

if we can’t compress and get by with less.

Senator Hathaway. Are you saying if the Congress should appropriate sufficient funds to offset the amount of money that ought to be 

the total you have to cut back on, these bases would stay open—not 

only Loring, but the others tha t are designated throughout the 

country ?

Colonel Morton. If I might respond to that question, sir, with this: 

As we say in the military, that is a little b it above my pay grade.

Senator Hathaway. You said tha t you are here to represent the 

Air Force and answer any question which they would answer if the 

head of the Air Force was here—which, I might add, is something we 

didn’t know anything about until we wrote a letter to the Pentagon 

asking why a person wasn’t going to be here to answer questions.

This is a complete surprise to us that, one, you are here to tes tify; 

and, two, you can say you represent the Air Force policy. You can 

answer any questions with respect to their reason for closing. We 

could have held a whole day of hearings just on the question of you 

and the others as to the basis for the closing.

You say the Air Force would keep these open if it had the money 

to do so?

Colonel Morton. It is my understanding.

Senator Hathaway. We will try to get you the money.

Mr. Cohen. I don’t want to diminish the enthusiasm on that response. We raised this very question before the representatives of the 

Air Force sent to the Maine delegation. We asked if t hat money were 

in fact restored to the m ilitary, whether they would keep Loring open. 

The answer was not quite as affirmative as yours, Colonel.

I have to question whether it is in fact purely fiscal, because we certain ly have money in the military budget this year of $114 billion. 

When you take tha t amount of money and include the $24 million tha t 

you theoretically propose you would save, I think t ha t amounts to less 

than three-quarters of 1 percent of the total DOD budget. I don't 

thin k i t is purely financial or fiscal. In fact, we have offered to restore 

that $24 million and did not get an affirmative response to that from 

the A ir Force.

Colonel Morton. Tha t $24 million figure, as a package of the $150 

million figure, as I understand it, this is a fiscal 1978 figure, afte r 

the actions are all completed and the personnel have cut back, and 

the wav I can see it, it is mostly the 10.500 personnel reduction.

Mr. Cohen. Do you find it coincidental that the announcement of 

the proposed candidates f or reduction came just before the Congress’ 

consideration of the military budget ?
77

Colonel Morton. I am not knowledgeable of that, sir. I honestly 

don’t know.

Senator Hathaway. I)o yon know if your figure is a net figure; 

that is, counting all of the other Federal expenditures-----

Colonel Morton, No, sir.

Senator Hathaway [continuing]. That have to be made, as has been 

testified to today, like additional SBA and other Federal agencies?

Colonel Morton. No. My understanding is it is only a portion of 

the Defense Department's budget.

Mr. Cohen. You say there is no realinement of B-52's to date, other 

than the ones that are in repair. What about the KC-135’s?

Colonel Morton. The 135 reassignment is part of the upgrading of 

the Air Force Reserve; 128 135's are being transferred to Reserve 

Forces, some of them right down here in Bangor.

Mr. Cohen. Has that taken place yet?

Colonel Morton. It is in the process. No aircraft from Loring 

have left. We started a little over a year ago at one squadron a month 

per quarter, one squadron of Reserve Forces. It has gone smoother 

than we anticipated and now we are doing two squadrons per quarter.

Mr. Cohen. Pursuant to this proposed reduction ?

Colonel Morton. It is not really tied in with the reduction. The increase in Reserve Forces—what they are doing is getting rid of the 

old KC-97’sand replacing them with 135’s.

Mr. Cohen. That would take place whether or not we have this 

proposed reduction ? That is a plan of the Air Force and has nothing 

to do with the cost savings ?

Colonel Morton. I believe so.

Mr. Cohen. That would not be a relevant consideration as far as 

the reduction ?

Colonel Morton. It could possibly delay it. As I understand, the 

Reserve Force is going to lx* Ix'efed up regardless. There might have 

to lx* an adjustment as to where the individual aircraft would come 

from as opposed to 30 of them from Loring.

Mr. Cohen. I think you were here earlier when one of the gentlemen representing the employees wanted to know where the cuts in 

civilian personnel would come. Do you have anv notion as to where 

they might be?

Colonel Morton. No. sir. I don't. I don’t know the m ilitary personnel cuts, either.

Off the top o f my head, just an estimate by me looking at the base, 

as I envision it under the end mission, as in the proposed candidate 

mission. T would say that those figures of 578 inilitarv and 191 civilians 

are at best an approximation and are probably a little bit lower than 

what would actually be needed.

I can’t be specific, as we haven't defined the actual end mission to 

the point where I can say we need 5 of this type or 22 of this type.

Mr. Cohen. When you have your environmental impact statement 

filed, you intend. I assume, to have a public forum such as this to 

take testimony?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. If we meet the schedules, as we are doing 

now, it will be approximately 15 days after. So we are talking of mid 

to late July for the open hearings.

7 3 -4 4 4 0 - 7 6 - 6 ’
78

They will be conducted, as I understand it now, by a legal officer, 

totally away from another station who would come in and would take 

testimony exactly as you gentlemen are doing.

Mr. Cohen. Here in Limestone?

Colonel Morton. We would prefer to have it right here. This is an 

outsanding facility for a thing of that nature.

Mr. Cohen. Thank you.

Mr. E mery Do you feel th at this decision reflects a change in philosophy in the Department of Defense in that more emphasis should be 

placed on nuclear missiles, for example, submarine-launch missiles, as 

opposed to manned bombers?

Colonel Morton. No, sir, because this proposal does not eliminate 

any of the strategic capability of the B-52’s. We would still have the 

same number.

Mr. E mery. Is it a strategic consideration, the amount of time it 

takes for the bomb to reach its target? The difference in time for a si

flight leaving from Loring and a flight leaving from a base fu rther to 

the south and west, how much time is involved and is tha t potentially 

critical to our capability?

Colonel Morton. I am not an expert, but I don’t believe it is as 

critical now tha t we have the other methods of getting there in a 

hurry. I am referring to both the ballistic missiles and th e submarinelaunched missiles. So that the a ircraft timing is not t ha t critical as to 

when the targets are struck.

Mr. E mery. How is our defense posture, say, with the Canadians 

or with the other NATO allies affected by these internal shifts of 

American bases?

I would assume there is some as to the relationship between the 

American Air Force and the location of our forces and deployment of 

our bases. Is tha t taken into consideration at all ?

Colonel Morton. Our NATO allies should not be affected since we 

are not denying use of the airfield.

Mr. Emery. It might be interesting. I am not sure that the Canadian 

posture and vis-a-vis that of the United States has any difference at 

all. But it might. That might be of interest.

Colonel Morton. Let me make sure I understand. You would like 

to know if these overall candidate actions have any effect on our relationships with our allies overseas.

Mr. E mery. Not necessarily. But our total military strength. How 

do our allies have to adjust the ir military posture to accept changes 

in our own posture?

Mr. Cohen. I am still a little bit confused. We are going to maintain the same strategic capability, correct?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Mr. Cohen. The same number of B-52’s; the same number of 

KC-135’s?

Colonel Morton. The 135’s wouldn’t be the same.

Mr. Cohen. You are going to increase them?

Colonel Morton. They would be in the A ir Force Reserve and they 

would support them.

Mr. Cohen. I am talking of the cost to the Government as such.

What about the reduction of personnel ? You have indicated you want 

to reduce personnel. What are you going to do with the personnel 

you transfer?
79

Colonel Morton. The m ili ta ry person nel would be tran sf er re d to 

wherever th ei r AFS C, th ei r special ty, can be used.

Mr. Coh en. St ill at the pay level?

Colonel Morton. Not foreve r. We would lose th at ma ny au th or izations, so the peop le com ing in would be less on the bottom.

Mr. Coh en. You s till have m anpowe r you have to pay, bu t on a------

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir, in iti al ly. Bu t in the lon g ru n we would 

reduce th at ma ny au tho riz ati on s.

Let me give you anoth er lit tle exa mple on th at . In 1968, the S tr ateg ic A ir Comm and had 288,000 peo ple in it. To day it has less than 

144,000, less th an half.

Mr. Coh en. You wa nt to reduce it fu rthe r?

Colo nel Morton. I am not sa ying we wa nt to, sir. It ap pe ars th at 

we need to.

Mr. Cohen. B ut how does th at come about ? W ha t ha pp en s to these 

people? Do they ju st ret ire ?

Colonel Morton. Some o f them retir e. W e have g oin g on to da y considera ble ea rly -out program s th ro ug ho ut the Air For ce. In oth er 

words, what I am say ing is th at f or both officers and e nlisted person nel, 

whe n the y come in, and say they are going to sta y “a?” am ount of 

time , now th e A ir For ce is sayin g, “W e don’t quite need you to sta y 

th at long. I f you would like to leave a l itt le b it early , we w ill let you ,” 

to g et down to t he end str en gth by the end of the fiscal year.

Se na tor H athaway. You are go ing to keep th e same numb er of 

B- 52 ’s an d t he cost for B -52’s is the same. Ho w a re you g oing to reduce 

the cost? If you move from here to anoth er base, you will increase 

the cost at the other base.

Colonel Morton. Only fo r the fly ing hours. Th ey pic k up a little 

money f or flying anoth er a ircr af t.

Se na tor H athaway. Th ere is no cost fo r maintaining an d flyin g 

them and so fo rth unless you red uce the numb er of hou rs.

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. W ha t we would reduce is the nu mber of 

pers onnel require d to sup po rt them because a no ther base can absorb one 

or two ai rc ra ft witho ut appreciab ly inc rea sin g th ei r ma nning .

Ju st a rough figure, if we tr an sf er 14 B-5 2’s, othe r bases could handle 

th at with a very sma ll increase in p eo pl e; where, on the ot he r side, h ere 

at Lo rin g, the pro posal wou ld be to reduce, I th in k it wo rks ou t to 

3,200 people. T ha t m igh t be a little off.

Se na tor H athaway. Has th at been docume nted so we can look a t it? 

If wh at you say is tru e, the y are no t op erating fiscally ri ght now.

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. I see yo ur point. Yo ur real que stio n is 

why haven’t we done th is 10 years ago.

Se na tor H athaway. Rig ht.

Colonel Morton. I would like to th in k it is because of the overall 

impac t. I am no t real sure. I can’t answ er why we h ad n’t take n these 

actions years ago. Altho ugh I kno w ovyer the years we have lost air ­

cr af t, so the to tal numb er of B- 52 ’s comes down slowly.

We lo st q uite a few—n ot quite a f ew —we lost a con siderable amo unt 

in Vie tnam. In essence, th at was a squadro n’s wo rth of ai rc ra ft we 

lost over there.

So eve ryb ody share d in the losses, so t o spea k, and no wing in SAC 

has t he au tho riz ed numb er of ai rc ra ft th at they rea lly a re autho riz ed. 

T hat might no t be correct. But m ost of the win gs don’t. I will pu t it 

th at way, s ir.
80

So what we are doing is getting them up to authorized strength. 

We eliminate a wing and the o ther wings pick up those aircra ft.

Senator Hathaway. But you say the overall number will remain 

the same.

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Senator Hathaway. It seems like the only thing you are going to do 

is have a shift of the employment, which we can argue about and 

debate whether it is a smart thin g to do strategically. I don’t think it 

is ; regardless of whether Loring is in the picture or not.

I think we ought to be employing as many bases as possible in order 

to make sure tha t we could survive a strike if tha t happened. And I 

can’t see that actual cost saving, even if I go along with the argument 

tha t we should reduce the employment, because it seems to me that 

the cost per un it isn’t going to be any-----

Colonel Morton. As I understand it, there is a requirement to be 

fairly specific on that particu lar question in the draft study.

Senator H athaway. That study you say is going to be out when ?

Colonel Morton. The tentative schedule is before July 1.

Senator Hathaway. Of course, no hearings will be held until that 

has been released ?

Colonel Morton. Tha t is correct.

Senator Hathaway. So everybody has a chance to examine it 

thoroughly and testify about it.

Colonel Morton. That is righ t. The way it is spelled out, it is 15 

days, and then you have 45 days in which to gather more data as a 

result of that. That, of course, can be extended.

The one thing I might add, the tentative decision is by December 1. 

I think that has been made available.

Senator Hathaway. That you say will be made before the 1st of 

December ?

Colonel Morton. Well, no. I didn’t say it tha t way. I said by 

December 1 is the tentative schedule the way it is laid out now.

Mr. Cohen. Would you tell us of the 3,300 military personnel how 

many you would anticipate would be retiring from the service?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. It would be just a guess on my part. We 

haven’t studied that.

Mr. Cohen. Theoretically, they could all stay right in and just be 

transferred to other bases ?

Colonel Morton. That is true. But then we would stop bringing 

them in on the bottom to replace them on the top.

Mr. Cohen. Stop bringing them in on the bottom ?

Colonel Morton. Because we could do that.

Mr. E mery. How do the facilities at Loring compare with other 

installations to which these airc raft may be transferred? In other 

words, are we possibly eliminating a facility that is potentially more 

valuable and in a more desirable location than maybe the base to which 

it is transferre d ? How do these bases compare ?

Colonel Morton. Looking at the whole picture, the aircraft facilities 

are adequate here. I don’t know of any maior difference in aircraft 

facilities. Some of the support facilities at other bases might be newer. 

I don’t have those exact figures with me on when all the other bases 

were built.
81

Mr. E mery. What about the geographic location ? There are other 

Air Force bases tha t are located in more densely populated regions 

that have environmental problems to consider; there are concerns for 

the local citizenry, about noise and things of th at nature, which aren’t 

a problem here.

Is it possible by e xpanding the facilities maybe we are enhancing 

the problem someplace else which is not a problem here? In other 

words, are we making the best use of the facilities we have available? 

Shouldn't we maybe be tran sferrin g other airc raft to Loring rather 

than transferring this aircra ft someplace else? Do you think this is 

a consideration tha t has been made properly? Are you aware tha t 

suggestion was in fact followed at all ?

Colonel Morton. I am aware of the prior discussions with you 

gentlemen and your aides. As to the specifics of why didn't we nominate one at another place and leave Loring alone, I can't really answer, other than to go back to the single-mission concept and that 

Loring is a single-mission base and was nominated for that reason.

Mr. E mery. Isn ’t it true that a base with a single mission or multimission is only designated according to what the Air Force decides 

to do with it ? In other words, if Loring should be designated a multipurpose facility and given the equipment to do th at job, it would be 

as much as any other.

Colonel Morton. I t could be tha t way. But the way it exists today 

it is only a single-mission base.

Mr. Cohen. Are all the proposed reductions applied only to singlemission bases?

Colonel Morton. In the Strateg ic Air Command.

Mr. Cohen. Are there any single-mission bases tha t have not been 

scheduled for realinement or for closing ?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Mr. Cohen. Where are they ?

Colonel Morton. Let me thin k. I can get you that information.

Mr. Cohen. Get that information, because I understand also each 

one has had to prepare this environmental narrative.

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

[The information requested follows:]

Yes; the “single mission’’ SAC bases similar to Loring a re : Blytheville AFB, 

A R; Kincheloe AFB, MI (also proposed for realinemen t) ; Wu rtsmith AFB, MI. 

The dr af t environmental impact statement will be published in the Federal 

Register, probably by mid-July 1976.

Mr. Cohen. We would have been in a position to get access to tha t 

so we might compare the environmental statement or narrative statement that you have prepared with all of the other SAC bases.

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. Those are filed I believe with the Air 

Force PR E in the Pentagon.

Mr. Cohen. But you say there are other single-mission bases that 

are not scheduled for reduction, realinement, or closing?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Mr. Cohen. You would still stand by your statement in the economic 

impact statement th at you signed ?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Mr. Cohen. Loring is one of the best bases in the U.S. Air Force.

Colonel Morton. I will stand behind it.
82

Mr. Cohen. We trus t you will. W e ask why they picked Lor in g to 

close. Th an k you.

Mr. Case. Ju st to pursue th at sing le-m ission base questio n a little 

bit fu rth er. We raised th at several weeks ago with A ir Fo rce peop le 

in W ash ing ton . They g ot to about th e same point as you did, in exp laining why Lo ring was selected. W hich is t he question which th e delega ­

tion has been ask ing since early Ma rch . It came down to the answer 

th at single-missio n bases were th e subje ct fo r cu rta ilm en t an d for 

closure.

That brou gh t us to the conclusion th at Lo rin g must be a special 

single-m ission base of some kind or th e oth er. But they cou ld not at 

th at time prov ide us with any inform ation as to why Lo rin g, ra th er 

th an several othe r unto uched sing le-m ission bases aro und th e country, 

was selected f or majo r cu rtailm ent.

Th ere are several single-m ission ins tal lat ions, SA C ins tal lat ions, 

aro und the co un try which are sm aller t ha n Lor in g; and, therefore, I 

would assume, less efficient th an L oring. Some are much fu rt her south 

th an Loring, fu rt her west th an Lo rin g.

I realize you pro bab ly are no t in a position today to pro vid e the 

dis cri mi natio n between different sing le-m ission SA C bases. How ever, 

I rea lly would like to hav e avail able fo r the he aring as detai led an 

ans wer to th at question as possible. W hy was Lo rin g selec ted amo ng 

all of the single-m ission bases in th is coun try fo r th is action ?

Colonel Morton. L et me ge t bac k to th at ju st a lit tle b it. I am not 

sure you un de rst an d fully the d ifferenc e between th e single- and mult imission.

If I m ight, h ere in the local are a. Pea se, you would think would pos ­

sibly be a single-m ission base. However, it also ha s the New H am pshir e 

Gu ard flying ou t of the re, or the Reserve . I am no t sure which it is.

In th e M ili ta ry A ir L ift Comm and , most of t he bases are associated 

wi th aeria l po rts and nav al ports. We hav e the m at Ch arlest on and 

McGuire on an Army base. Th e tac tic al ai r lift person nel are all 

asso ciated wi th Army bases. Al thou gh the y hav e an Air Fo rce base 

name, most of the m are ad jac en t to an Ar my fac ility and are tied 

together an d, therefore, wou ld be called a multim ission, althou gh the 

A ir For ce h as only one mission at th at insta lla tio n.

I th in k it is also significant th at there is a need fo r Lo ring to be 

used fo r a fo rw ard op erating base and to be used fo r tran sf er ring 

airc ra ft routinely back and fo rth to E urop e and also on a co ntinge ncy 

opera tion. Possibly some of thes e othe r single-m ission bases could n’t 

be used fo r th at .

Mr. Coh en. W ha t do you mean by con ting ency, fo r exa mp le ?

Colonel Morton. An incr eased al er t req uirement. I can’t rea lly go 

int o it too deep. It is classified. Bu t th at is ba sically w hat I am saying. 

Th at in form ation is available to you in Wa shi ngton .

Se na tor H athaway. Let me ask you, Colonel—and I gue ss we had 

be tte r cu t off the questions so we can go to oth ers who are scheduled 

to testify —are you pa rtic ip atin g in the rep ort of the envir onme nta l 

st udy; you. yourse lf ?

Colonel Morton. Not dir ectly. In di re ct ly I have assiste d gr ea tly in 

ga thering the da ta th at is bein g used, or some of the da ta t h at is be ing 

used fo r inc lusion in th e stu dy.
83

For example, that book we updated. As you might note in there, 

there are a lot of areas tha t say “Not available.” We have made extensive efforts throughout all of the communities gathering data for 

that since the announcement; plus we have supplied personnel survey 

data—in other words, how much money do I spend in the local area, 

this kind of thing, and other things as opposed to just economic.

Senator Hathaway. Did you discuss this matter with the Pentagon 

before you testified here today ?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. I was there Tuesday and Wednesday; 

I arrived late Monday night and I came back Wednesday. Basically 

I was down there to be filled in on the prio r discussions with you 

gentlemen and your aides.

Senator Hathaway. You have been authorized to make all of the 

statements that you have made here at this hearing?

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir. I wasn’t instructed not to brief anything 

or not to answer. I wasn’t told what I couldn't say. I was put on my 

own.

Senator Hathaway. I am particularly interested in the statement 

you made that the Air Force would like to keep this open i f they got 

the money. It could be crucial to what action we might take.

Colonel Morton. I hope not. We will find out tomorrow if I have 

exceeded my power.

Mr. E mery. If I could ask you one final question, Colonel. Did you 

have any direct input into the recommendation that Loring be one 

of the bases considered for closing or substantial reduction?

Colonel Morton. No, sir.

Mr. E mery. This was in no way a recommendation from you or 

from your staff?

Colonel Morton. That is correct.

Mr. Emery. Were you consulted by the Pentagon ?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. We were informed.

Mr. Coiien. One final question. You recall that Griffiss A ir Force 

Base was scheduled by the Secretary of the Air Force for reduction 

or closure. Then after trans piring political events there suddenly wa-a

a reversal of the decision and they decided to keep it open.

I was wondering, for the benefit of the people here, since we were 

told when we asked the A ir Force official what criteria were used to 

select Loring for reduction, we were told, “We can’t tell you tha t.” 

When asking about the argument to reverse the Secretary’s decision, 

they said, “We can’t tell you that .”

I would like perhaps for you to tell us what criteria do you think 

we should be developing here at this particular meeting and the ones 

tha t will be taking place in July and August that you thin k would be 

persuasive to the Secretary’ of the A ir Force to keep it open?

Colonel Morton. Exactly what you are doing today and what the 

Save Loring Committee is doing.

Mr. Cohen. Is there anythin g in addition that we should be 

stressing ?

Colonel Morton. I haven’t analyzed it th at deeply.

Mr. Cohen. You have analyzed it for the purposes of closing it. 

Did you analyze it for purposes of keeping it open, helping us out ?

Colonel Morton. I don’t believe tha t is in my charter, sir. B ut from 

my knowledge, the Secretary is fairly new in the job. In fact, I am
84

not sure of the exact (dating of it, bu t I do n’t believe he was there 

when the back room work was done to come up with th is pro posal 

alt hough he was in office when the ann oun cem ent was m ade.

Bu t he is a man of hig h in tegr ity . I believe th at if yo ur case is 

strongly pu t, th at he could possibly use one of the alt erna tiv es th at 

will be listed.

Mr. Cohen. I s t ha t wha t happened at Rome Air C enter th at caused 

the reversa l ?

Colonel Morton. Th ere was pressure fro m somewhere, yes, sir. I 

believe the g entlema n th at ran th at an d worked out there said it took 

10 to 12 mo nth s of ha rd work , but they got it cha nge d.

Mr. Cohen. Th an k you.

Mr. E mery. Colonel, if you h ad been consulted, if the P en tago n had 

asked your reco mm end atio n fo r clo sing of this facility or reduct ion 

of this facility, what answer would you have give n? Would you have 

recommended ag ain st it or for it, bas ed on yo ur military position?

Colonel AIorton. I would have told them I don’t have sufficient i nform ati on to make a recommendation . I would hav e to look at the 

whole pictu re of all bases eve ryw here to see what the pro blem is, and 

the n I would make a recomm endation.

Mr. E mery. C ertai nly you must h ave a basic feel fo r the im portance 

of thi s base and its mission.

Colonel Morton. Yes, sir.

Mr. E mery. I) o you feel s tro ng ly enough abo ut tha t mission th at you 

would have made a reco mm end atio n, based on yo ur k nowle dge of its 

mission ?

Colonel Morton. No, sir. I stil l ca n’t, because even tho ug h I get 

alo ng ju st wo nderf ul up here with th e local peop le—a nd th at sta tement still sta nd s as I signed in t he re —T don’t know the full realm o f 

wha t is go ing on a t all the o ther bases. So I can ’t say which is p lus and 

which is minus .

Mr. E mery. Colonel, th an k you very much fo r yo ur co ope ration.

Se na tor H athaway. Colonel, th an k you very much. We hope that 

you are sti ll Base Comm and er tom orrow . And for m anv ye ars to come.

Th e next, pan el of witnesses is f rom F or t Fai rf ie ld : B etty Joh nston , 

For t Fa irf ield Chamber o f Com merce; Da vid Dorsey, Fir st National 

Ba nk of Aroostook; Vince Be rnier , I.G .A .; Jo hn Anderson , Ja ndra ’s 

Woodshed.

STA TEM ENT S OF BETTY JOHN STON, FORT FA IR FIEL D CHAMBER OF

COMMERCE; DAVID DORSEY, FI RS T NATIONAL BANK OF AROOSTOOK: AND JOHN ANDERSON, JA ND RA ’S WOODSHED

Ms. J ohnston. Con gressm an Cohen, Ch air ma n Hatha way , Congressm an Em ery, a nd the good peo ple of A roostoo k Co unty who have 

come t od ay to show th eir concern to th is co ngre ssional del ega tion and 

to show th ei r appre cia tion and s up po rt of the Sav e L or in g Com mittee 

and the go od w ork tha t the y ha ve done thu s fa r.

As y ou know. Fo rt Fa irfiel d is a sma ll ag ric ultural com munity . W e 

will not feel the drastic i mp act th at Caribou and Lime stone will feel 

if th is cutba ck is made imme dia tely. However, we do hav e pro bab ly 

three businesses t h at m ay close if thi s cutback is m ade. A ll of our businesses in Fort Fairfield will feel th e effect, mostly because of the civil 

service emplo yees who work at Lorin g.
85

We have about 60 families in our community who are dependent 

upon an income from the Federal Government. If these families no 

longer have th is income, each one of our businessmen will feel a big, 

drastic reduction in the ir sales.

If Mr. Ayoob had been able to stay today to testify, he had intended 

to approach the tax burden that would be inflicted on people as a result 

of the civil employees no longer being here at Loring.

I do feel, and I have been critical of the fact tha t the farming community of Aroostook County has not shown enough concern about this 

proposed cutback.

We in the farm ing community will be the people who will feel, over 

a long period of time, the fact that Loring is no longer operating at 

maximum capacity.

I would again like to say we appreciate the work tha t the Save 

Loring Committee has done. I would like to express mv thanks to the 

people who have been so generous in contributing to the fund to see 

that this cutback is not made. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you, Betty.

STATEMENT OF DAVID DORSEY, FIRS T NATIONAL BAN K OF 

AROOSTOOK

Mr. Dorsey. I am speaking on beh alf of my small business. I know 

if Loring is cut 83 percent, it will have a definite effect on all retail 

stores which would affect wholesalers; therefore, raising prices again 

in Aroostook County.

But I strongly feel that if you people do your homework well and 

we do ours, we can stop the cut. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF JOH N ANDERSON , JAND RA ’S WOODSHED

Mr. Anderson. Gentlemen, I am Joh n Anderson, from Ja nd ra ’s 

Woodshed, in Fo rt Fairfield. Ours is a small business. In fact, it is 

closed today because I think this is important enough tha t we take 

care of some business to perpetuate the county.

Each of us in a small town wears several hats, from the chamber of 

commerce to a businessman to a citizen and taxpayer. First, as a businessman, when a small business such as mine, who depends on getting 

50 to 60 percent of their income directly from base personnel pu rchases—not from the base purchases but the personnel on the base— 

take 83 percent of tha t away and I might as well close my doors.

I have one alternative, which is to change the operation of the business. But with antiques and gifts, there isn’t too much you can change.

I would hate to be faced with giving it up.

As a citizen and taxpayer, the only way I can see to save money, 

and from what I understand of this whole closure, it at least at one 

time has been predicated on saving money for the A ir Force and DOD, 

is to reduce the cost at the base.

But when you operate something at 17-percent capacity, how can 

you save money? You either operate at full capacity or you shut it 

down. The snow removal, the heating, the maintenance, all of the fixed 

costs attached to operating the base are going to continue for 17 per-
86

cent and a contingency that won’t be talked about or can’t be talked 

about. It doesn’t make sense to a businessman.

Thank you.

Mr. Cohen. It doesn’t make sense to us, either.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much, all three of you.

Our next panel is from Houlton: Fra nk Dunn, Dunn’s Furn iture: 

George Brown, Fogg Co.; and Francis Pierce, First National Bank of 

Aroostook.

STATEMENTS OF FRANK DUNN, DUNN’S FUR NIT URE; GEORGE

BROWN, FOGG CO.; AND FRANCIS PIERCE, FIRST NATIONAL BANK

OF AROOSTOOK

Mr. Dunn. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Maine 

delegation, I am Frank Dunn, treasurer of the Dunn Fur niture Co. 

in Houlton, and here on behalf of Dunn Furnitu re and Chamber of 

Commerce in Houlton, as well as the H oulton Regional Development.

Aly remarks will be mainly directed toward the impact that this 

Loring cutback would have on our own business, because that is where 

I am most concerned.

We are a small business in retail furn iture sales, employing 29 

people. In 1971, we opened a 30,000-square-foot wayside operation 

at the exit of Route 95. The idea of this was to try to obtain some 

of the traffic from the northern end of the county—Presque Isle, 

Caribou, and, of course, including Loring.

The project was financed by the local bank and the SB A. We were 

encouraged by the increased sales throu gh the improved exposure, 

so we started plans for a 20,000-square-foot warehouse on the same 

site in order to improve our service.

Needless to say, these plans have been put on the shelf, pending 

the outcome of Loring.

Research of our records indicates we would sustain a minimum of 

20-percent reduction in sales should the proposed cutback occur. Such 

a reduction in gross sales would require us to reduce our staff.

We would estimate, in discussions the other day, t ha t immediately 

on hearing of the date of the cutback, at t hat date we would probably 

cut back about four employees, with a look toward cutting back a total 

of six within 60 days.

This would represent a payroll loss to the town of Houlton of 

approximately $40,000. The reduction of staff and the subsequent payroll loss would occur with several other firms in the Houlton area, 

in varying degrees.

Since we are already at an 11-percent unemployment situation in 

the southern end of the county, most of these families, in order to 

find work, will have to relocate.

The reduction in population, of course, means further reduction 

in business. We go back to the snowballing effect.

To change the subject a little bit, having spent over 12 years with 

the Air Force in both active duty and Reserve duty, I felt that the 

strategic importance of Loring had sufficient merit when we moved 

our operation to the exit of Route 95 to sustain the north ern end of 

Aroostook County for an indefinite period of time.
87

It was my feeling th at the United States needs a military A ir Force 

base on American soil on the great circle route between the New 

York-Washington area and Europe, and on our Northeastemmost 

border.

If this has been changed, then the whole theory of flying must have 

been changed.

One final point. In Houlton, we presently have a newly constructed 

20,000-square-foot industrial spec building tha t is empty, and no efforts by the State or the Houlton Regional Development have been 

successful in finding a tenant.

This being the case, how could we expect to fill Loring’s 9,000 acres, 

even if they were to give them to us ?

Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you, Frank. George ?

STATEM ENT OF GEORGE BROWN

Mr. Brown. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Cohen, and Congressman Emery, I thank you very much for having this opportunity to 

represent the town of Houlton and also the firm which I am associated with, Almon Fogg Co.

We are a small wholesale firm. We are one of the major suppliers 

of this area, supplying the dealers of Aroostook County with hardware, sporting goods, building materials, and so on.

In fact, our wholesale sales in the area of approximately a 20-mile 

radius of Loring amounts to about 25 percent of our sales. This is our 

wholesales.

Consequently, you can see an economic blow in this area through 

the loss of payroll, through the loss of jobs, the purch sing power 

would be lost, the housing starts wouldn’t be there, maj >r repairing 

wouldn’t be there, the recreational facilities tha t we supply tha t are 

largely used by Loring men because they hunt and they fish, and this 

is a major industry in this particular area.

I happen to be the buyer of the sporting goods for our firm. In the 

117 years that the company has been in business, the last time since 

1946 that Loring has been here we have increased tremendously. I 

went to work for the company in 1940. At that time we had 13 employees. At the present time this has increased to 28. This is partially 

due to the Loring impact on the economy.

I know we have no concrete way of determining how much our 

economic loss might be to us personally because we are fa r away. We 

are 65 miles from here. But whatever impact it has on the immediate 

area is definitely going to spin off and affect us, as well as the other 

businesses in the town of Houlton.

For 30 years, since 1946, I have been quite closely associated with 

the base. For a number of years we sold the base exchange a tremendous amount of merchandise.

The established central buying out of State, at which time we lost 

this business. But through our service to the area, we were able to pick 

up this substantial loss.

For these 30 years, all the businessmen in the area have been assured 

tha t Loring was the first line of defense. They were the closest to 

Russia. They could meet any air craft; or when we had the missile
88

here, we could attack with missiles and be substantially closer in time 

to perhaps stop the enemy before they reach us.

As has been stated a number of times before, we have watched 

businesses grow and helped them grow. O f course, now with this impact upon us, I can notice that drastically now. And calling on 

dealers, tryin g to get future orders for hunting equipment, already 

dealers are a little bit jittery.

How much should I buy and do I need guns and ammunition for 

fall ? Are we going to have the people here to purchase this material ?

As has been noted before, it isn’t tha t we are going to wait until 

it happens to have an effect on us. I t already is having an effect on us. 

Already people are watching their purchases. They are pulling them 

in.

Maybe, if it doesn’t happen, when the time comes, they aren’t going 

to have the merchandise available for the people when they want it. 

This is bad. This is very bad. Because we need leadtime on many of 

these things.

Another feature tha t I am concerned about is the President’s plan 

for unemployment, making jobs. Here we have an area where we don’t 

have to make jobs. We already have an industry that has the jobs 

available.

True, our unemployment has been anywhere from 10 to 12 percent, 

or better, But if this economic blow comes to us, then our unemployment may rise—I have heard projections from the unemployment 

office—as high as 24 percent.

What is this going to do to the Pres iden t’s plan? He has to turn 

around and make some jobs for the people. I feel that it just isn’t 

good sense to take an industry out of there that already has the jobs 

available and for the President to have to make jobs available for 

people when they already have them.

Thank you.

Senator H athaway. Thank you. George. Francis?

STATEMENT OF FRANCIS PIER CE

Mr. Pierce. Mr. Chairman, members of the delegation, than k you 

for allowing me to testify here. I originally thought I would not 

testify, but as I sat and listened to the other testimony, it seemed to 

me that I should say something as one of the bankers in the community.

To use the colonel’s phrase, to state the position of the Aroostook 

County Banker’s Association, since I am not an officer of that organization, would certainly be speaking alxive my pay grade.

I shall try to get a statement for the record of this meeting from 

the Aroostook County Banker’s Association, as it seems to me tha t 

would be pertinent information.

Mr. Donald Collins, in his very brie f remarks in response to Mr. 

Cohen’s question, made two observations about the trailer homes, I 

believe, and mobile homes and real estate mortages, which would be 

a considerable impact.

I also wear another hat here at this table in that I am vice president 

of Almon Fogg Co. I see no reason for stating the Fogg Co. again. 

Mr. Brown has done th at probably more ably than I can.
89

I shall consider myself at tha t meeting in the position to take this 

information back to our association so that they can give for the record 

of this meeting their views on this matter.

Than k you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much, all three of you.

Our next witness is Air. Perham Amsden, president of the Maine 

Teachers Association.

Your entire statement will be made a pa rt of the record. If you 

could summarize it, we would appreciate it. We are runn ing a little 

short of time.

[The statement appears at p. 91.]

STATEMENT OF PERHAM AMSDEN, PRESIDENT, MAINE TEACHERS 

ASSOCIATION

Mr. Amsden. Thank you, Senator Hathaway, Congressman Emery 

and Congressman Cohen. I would like to express first of all my thanks 

at the opportunity to lie here, and I would like to take you briefly 

through some of the statistics which appear on the white pages at the 

close of my statement.

If you turn to the first white page, please, it is exhibit A, entitled 

“Number of Aroostook County Students Connected with Loring,” 

tha t provides 1975-76 statistical breakdown of the number of Loringconnected students.

Slightly more than 1,500 of those in column A are students that 

live on Federal base installations, either in Presque Isle, Limestone, 

Caribou, et cetera. Slightly under 1,000 students are listed in the 

second column. Those are the students whose parents are employed on 

Federal installations.

Combined together, they represent alxmt one-sixth of the student 

populations in these central Aroostook County schools.

We could look at the impact of the closing of Loring in one way by 

the number of teacher job positions that would be lost.

If you would look at exhibit B, we have taken the current number 

of teachers in each of those 10 distric ts and the number of students 

tha t are there, the number of Lo ring students, and made a guesstimate, 

if you will, tha t based on th e cu rrent pupil/teacher ratio, the number 

of teachers tha t would be reduced in force would be approximately 

139.

I think the important part of that, however, is in terms of the economic loss to the communities in purchasing power, buying power, 

since 139 teachers with an average salary of roughly $10,000 in annual 

salary comes close to $1.5 million a year purchasing power lost.

I would like to make a comment briefly that a spinoff to this whole 

thing is the fact you have two teacher trainin g institutions as part of 

the university system in this area. A loss of 139 teaching positions, or 

some comparable figure, would be devastating to those particular stu ­

dents c urrently in college, as well as to the future enrollment of these 

two institutions.

"While we have done nothing to attem pt to calculate the impact on 

the program and the impact on jobs of these two institutions, I think 

we would have been remiss not to have brought this to you r attention. 

I feel th at is an important area that needs to be considered.
90

Lastly, we have given you statistics in exhibit C and exhibit D in 

terms of the amount of money which is channeled into the school 

system from the State, including the reimbursement from the Federal 

Government for the pupils in the school systems here because of their 

relationship to the Federal installations.

Finally, I would simply say this, tha t we stand ready to provide 

you with whatever facts and figures we can on a continuing basis relative to the impact of the closing of Loring as it relates to education 

in the schools.

Thank you very much, because all of the teachers in the area I think 

are very much concerned about not only their futures hut the future 

of the children th at they deal with, because most of these children are 

going to stay here, settle here and work here, and their jobs depend 

on what happens.

Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

Mr. Cohex. Just one question. Out of the almost $2.5 million, that 

is the impact that we get, on exhibit D.

Mr. Amsdex. Exhibit D, we get almost $2.5 million statewide.

Air. Cohex. More than a third of that comes to this area.

Air. Amsdex. To the county, righ t. You are bringing Brunswick and 

Topsham and other areas as well into that $2.5 million.

Air. Cohen. Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much. 

fAIr. Amsden’s prepared statement follows:]
91

Te stimo ny pre pare d fo r Maine’ s C ongre ss io nal D el eg at io n on th e 

clo sin g of Lor in g Air Fo rce Base

P re se nte d by : Perham L. Amsden, P re sid e n t 

Maine Te ac he rs A ss ocia ti on 

Au gu sta , Maine

May 10 , 1976

I am Perha m L. Amsden, P re sid e n t of th e Maine Te ac he rs Assoc ia tio n , re p re se n ti n g ap pr ox im at el y 12 ,5 00 members th ro ug ho ut th e 

S ta te of Maine.

I am h ere to comment on th e im pa ct o f th e pr op os ed clo sin g of 

Lo rin g Air For ce Ba se, not onl y on th e Town of Lime sto ne but a ls o 

on se v e ra l o th er com mu nities in c e n tr a l Ar oo sto ok Co unty.

E x h ib it A e n title d "Number of Ar oo sto ok County st u d en ts 

co nn ec te d w ith Lor in g" pro vid es a c u rre n t 197 5-7 6 s t a t i s t i c a l 

breakdown o f th e number of L oring -c on ne ct ed st u d en ts in Ar oosto ok 

County sch o o ls .

S li g h tl y more th an 1,5 0° stu d e n ts a re lis te d in Column A as 

"S tu den ts L iv in g on Base." S li g h tl y un de r 1,00 0 stu d en ts are 

l i s t e d in th e B colum n as st u d en ts whose p are n ts a re employed by 

th e Base.

Combined to g eth er th ey re p re se n t ab out l/ 6 th th e st udent 

p o p u la ti o n s in th ese c e n tr a l Ar oo sto ok Cou nty sc hools .

One way o f lo ok in g a t th is im pa ct is to examine th e number of 

te achin g p o s it io n s th a t would have to be re du ce d by th e d ecli n e in 

st u d en t p o p u la ti o n . E xhib it B ad d re sse s th e is su e of Te acher 

L ayoff s. The f i r s t column re p re se n ts th e number o f to t a l te a c h e rs 

c u rre n tl y employe d to te ach th e to t a l number of st u d en ts lis t e d in 

th e sec on d colum n. Based on ea ch d i s t r i c t ’ s per p u p il r a t io , we 

ha ve c a lc u la te d an ap prox im ate number o f te ac h ers th a t would be 

re du ce d as a co ns eq ue nc e of th e L or in g clo sin g fo r c e n tr a l Ar oosto ok 

to be a to t a l o f 139 p o sit io n s. Based on an av er ag e an nu al te a c h e r'
92

s a la ry o f s lig h tly in ex ce ss o f 31 0, 00 0, we can c a lc u la te th a t th e 

to t a l lo s s to th e economy o f th ese comm un ities in th e v ic in ity of 

31 ,5 00 ,0 00 annual ly .

A sp in -o ff from th is is th e f a c t th a t two cam puses o f th e 

U n iv ers it y system in th is County pro vid e te ac h ers fo r Aroo sto ok 

County and a l l Maine sc hools . A lo s s of 139 te achin g p o sit io n s 

would d ev asta te th ose st u d en ts c u rre n tl y st udy in g on th ese campuses 

as w el l as c re a te a seri o u s prob lem fo r fu tu re enro ll m ent. The 

to t a l im pa ct on th e U n iv e rs it y syste m in pro gra m and jo bs i s an 

is su e we have not at te m pte d to c a lc u la te , but c a ll to yo ur a tt e n ti o n .

E x h ib it C is an att em pt to show th e Committee th a t th e S ta te 

of Maine su p p li es ro ugh ly two and o n e -t h ir d m il li o n d o ll a rs to 

c e n tr a l Aroosto ok to fund sc h o o ls . The fu nd in g is ba sed on a 

co m plica te d sc ho ol su bsi dy fo rm ula , bu t fo r th e pur po se s of th is 

stud y we have av erag ed th e S ta te su bsi dy between th e el em en ta ry and 

se co nd ar y p u p il s si nce we do n o t ha ve th e accu ra te num bers of 

el em en ta ry and seco nd ary p u p il s in each community.

How ever, th e S ta te is re im burs ed by th e F edera l Government 

fo r i t s "A" and "B" p u p il s. E x h ib it D shows th a t th e F edera l 

Gov ernm ent reim bu rsed Maine ab out $375 ,00 0 fo r 197^-75 fo r sc ho ol s 

im pa cted by Lor in g. T h a t' s ro ughly 36% of th e Federa l Go ve rnme nt's 

to t a l o f 32 ,^00 ,0 00 pai d to Maine in 15 7^-75 to a s s is t lo c a l 

commun ities im pacte d by F edera l I n s ta lla tio n s .

The economic im pa ct of th e c lo sin g of Lo rin g w il l ha ve major 

sig n if ic a n c e to th is a r e a 's sc h o o ls . The lo s s of jo b s, lo s s of 

F edera l fin a n c ia l su p p o rt , lo s s of purc has in g power to th e 

co m m un iti es , lo ss to th e U n iv e rs it y sy stem , and lo s s of fu tu re 

te ach in g jo bs fo r Ar oosto ok C oun ty 's young pe op le w il l se rio u sly
93

impact upon the total economy of this area.

We stand ready to provide the Maine delegation with facts

and figures on a continuing basis relative to the impact of the 

closing of Loring on education and schools in this area.

I thank you for the opportunity to be here today to represent 

the teachers of this area who are deeply concerned, not only about 

their own future but also about the future of the children they 

teach and prepare for adulthood - many of whom remain here to 

settle and work throughout their adult life.

73 -4 44 0 - 76 - 7
Number of Aroostook County St ud en ts Connected w ith Loring

School

D is tr ic t

St ud en ts 

Liv ing 

on Base 

"A"

St ud en ts 

Whose 

Paren ts 

Employed 

by Base 

"B"

To tal 

"A" & "B"

To tal

School

Po pu lat ion

Caribou 18 252 270 3119

Caswell P it . 25 29 5*+ 133

Easton 0 19 19 339

Lim esto ne 1272 270 15^2 2028

SAD #1

Pre sque Isle 192 6U 256 3663

SAD #20

For t F a ir fi eld 0 62 62 1356

SAD #2U

Van Buren 0 129 129 1518

SAD #+2

Mars H il l 0 26 26 960

SAD #U5

Washburn 0 UU UH 787

Union #122 0 79 79 U89
95

Tea ch er L ayoff s

Sch oo l

D i s t r i c t

No. o f 

T each ers 4

T o ta l

S tu d e n ts

L o ri n g

C o n tr acte d

RIF

Tea ch er

C ar ib ou 17 2 4 3 ,1 19 270 15

C as w el l P i t . 12 4 133 5M- 5

Eas to n 23 4 339 19 1

Lim es to ne 113 4 2,0 28 1 ,5 ^2 86

SAD #1

Pre sq ue I s l e 158 4 3,6 63 256 Ik

SAD #20

F o rt F a i r f ie l d 75 4 1,3 56 62 3

SAD #2*+

Van Buren 95 4 1,5 18 129 8

SAD #l+2

Mars H ill i+8 4 960 26 1

SAD #1+5

Wa shb ur n Ul 4 787 1+1+ 2

Un ion #12 2

New Swe den) 5

St oc kh ol m ) i+

Woodland ) Ik 4 1+89 79 1+

TOTAL 139
96

S ta te o f Maine E d u ca ti o n a l Fun ds f o r S tu d e n ts Q u a li fy in g un de r 

P. L. 874

S ta te S ubsi dy p er S tu d e n t fo r 19 76 -7 7 Sch ool Y ea r:

E le m en ta ry K-8 p er p u p il 3 754.0 0

Sec ondar y 9-1 2 p er p u p il lii o.oo

1864.0 0 4 2 =

Av erage per p u p il 3 932 .0 0

Sc ho ol

D i s t r i c t

No. of 

S tu d e n ts X Av erage T o ta l

C ar ib ou 270 3 932 3 251,6 40.0 0

Cas w el l 54 932 5 0 ,3 2 8 .0 0

Eas to n 19 932 17,7 08 00

Lim es to ne 1542 932 1 ,4 3 7 ,1 4 4 .0 0

SAD #1

Pre sq ue I s l e 256 932 238,5 92.0 0

SAD #20

F o rt F a i r f ie l d 62 932 57,7 8 4 .0 0

SAD #24

Van Bu ren 129 932 1 2 0,2 28.0 0

SAD #42

Mars H ill 26 932 24,2 3 2 .0 0

SAD #45

Washb urn 44 932 4 1 ,0 0 8 .0 0

Un ion #122

New Swede n) 

St oc kh ol m ) 

Woodla nd ) 79 932 7 3 ,6 2 8 .0 0

TOTAL 2481 X 932 3 2 ,3 1 2 ,2 9 2 .0 0
P .L . 87V F ed era l Rev enue Expen ded f o r 19 7^ -7 5 School Year

S t a te T o ta l 32 ,1+0 0,00 0.00

N o rt h ern Maine U ni Ser v D i s t r i c t

C ar ib ou 3 57,3 35-0 0

Cas w el l P i t . 21,5 60.0 0

Eas to n 3 ,6 0 0 .0 0

Lim es to ne 6^2 ,1 5 0 .0 0

SAD #1 (P re sq ue I s l e ) 8 3 ,^ 6 5 .0 0

SAD #20 (F o rt F a i r f ie l d ) 15,5 0 5 .0 0

SAD #2^ (Van Buren ) 25,5 0 5 .0 0

SAD #>+2 (Ma rs H ill) 5 ,9 6 5 .0 0

SAD #+5 (W ash burn) 8 ,0 5 0 .0 0

Un ion #1 22 :

New Sweden 1+,1+95.00

St oc kh olm 3 ,3 2 0 .0 0

Woo dland 3 .6 8 0 .0 0

TOTAL $8 7U ,6 30.0 0 A ll o c a ti o n

S o u rc e : Maine D ep ar tm en t o f E d u cati o n al and C u ltu ra l S e rv ic e s , 

Form ED 263 - C om pu ta tion o f U nit A ll o c a ti o n to Fund 

P u b li c Schools

Data Rep ro du ce d by Maine T each ers A s so c ia ti o n , May, 1976
98

Senator Hathaway. The next witnesses are Richard Cullins and 

Mary Golob from the Damon Elementary School of Loring A ir Force 

Base.

STATEMEN TS OF RICHARD CULLINS AND MARY GOLOB, DAMON 

ELEM ENTARY SCHOOL, LOR ING AIR FORCE BASE

Mr. Cullins. Members of the congressional delegation, I had a 

speech prepared, but time is getting along. We would only be rehashing what everybody has said.

I think what the teachers are concerned with in the area is let us 

educate our children to the standard tha t they are accustomed now, 

and keep us off the unemployment lines. Let us work. That is all we 

want.

Thank you.

[Mr. Cullins’ prepared statement follows:]

Statement of Richard A. Cullins

The recen t proposal of the Air Force to c ut back Loring A.F. Base will crea te 

the following pro blems:

1. The educatio nal stan dar ds maintained by our present school system will be 

greatly altered.

2. Economic problem s will be incurred by those forced into early retirem ent. 

This will crea te low’ income retirement benefits for many teachers for the 

remainder of their lifetimes.

3. The percentage of available teaching positions is almost nonexistent. As 

the situ ation is today the University of Maine at P. I. will grad uate 36 degreed 

teachers this year. In addition to these the presently unemployed teachers. 

There will be many applican ts for 6 possible teach ing vacancies in Aroostook 

County. To top this, the release of over 50% of Limestone’s teach ing staff will 

really establish an excess of teachers.

4. Economically there will be a % million dollar loss of salary by the 50 or 

more unemployed Limestone teachers and co-workers which will devas tate the 

income of this area. This figure of $499,700.40 represents staff pay for only the 

Damon School.

5. The normal sta ndard of living will be greatly diminished. Loss of property, mortgages an d emotional hardships is only a small percent of our immediate problem. This property value figure of $1,170,000.00 represents the real 

esta te investm ent.

6. Teachers will automatically lose tenure, medical benefits, life insurance, 

retirement possibilities. There are just no a vailable jobs for the 39 Damon Staff 

home owners.

7. With the loss of our present jobs, the United States Government will also 

lose 23% of $499,700.00 as income tax from the Damon teaching staff. This 

23% means $114,931.00 loss of income ta x to the United States Government or to 

the State of Maine.

8. Some of our past teaching staff has chosen to retire in this area . With 

limited base facilities being offered this will force these retired people to choose 

another area to resettle.

Lastly, and perhaps the most upsetting facto r is : Without available teaching 

employment we must leave our homes and move wherever one can find work. 

We chose Aroostook County as our home. Leaving our county would be difficult 

but even so, jus t where does one go? All over our Continental U.S. is the problem of over abundance of educators. Why not do your part to help us remain 

here?

Thank you for the privilege to tell you our personal side of our st ory !!
99

STATEMENT OF MARY GOLOB

Ms. Golob. I would like to speak as president o f the Maine Art Edu ­

cation Association, and I would like to commend the Limestone School 

Department for having played a leadership role in the dedication to 

the educating of the total child by initiatin g our programs for all 

students as early as 1965. The Limestone School Department has an impressive record in the 

fostering, encouraging and making substantial financial commitments to the arts. I feel it would be a severe loss to the aesthetic awareness 

in Aroostook County for the Limestone School Department to be curtailed in its function of leadership within the educational community.

Thank you.

Senator H athaway. Thank you both for your testimony.

Rev. Earle T. McKinney, president, Northern Aroostook Clergy 

Fellowship and minister, First Universalist Church, Caribou.

STATEMENT OF REV. EARLE T. McKINNEY, PRESIDENT, NORTHERN

AROOSTOOK CLERGY FELLO WSHIP AND MINISTER, FIR ST UN IVERSALIST CHURCH, CARIBOU

Reverend McKinney. Mr. Chairman and members of the Maine 

delegation, I appreciate this o pportunity to speak here today as president of the Northern Aroostook Clergy Fellowship. This has over perhaps 5 or 6 years averaged a group of 15 or 16 

Catholic and Protestant clergymen in local churches, plus chaplains 

from the Loring Air Force Base. Tha t group is more than half of the clergy in the northern Aroostook area of Caribou north up to 

Fo rt Kent. Military personnel and families from Loring Air Force Base, Limestone, Maine, have over the years been associated with the churches in the area, in varying numbers in the churches and at differing times.

The clergy and parishioners of these churches involved can attest 

tha t the presence of the A ir Force people in th eir churches has been of 

great value.

That presence has served the needs of the Air Force people to identify with people and institutions in the community. It has served as 

well the churches in many ways. These people have brought vitality from the ir broadened experiences of having served and lived elsewhere. They have had innumer­ able talents t hat have been available to the churches’ needs. They have 

participated in the life of the churches in ways as deep as the local members, such a s: congregants, church school students, church school 

teachers, youth workers, organists and music directors, choir members, 

soloists, lay readers, committee chairmen and members, board of 

trustees members, presidents or chief lay officers, and in special 

programs. And a number of these A ir Force persons have been the more committed among the congregations as to the value and the importance 

of the church.
100

There is no extensive information compiled on each religious society

as to the participation of Air Force personnel. I t is common knowledge among the religious leaders, however, tha t some of the churches 

exist because of people from the base, as such people have extended 

their religious preference to this area.

Other churches have significant participation which makes their 

existence much easier and perhaps possible. It is true as well that some 

churches are affected very little, or even not at all, either directly by 

Air Force personnel or by civilian employment a t the base.

In addition to the Air Force laity , some of the chaplains stationed 

at Loring Air Force Rase have been active members and officers of 

the Northern Aroostook Clergy Fellowship, where fellowship with 

civilian clergy was mutually enjoyed. The chaplains have, on occasions, 

been available to assist at the local churches by preaching and providing programs. They have also held an annual Clergy Day at the 

base which has brought together clergy’ of all denominations, a rare 

occasion, for programs, orientation to the base, and fellowship.

In short, the people stationed at Loring Air Forse Base and their 

families have been of great help in maintaining some religious communities of this area, providing thereby a wide selection of alternative 

denominations, and enhancing the life of the community through their 

participation in and relationship to the people of the area around the 

base.

Thank you.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much, Reverend McKinney.

The next panel will be Ronaldo Morin, American Legion, and John 

Sotomayor, president, Maine Military Retirees Association.

STATEMENTS OF RONALDO MORIN, AMERICAN LEGION; AND JOHN

SOTOMAYOR, PRESIDENT, MAINE MILITARY RET IREES ASSOCIATION

Mr. Morin. Senator H athaway, Congressman Cohen, and Congressman Emery, my name is Ronaldo Morin. I am Department Senior 

Vice Commander of the American Legion. I am here today on behalf 

of the American Legion.

The Department of Maine, the American Legion, wishes to be recorded as opposed to the move by the Department of Defense to reduce 

Loring Air Force Base.

Despite many requests, the Department of Defense has failed to give 

to the National Security Committee of the Department of Maine, the 

American Legion, any information which would provide for a background on the necessity of the proposed reduction. The executive board 

of the Department of Maine, American Legion, has gone on record to 

voice the opposition of the Legion to the cuts at Loring Air Force Base.

Coupled with the action by the Maine American Legion Department,' 

the entire New England delegation of officers of the American Legion 

meeting at national headquarters at Indianapolis, Ind., May 3 to 6, 

1976. has voted to present a united front to voice the concern of the 

veterans of New England on the drainout of defense contracts and 

installations from the New England area.
101

Only a few years ago the Department of Defense reported tha t the 

mission capability of Loring Air Force Base was the key to the defense 

of the Nation. Now. without any sufficient reason, the people of Aroostook County and Maine are being told that Loring Air Force Base 

must be reduced to meet the economy drive of the administration.

Certainly nothing has changed in the drive to present a firm defense 

of the Nation or to reduce the impact which Loring Air Force Base 

has on the strategy of defense for this Nation.

The American Legion stands second to none in the support of p rograms aimed at providing for the best possible defense of our people 

and to curtail aggression in the world. We cannot remain silent while 

our defense installations are being reduced without any good reason. 

To say tha t some economic factor has decided this course which calls 

for the reduction of Loring Air Force Base is false both in economy 

and defense patterns.

Nor can we remain silent in the face of the drastic economic factors 

being affected by the proposed cutbacks at Loring Air Force Base. 

The unemployment rate, already high in Aroostook County, will really 

climb with the reductions of employment at the base.

The veterans of Aroostook County employed a t Loring Air Force 

Base and others who are making a life for themselves deserve better 

consideration from the Department of Defense than this proposed 

reduction.

The American Legion of Maine, and indeed the New England area, 

feels that if the proposed reductions at Loring Air Force Base are 

carried through, the effect on the economy would be devastating, to say 

the least.

Speaking on behalf of Department Commander Robert R. Rich and 

Department Adjuta nt Daniel E. Lambert, and representing the American Legion and Auxiliary, we urge this delegation to call upon the 

Department of Defense to make all information available to the public 

and to study in depth the impact of the reduction not only on the 

economy but also on the defense picture of the Nation.

The American Legion continues to call for a strong military presence in the path to peace, and we feel tha t the reduction of Loring 

Air Force Base is not in the best interest of the Nation.

On behalf of the legionnaires and auxiliary members of Maine, I 

urge this delegation to give every possible avenue of exploration to 

prevent the reduction of Loring Air Force Base.

Tha nk you.

STA TEM ENT OF JOHN SOTOMAYOR, PRES IDEN T, MA INE MI LITA RY 

RE TI RE ES ASSOCIATION

Mr. Sotomayor. Senator Hathaway, distinguished delegates, my 

name is John Sotomayor. I am an Air Force retiree. T am representing 

the Maine Military7

 Retirees Association as its president.

Naturally we are greatly concerned with the proposed cutbacks. 

For the record, T have submitted copies of the statement.

Senator Hathaway. Your entire statement will be made a part of 

the record.

[The statement appears on p. 104.]
102

Mr. Sotomayor. I will summarize. The retiree’s situation is serious 

and rather complex. I will skim over my statement and get into some 

of the highlights.

I wish to go into certain areas, and I wish it clearly to be understood 

tha t this is in the rumor category. Prior to the announcement that 

Loring was to be reduced, the rumor had circulated, and I had personally checked this out at the base and was assured that they had no 

knowledge of any cutbacks. And, of course, 2 weeks later the Loring 

cutback proposal was announced.

There have been rumors circulated th at the base hospital was being 

reduced to a staff of 2 doctors and 19 airmen—a dispensary type 

operation. Such a detail plan existed as early as February.

It appears coincidental that the operating room facilities, obstetrics 

and pediatrics, have been temporarily curtailed in the hospital due to 

the necessary cleaning of the air ventilation system. This is a valid 

consideration, so it would appear. This has been in process for some 

time now.

It is my understanding at this time that Cary Memorial Hospital in 

Caribou is to handle the base hospital needs during this interim period.

There were other rumors th at I think would be appropriate to note 

here, even though they are rumors. They persist that many personnel 

on the base know where they are going, that most of the bomber crews 

are going to Ellsworth Air Force Base, which is to become a double 

wing, absorbing personnel from Loring A ir Force Base and Kinchlee 

Air Force Base.

The latest rumors—tha t 200 assignments have been made and are 

being held at Barksdale Air Force Base pending release by the Air 

Force. Another notice was received recently with an effective implement date of August 1976.

The patte rn of rumors seems to be a consistent development of plans 

leading to the actual proposed cutback. Many feel there is no question 

of whether or not the reduction will take place but, rather, when. If 

this is only a proposal under consideration, why the complete detailed 

planning that has already been laid out? Time will tell whether these 

rumors are well founded.

Moving along to other are as: It should be appropriate to note for 

your record that, the Maine military retirees have conducted a survey. 

It is, in fact, in progress r ight now. We know there are approximately 

485 retirees residing here in Aroostook County. We have been able to 

get a hold of 315 of them. They are being surveyed, and data is still 

coming in.

The basis of the statistical analysis is on 77 of these people, and tha t 

represents a 24.5-percent sampling. One was not surveyed because he 

has already left the area. Another is leaving the 18th of this month.

There will be a great potential personal loss, great increases of cost 

and expense, if Loring is reduced. There were 294 of the 315 people 

who purchased houses in this area, to the amount of $7,135,380.

Of this number of people, 53 percent say that if Loring is reduced 

and the hospital facilities are reduced, and the other features which 

the retirees retired in this area to start with are taken away, these 53 

people will leave the area, and it will be at a considerable loss.

This includes disabled personnel. Some are medically retired who 

are on fixed incomes who do not enjoy the privilege of other work 

because of their incapacities.
103

As fa r as th e L imestone school system, I listened t o the figure s given. I he ard the figure q uoted as 1,500. You can add 146 of these 77 because 146 children thus ia r would also have to be included in those figures th at might not be rea dily available. Th is wou ld affect th e Limestone school system by an ad ditio na l 57 children , not co un tin g wh at else 

will be com ing in. The increase to the m ili tary person nel in te rm s of additio na l expense, if Lo rin g is reduced, is estim ate d at $212 pe r m onth : 78 per cent of all ret ire es do not hav e med ical insu rance to offset the expense of medicaid or Cham pus sho uld medical facil ities be eli mi nated from Lor in g; 93 perc ent of those sur veyed rely on the ho spita l at Lo rin g A ir F orce B ase fo r medical treatmen t. W ith ou t med ical fac ilitie s here to de fra y t he insurance, es pec ially in the case of those th at a re d isabled, th is m eans if the y di dn ’t have the fund s to de fra y the cost, the y would 

have to go to Tog us, a roun d tr ip of over 500 miles. I di dn ’t go in depth int o medic al aspects. It is in th is docu ment 

th at I have sub mitted fo r th e record. Th ere ar e man y, man y problem s in the re. I th in k th at the Air 

Force ou gh t to be very con cerned about th is fo r th ei r peop le. In the area of pr op erty owners, 58.2 perce nt indic ate the y would be faced with losses an d tra ve l and relo cation expenses. Tha t figure 

is $2,479,452. Seventy -eight percen t of th e retirees mad e th ei r home here to be close to th e military in sta lla tio n fo r its h ospit al, com missa ry exchange, rec rea tion, and economic we lfa re—74.4 percen t of the retirees are out-o f-s tat ers . The y are non-M ain e natives. Retire es rep resent over 5,000 ye ars of hon orable an d fa ithf ul service to ou r country . They perfo rm du tie s all over the wo rld . ,An d the benefits of retirees used to be ma ny and varied, an d th ey are now bas ically red uce d to those benefits lik ely to be revo ked by the reduct ion or clos ure of Lo rin g 

Air Fo rce Base. If I un de rst an d the Air Fo rc e’s proposal cor rec tlv, the base woiild sti ll maintain its run ways, runw ay clearanc e and flight fac ilities , in­ clu ding t he t ra nsi t facilities, which I un de rst an d wou ld be beefed up. If so, th e costs asso ciated with it will not change appre cia bly . Th e Gover nm ent sav ings wou ld be ma inl y on ai rc ra ft opera tio ns, person ­

nel, and fuel. If the ai rc ra ft would be tran sf er re d to some othe r place, the y will be op era tio nal and fuel will be consumed. An d the only app reciable difference th at I can see is th at the re will be abo ut a 65-perc ent cut 

in person nel. I know one area th at pos sibly might not have been touche d on. I have to relate th is to a yo ung ca ptain on active du ty rififht here at Lo rin g who has a normal rea ssignme nt. He has a tr ai le r fo r sale. He was abou t to conclude selling his trai le r when the ann oun cem ent was 

made. Needless to say, he is unable to sell his trailer. He will make his Air Force assi gnm ent. I don’t kno w wh at he is going to do, wheth er he will suffer the loss or wh eth er the A ir Force 

will reimb urs e him fo r the loss. I wo nder if he owned a house wh eth er the A ir Fo rce would bail him out of t ha t, too. So there are man y impac t conside rat ion s for the 

Air Fo rce as well.
104

The last area I want to touch on is the national defense and the 

B -l bomber. The United States has in the past maintained its position of world leadership, and there have been many reasons for that.

One of them certainly is military capability, the technology and 

our superiority. With today’s potential threa ts and world conflicts, 

we cannot and must not take a second place position in our military 

posture. I don’t think the American people will put up with that. 

We must not reduce our strategic capability nor reduce our ability 

to deliver our military.

Loring is one of the closest, if not the closest, stateside base to the 

heart of the Soviet Union. The B-l bomber has the capability as one 

in the triad concept to deliver the payload when and if required.

There have been many critics of the B-l, particularly in the area 

of funding. Loring is exceptionally well suited as to location from 

which the B -l bomber or F - l l l could operate.

To adopt the philosophy that it is better to use missiles alone could 

be dangerous. Once launched, you cannot reprogram it or recall it.

Our Air Force personnel are the best trained in the world. Coupled 

with our technology and weapons such as the B -l bomber this provides the Nation with a key strategic weapon system.

I ask you, what price are we willing to pay ? Are we willing to move 

to a second place position? If not, we had better see to it tha t the 

B-l bomber comes to Maine, and we had better keep Loring 100 percent 

operational.

Tha nk you.

Senator Hathaway*. Thank you.

[Mr. Sotomayor’s prepared statement follows:]

Statement of th e Maine Military Retiree’s Association

My name is John Sotomayor. I am an Air Force Retiree an d I am representing 

the Maine Military Retiree Association (MMRA) as their President. We are 

greatly concerned on the proposed cutback which not only affects the local 

economy but can be as fa r reac hing as Bangor and Por tlan d. The retiree’s 

situ ation is serious and complex and we may find more on the impact th at 

perhap s has not been considered yet.

Before going into that area, I would like to direct atte ntion to recent events— 

those specifically in the “rum or category.’’ As early as last September rumors 

circ ulated that one of the flying units would be leaving. It turn ed out that later 

several aircraft were tra nsferre d on a temporary basis to support operation s 

elsewhere. Earier this year, ano ther rumor circulated th at a big reduction 

wus coming and that Loring’s Bomliers and Tank ers would lie leaving. I personally 

checked this out with the Wing Commander at Loring AFB and he assured 

me th at he had no knowledge of any cutback or movement plans for any units 

at Loring AFB. Two w’eeks la te r the Loring Cutback Proposal was announced.

Rumors circulate d th at the Base Hospital was being reduced to a staff of 

two doctors and 19 airm en—a dispensary type operation. Such a detail plan 

existed as early as February. It appears coincidental th at the Operating Room 

facilitie s, Obstetrics and Pedia trics have been “temporarily affected” in the 

Base Hospital—due to necessary cleaning of the air ventilation system—a valid 

consideration, so it would appear. This has been in process for some time now. 

It is my understanding at thi s time that Cary Memorial Hospital in Carib ou 

is to hand le the Base Hospital needs during this interim period. Rumor has it 

th at thi s is earm arked as a semi-permanent arrangeme nt for some time to come.

I dra w atte ntio n to specific rumors such as local moving company’s being 

ale rted to prepare for extra larg e household movements commencing July 1976. 

It is proper to point out th at Jun e through August are norm ally heavy moving 

periods. Concurrently, rumors persist that many personnel know where they 

are going, tha t most of the bomber crews are going to Ellsworth AFB which 

is to become a double wing—absorbing personnel from Loring AFB and Kinchloe
105

AFB. The lat est rumors—tha t 200 assignments have been made and are being 

held at Bark sdale AFB landing release by the Air Force. Lastly, that a Movement notice was received at Loring AFB this past week w ith an effective date of 

August 1976. As sta ted these are some of the more talked about rumors. Two concerning 

movement and Base Reduction were correct. In the patte rn of these rumors there seems to be a con sistant development of plan s leading to the actual 

proposed cutback. Many feel th at there is no question of whether or not the 

Reduction will take place, but rather whe n! If this is only a proposal under 

consideratio n, why the complete detailed planning that has already been laid 

out? Time will tell whether or not these rumors are well founded.

Moving along to other ar ea s: The MMRA is in process of conducting a survey 

of Maine Military Retirees. Approximately 485 retirees live in the Northern 

Region of Maine. 315 retiree s were sent surveys. We received 77 at the point 

we cut off the imput, and thi s represen ts a sampling of 24.5% of the surveys. 

They are s till coming in ! One was not surveyed because he has already left the 

area. (The Loring cutback announcem ent influenced that decision to relo cate!)

According to the data alread y received, a gre at potential personal loss, and 

increase s of costs and expenses could impact itself on our retired military personnel : 72 of 77 retirees purchased homes an d/or properties which amount to 

$1,747,500.00.

E q u it y ______________________________________________________ $836, 500

Mortgaged ___________________________________________________ 911,000

If 24.5% is a reasonable sample—it would be reasonable to assume that the 

tota l for all 315 retiree’s surveyed would reflect the following : 294 of 315 purchased—an amount of $7,135,380.00. Equ ity ____________________________________________________$3,415,692

Mortgaged --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3, 719, 688

Wh at is significant is th at 20 of 77 retirees indicate th at if the Base is reduced 

they will leave the area. (One is leaving the 18th of thi s month.) If work is not 

available—due to reduction, 10 more will leave. If h ospital facilities are reduced 

to a dispensary level, 5 more will leave. If the base is reduced, and they can 

afford it, 6 more will leave. This is a tota l of 41 persons—or 53% of those w’hose 

survey we received.

53% of all surveyed rep resents 167 persons. Included in these numbers are 

retirees who have disabilities and who subsist on fixed incomes. Some are 

tota lly dependent on the medical facilitie s available at Loring AFB. There are 

7 medically retired and 15 othe r reti red who have disa bilities. (8 of the 15 are 

from 20 to 70 percent disabled.) In addition to the obvious reduction which would affect the Limestone Schools, 

39 children would be fu rthe r reduced from the school rolls due to relocations 

forced by a Loring cutback. 18 more children would be deleted—based on a 

movement/relocation con sideration.

In the area of increased costs to the retiree's: These were averaged. The ave rage fam ily, consisting of husband , wife and three children. Per month

in crease

Food __________________________________________________________ $62. 25

Household goods________________________________________________ 45. 43 Clothing ______________________________________________________ 18. 23

Ent er tain m en t__________________________________________________ 19- 88

M ed ic al _______________________________________________________ 63. 33

To tal____________________________________________________ 212.00

78% of all retirees do not have medical insurance to offset the expense of 

Medicare or Champus, should medical facilities be elim inate d from Loring. 93% 

rely on the hospital at Loring AFB for medical trea tment. I should also point 

out th at Champus requires th at the reti ree pay 25% of the bill—providing th at 

the doctor and/o r medical fac ility recognizes the Medicare recommended charge. 

If not, and the charge is higher, the retiree must absorb the additional cost. 

If the reti ree has a disability, he might not be insurable in most cases, w ith those 

who provide Champus insurance. The approximate cost for monthly insurance is $48.00. Without adequate medical facilities or fund s to defray the costs, the 

only altern ative is travel to TOGUS, Maine—a rou ntrip distance over 500 miles.
106

In the are a of property owners, 42.8% indicate they would be faced with 

$1,542,474.00 loss, plus a travel/re loc ation expense of $224,651.00 to leave the 

area. 10.4% are not sure if they will be forced to move. If they are, $702,171.00 

loss.—$10,156.50 trav el/reloca tion expense.

These to ta l:

L o ss__________________________________________________ $2,244,645

Tra vel/relocate expense___________________________________ 234, 807

Total_________________________________________________ 2, 479, 452

78% of the retirees made their homes here for reasons of being close to a 

militar y installation for its hospital, Commissary, Exchange, recreation and 

economic welfare. The retirees represent OVER 5,000 YEARS of honorable and 

faith ful service to our country—through three wars, and performed service in 

every pa rt of the world. Less we forget, it was not so many yea rs ago that our 

service people earned as little as $50.00 a month. It has only been in the recent 

15 y ear s th at military pay was brought closer to where it belonged. The benefits 

of the retirees used to be many and varied. They are now basically reduced to 

those benefits likely to be revoked by a reduction or closure of Loring AFB. 

The Air Force has recently stressed it’s concern about not utilizin g the potential 

of its retired communities, yet little consideratio n is given to the hardships, 

gre at personal loss and economic impact of its retirees here in Northern Maine.

If I understand the Air Force proposal correctly, the Base would still maintain its runways, runway clea rance and flight facilities , increasing the transient 

facilitie s. If so, the costs associated with it will not change appreciably. The 

net government savings would be mainly on aircraft operations, personnel and 

fuel. What cost to the government to relocate all the personnel, its materiels, 

the shipment of Household goods. . . . The amount would be stag gering! What 

about the economic impact on those active duty personnel who have bought 

houses and mobile homes? Consider the following: I know of one young Captain 

who has a normal assignment and will shortly be leaving. He had his mobile 

home up for sale and was ready to close on the sale at the time the Loring 

Cutback announcement was made. The buyer backed out and the Captain still 

is unable to sell his trailer. Will the Air Force reimburse him for his loss? 

If he owned a house, would the Air Force bail him out of it? There are many 

economic impact considera tions for Air Force personnel too.

Has impact consideration been given to the pipeline system from Searsport? 

Freight, rail and moving companys located downstate, but who do a volume 

of business with Loring AFB? All the businesses along the road between Houlton 

and Limestone will feel the impact of the personnel reduction.

The las t are a—and perh aps one of the most impo rtant, touches on two things. 

They are Natio nal Defense and the B -l Bomber. The United States has in the 

past maintained it’s position in world leadership for many reasons. One important reason was it’s position—second to none, in our militar y posture, and in 

term s of military capability, technology and superiority. Today with the potential threats and world conflicts, we cannot and must not tak e a second place 

position in our military posture. We must not reduce our stra tegic capabilities, 

nor reduce our ability to deliver our military might whenever needed to defend 

our rig ht to live as a free nation—without fea r or intim idation. Loring AFB 

is one of the closest, if not the closest statesid e base to the he art of the Soviet 

Union. The B-l Bomber has the capability, as one in the TRIAD concept, to 

deliver the payload if, and when required. There have been many critics of the 

B-l, partic ula rly in the area of funding. Loring AFB is an exceptionally well 

suited forward location from which the B -l Bomber or the F - l l l ’s* could 

operate. To adopt the philosophy that it is better to use missiles alone could 

be dangerous. Once launched, you canno t recall a missile. Our Air Force Personnel 

are the best trained in the world. The human reliability fac tor coupled with our 

technology and such aircraft as the B -l Bomber—provides this nation with a

key strategic weapon system. You have only to look at the new Russian “Backfire” airc ra ft being introduced into the Soviet arsenal. The B -l Bomber and 

the backfire has a great deal in common, They are aircraft of the future.
I ask you. What price are we willing to pay? Are we willing to move to a 

second place position? If not, we had better see to it th at the B -l Bomber 

comes to Maine and we had better keep Loring AFB 100% operational.

In conclusion, additional data will be available upon receip t and tabulating 

of the remaining surveys. It will tak e several weeks for the whole package, but 

we shall be happy to furnish whatever data necessary to help the Save Loring 

Committee formulate its impact study.

It has been a long day, and you have all been very patient. On beha lf of the 

Maine Military Retiree Association, I thank you for allow ing us to present 

our views.

J ohn A. Sotomayor,

President.

[Attachment A]

1. BRA NCHES OF SERVICE RETIRED

Branch of service

Retired

from nonnative

Num ber Loring retirees

(a ) US AF...........................................................................................................................

(b ) U.S. Ar my.................................................................................................................

(c ) U.S. Na vy..................................................................................................................

(d ) USMC..........................................................................................................................

70 58 57

6 .............................. 0

2 .................. 1 0 .................. 0

2. DATE RETIRED

Year

Total Retired from

retired Loring

1976..................

197 5..................

197 4..................

197 3..................

1972...................

1971...................

1970...................

1969...................

1968...................

1967...................

196 6...................

1965...................

1964...................

196 3...................

1962...................

1961...................

1960 and prio r

T o ta l. ..

5

7

17

7

7

8

1

7

5

2

2

2

2

1

2

3

4

7

15

5

7

6

1

4

2

1

2

2

1

1

78 58

3. Employed at Loring AFB : 20 Retirees. 16 in Appropriated Fun ds and 4 in 

Non-appropriated.

4. Own th eir own business : 9 Retirees (11.6%).

5. Housing : 5 out of 77 ren t homes (6% ). 72 of 77 purchased homes (includes 

farms, mobile homes, recreational prop erty and oth er inv estm ents).

E qu it y _________________________________________________ $836,500.00

Mortgaged _____________________________________________ 911. 000. 00

To tal __________________ :___________________________ 1, 747, 500. 00

Projected totals_________________________________________ 7, 135, 380. 00

Projected losses_________________________________________ —2, 479, 452. 00

Real estat e taxes only____________________________________ 24, 592. 00

Total projected__________________________________________ 100, 415. 57
108

[Attachment B]

Dire ct increases in costs d irectly associated with reduction of Loring AFB and 

its facilit ies:

Per month Per year

Food .................................................................................................................................................. $62 .25 $747.00

Household goods............................................................................................................................. 45 .43 545 16

Cloth ing.................................................................................... 18.2 3 218.76

Entert ainment.................................................................................................................................. 10.8 8 130.56

Medical..................................................................................................................................................... 63 .33 759.96

To tal ..................................................................................................................................... 212 .00 2,4 01. 44

Employment effect anticipa ted due to job relation of direct employment on 

base or local communities where individua l's job would be effected by Loring 

red uctio n:

Yes No No opinion

Retiree_____________________________________________________ 48 26 3

Wife.......................... .................................................. . ....................................... 15 59 3

Other family mem bers____________________________________________ 5 ___________________________

BA NK ING SE RV IC ES USED

Savin gs Check ing

(a ) Local commun ity....................... ................................................................................ ............. 31 46 (b ) Loring Bank (N N B ).................. ...................... ........................................... ......................... . 10 23 (c ) Loring Federal Credit Union.................................... ............................................. . ............... 44 11 (d ) Other (o ut of S ta te )................................................. ......................................... . ............... .. 3 3

Types of mortgage on purchased prope rty :

FHA ______________________________________________________ 6

VA/GI loan __________________________________________________ 26

Priva te ban k_____________________________________________ 17

L.F.C.U. ____________________________________________________ 8

Gl ED UC AT IO NA L PROGRAM

Ricker Husson

College UMPI UMFK College NMVTI Other

At Lorin g A F B ................... 15 2 .........................................................................................................

At Car ibou......................... 7 ...................................................... 1 ..........................................

Houlton.............................. 1 .........................................................................................................................................

Presque Isle ................................................. 1 ...................................................... 2 ........................ .

Fort Kent.................................................................................. 2 .................................................................................

Devine Institute of

Tech nology................................................................................................................................................................ 1

If Loring is reduced will this have an effect on your plans?

Don’t know______________________________________________________ 14

No comment_____________________________________________________ 13

Not at all______________________________________________________ 4

Hospital affected, will leave_______________________________________ 5

Will leave______________________________________________________ 20

Will sweat it ou t_________________________________________________ 5

If work not available, will leave____________________________________ 10

Afford it, will leave______________________________________________ 6
109

[Attachment C]

♦6 of 77 

retirees

Number sampled

Children of retirees attending schools:

(a ) Elementary schools____________ ________ ______ ________________________

(b ) Junior high school............................................................................................................

(c ) High school.......................................................................................................................

(d ) Local college.....................................................................................................................

59 *31

26 »14

48 »17

13 >6

1

 At Limestone.

’ From Limestone.

Some selected comments from r etiree s:

1. We relied on Loring AFB when we decided to retir e here. Can’t believe the 

Air Force would close or reduce Loring. 4 retiree’s.

2. Will stay and sweat out economic recovery. It w ill be a hardship. 9 retirees.

3. A g rea t impact—we will be forced to a reduced sta ndard of living in orde r 

to manage on our fixed incomes. 12 retirees.

4. Will be forced to reloca te: 10 retirees.

5. Left or in process of leaving : 2 retirees.

6. Loss of Base facilities will adversely affect those with fixed incomes: 4 

retirees.

7. 70% reduction in employment opportunities may force move: 1 retiree.

8. Real estate valuations could drastically be redu ced: 1 retiree.

9. Have to leave family here and go elsewhere for wor k: 2 retirees.

10. Retired here because of Base facilitie s available. May have to leav e: 

2 retirees.

11. Great economic impact on all communities : 3 retirees.

12. College course—Education at Rickers could be badly affected: 1 retiree.

13. Unemployment burden will be increased if Loring is reduced. 1 retiree.

14. Un pri nta ble s: Numerous.

Senator Hathaway. Our next witness is Joel Leblanc, Aroostook 

County commissioner.

STA TEM ENT OF JOEL LEBLANC, AROOSTOOK COUNTY 

COMMISSIONER

Mr. Leblanc. My name is Joel Leblanc. I am the Aroostook County 

commissioner. I reside in Madawaska. In view of the lateness of the 

hour, I will just make a feiv comments.

I wish to make this comment about the fact tha t this closure at 

Loring will affect every community in Aroostook County, and not 

just the communities close to the Loring Air Force Base.

In this respect, the county taxes which this year amounted to 

$664,000 are based on a ratio of the property tax all over the county. 

So if there is a decrease in valuation in Presque Isle, in Caribou, and 

in Limestone, this will necessarily increase the taxes in areas such as 

Olamon and Matinicus. So the w’hole county will be affected and not 

merely the areas closely associated in proxim ity to Loring.

Also, I wish to bring out the fact th at w*e have just built a building 

in Caribou, and we spent $668,000. This is a courtroom building, and 

this was done w ith the idea that Loring was going to continue here.

We are in the process of putting up another building in Houlton, 

and we have awarded the contract for $202,000. If Loring closes, we 

will not be able to finish this building next year.

73 -444 0 - 76 - 8
110

We have built these buildings with revenue sharing. The register 

of deeds will be greatly affected by the closing of Loring. There will 

be a lot of transfer of land. I am sure there will be a lot of tax links. 

There will be mortgage foreclosures or whatever.

We will have to add on additional personnel initially, and then, 

afte r the base is closed, we will have to at that point eliminate 

personnel.

But I will submit a written statement, and I will also submit some 

facts and figures on the county budget. Thank you very much.

[The county information referred to follows:]

A r o o s t o o k C o u n t y , C o u r t o f C o u n t y C o m m i s s i o n e r s . M a y T e r m . A .D . 1 9 7 5 .

O n t h e t w e n t y - t h i r d d a y o f t h i s M a y t e r m o f t h i s C o u r t , b e i n g t l i e s i x t h d a y 

o f J u n e A .I ) . 15 )75. I t is O r d e r e d , t h a t t h e C o u n t y T a x f o r t h e y e a r 1 9 7 5 , a m o u n t ­

i n g t o s i x h u n d r e d f o r t y - s i x t h o u s a n d , s i x h u n d r e d n i n e t y - f o u r D o l l a r s , t h e 

s u m a u t h o r i z e d b y a r e s o l v e o f t l i e L e g i s l a t u r e o f M a in e , a p p r o v e d J u n e 3 , 1 9 7 5 , 

t o g e t h e r w i t l i a n o v e r l a y o f t w e l v e t h o u s a n d , n i n e h u n d r e d t w o D o l l a r s a n d s e v ­

e n t y C e n t s , b e i n g a s u m n o t e x c e e d i n g t w o i> er c e n t o f s a i d s i x h u n d r e d f o r t y s i x 

t h o u s a n d , s i x h u n d r e d n i n e t y f o u r D o l l a r s , b e a p p o r t i o n e d o n t h e s e v e r a l t o w n s , 

t o w n s h i p s a n d t r a c t s o f l a n d , a n d o n t h e t i m b e r a n d g r a s s o n t h e r e s e r v e d l o t s 

i n s a i d c o u n t y , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e l a s t s t a t e v a l u a t i o n .

A n d s a i d a p p o r t i o n m e n t i s h e r e b y m a d e a s f o l l o w s :

Apportio nment on towns Valuation Tax

Am ity...............................................................................................................................................................

Ashland.................................................................... ....................................................................................

Bancroft..........................................................................................................................................................

Benedicts.................................................................................................................................................

Blaine............................................................... ..............................................................................................

Bridgewater...................................................................................... .............................................................

Caribou.....................................................................................................................

Castle Hill.....................................................................................................................................................

Chapman................................................................... . ...................................................................................

Crystal..............................................................................................................................................................

Dyer Brook......................................................................................................................................................

Eagle La ke .......................................................................................................................................................

Easton................................................................. ................. ............................... .........................................

Fort Fa irfield...................................................................................................................

Fort Ke nt............................................................................. .....................................................................

Frenchville......................................................................... . .................................................................

Grand Isle................................................... ..........................................................................’ ......................

Haynesv ille .........................................................................................................

Herse y..............................................................................................................................................................

Hodgdon..............................................................................................................................

Houlton......................................................................................................................................2—

Island Falls............................................... .................................................................” 2 .. .” . . ” 2. ”

Lim estone................................................................................................................2 22______ 22222

Linneus................................................................................................................ .'.

Littleton ........................ ......................................................................................2.2..222222222.22222

Ludlow..............................................................................................2.....................222222222222222

Ma dawa ska.................. .......................................................................................2....222..22..22222

Mapleton ...........................................................................

Mars Hill...................................................................................................22.2222222222222222222222

M as ard is ............................... ................... .............................................................

Merr ill ........................................................................ ...........................................77 77777717

Monticello...............................................................................................................7.-7 7.77 77 7

New Limerick.....................................................................................................................7.77 77 7

New S w e d e n .. .........................................................

Oakfield........................................................................................7.7 ..777777777777'.

Orie nt.................................................................................................................................777 77 77

Perham ..................................................................................................7. 77 77 77 77 77 77

Portage La ke ........................................................................7. 7. 77 77 77 77 77 77 77

Presque Isle........................................ 7.-77.77 77 77 77 7

Saint Agatha........................................................... 77 77 .77 77771

Saint Francis......................................................................................1..7....7...7777771

Sh erm an......................................................................................17.1711 777777717'1

Sm yrna ........................................................1... .7 .7 77 77 77 77 77 7

Stockholm ...............................................................................1.71.71.11117777771777

Van Buren.................................................

w ad e.........................................................................7.77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 71 7

Washburn.............................................................................

Westfield...........................................................1-71.17111

Weston.....................................................................7.7.117

Woodland........................................................................77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77

$800,000 

6,7 00, 000 

560, 000 

940, 000 

3,6 00, 000 

3,960, 000 

64, 000, 000

1, 760, 000 

1,400, 000 

1,820,000 

1,200, 000 

3, 300, 000

11,500,000 

28, 500, 000 

20, 600, 000 

6, 000, 000

2, 500, 000

920, 000

700, 000

3, 200, 000 

2, 10 0,00 0 

5, 900, 000

12, 200, 000 

3, 450, 000 

4,60 0,0 00 

820, 000 

78, 600,000 

9, 000, 000 

11,250, 000

2, 360, 000 

920,000

5,60 0,0 00

3, 000,0 00 

2, 300, 000 

3,4 00,00 0 

1,9 50,00 0 

2,000, 000

4, 500, 000

74, 850,000

3,150, 000 

1,4 60,00 0 

2, 950, 000 

1, 250, 000 

1, 320, 000 

11,600,000 

1, 200, 000 

11,800, 000 

2,600, 000 

1,560,000 

4, 300, 000

$920.80

7,7 11.70 

644. 56

1,081.94

4,1 43.60

4, 557.96

73, 6 64.00

2,025.7 6

1.611.40

2, 094. 82

1.3 81. 20

3.7 98 .30

13, 236. 50 

32, 303. 50 

23,710. 60

6,9 06. 00

2.76 2.40

1, 058. 92 

805. 70

3,683. 20

48, 457.10

6, 790. 90

14,042 .20

3, 970.95

5, 294.60 

943. 82

90, 46 8.60 

10, 359.00

12, 948. 75

2,7 16 .36

1,0 58.92

6, 445.60

3, 453 .00

2.64 7.30

3.9 13 .40

2, 244.45

2,30 2.00

5,1 79 .50

86,15 2.3 5

3,6 29 .65

1,6 80.46

3, 395. 45

1,4 88.75

1,5 19. 32

13,351 .60

1.3 81. 20

13, 581.80

2,992. 60

1,7 95.56

4, 949.30

Total for towns 475,850,00 0 547,7 03. 35
App ortionm ent on pla ntations Valu atio n Tax

Alla ga sh ................................................... ...............................................................- ..................................... Cary ................................. ................................................................................................................................ C a s w e ll.......................................................................................................................................................... C yr.................................................................................................................................................................... E..........................................................................- ..............................- ........................................................... Gar fie ld _________________________ ____________________________________ ____________ — Glenw oo d------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- ..........- H am lin.............................................................................................................................- .............................. Ha mmon d_______________ __________________________________________________________ Mac wa hoc_____ . ______ _________________________________________ _____ _____________ M oro __________ _ _________ _________________________________ _________ _____________ N a shville .......................................................................................... - ........................................................... Ne w Ca nada............................................ - -------- --------------------------------------- -------------------------------- Oxb ow ............................................................................................................................................................ R eed................................................................................................................................- ............................ S t. Jo hn ------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ W allagras s_______ _______ _____________________________________ ______ - -------- -------------- Wes tm an land ________________ _______ _______________________________________________ W in te rv ill e....................... i ..........................................................- ...............................................................

$1 ,8 80 ,000 

58 0,00 0 

1,5 80, 000 

1,28 0, 000 

480, 000 

380, 000 

800, 000 

1,8 40, 000 

60 0,00 0 

90 0, 00 0 

620, 000 

2, 480, 000 

920, 0G0 

640, 000 

1,0 80,0 00 

1,16 0, 000 

1,6 00,0 00 

800, 000 

760, 000

$2, 163 .8 8 

667. 58 

1,81 8. 58 

1,4 73.2 8 

55 2.48 

437 .3 8 

920.8 0 

2,1 17.8 4 

690. 60 

1,0 35.9 0 

71 3.62 

2,8 54.4 8 

1,0 58. 92 

736. 64 

1,2 43. 08 

1,2 66. 10 

1,8 41. 60 

920. 80 

874. 76

To ta l fo r p la n ta tio n s .. ..____ ______ _____ ________ _______ - .......... .............................. 20, 320,0 00 23, 388 .3 2

To tal fo r un inco rp or at ed places and tracts of lan d an d to w nship s______________________ 76,8 94,0 43 88, 505 .0 3 Total on ti m b e r and gra ss on reserv ed lots in Aroos took C o u n ty ..........................................................— ................... - .....................

AROOSTOOK CO UNTY ES TIMAT E 1975-76

Nu mbe r

1000— D is tr ic t court (i nc lu des all 6 ): 

Cont ra ct ual se rvice s:

M ile age.....................................

Meals.........................................

M eals-p ris one rs __________

Lodgin g.....................................

T o lls ...........................................

Other (o ffi ce rs fe es)..............

Med ical ex am inat ions ...........

T o ta l......................................

1005— Sup erio r court :

Pe rsonal se rvices :

Cour t office rs ..........................

Medical se rvices ....................

Physic ia n.................................

Hospital....................................

Part-tim e em ploy ee s............

Ju ry co mmission ers..............

Grand ju ry ...............................

Tra ve rse ju ry ............... ..........

1973 1974 Actua l, 1974 1975 1976

10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 15, 561.13 16, 000. 00 16, 000. 00

1,200 . 00 1,200.00 2,1 06.1 4 1,8 00. 00 1,80 0. 00

17 5.00 17 5.00 325. 49 ‘ 300. 00 ‘ 300. 00

10 0.00 100.00 105. 70 100. 00 100. 00

50 .0 0 50 .0 0 72 .25 50 .0 0 50. 00

17, 000. 00 17, 000. 00 26, 370. 75 ‘ 25, 0 00 .00 ‘ 25,0 00.0 0

27.5 0

Con trac tu al se rvices:

Cou rt ap po inted atto rn ey s........... 14,0 00.0 0

Clergy men ...................................... 10 0.00

Cou rt ap po inted in te rp re te r... . 100.00

Ps ycological exa minations ............ 75 .0 0

R efe re es................................... 20 0.00

Cou rt ste no grap he rs...................... 10 0.00

M ile ag e.............................................. 6,5 00.0 0

Mea ls...................................... 1,2 00.0 0

Lo dg ing______ _______ 60 0.00

T o lls .................................................... 50 .00

Te leph on e............................. 50 0.00

Re nta l of equ ip m ent ........... .......... 25 .00

Postage.............................................. 300.00

Offic ers fee s...................................... 3,0 00.0 0

Witness fe e s................................— 6,5 00.0 0

Fish and game fees ........................ 70 0.00

28, 525 .00 28, 525.00 44, 5 68.96 43, 250. 00 43, 250. 00

8, 00 0.00 8, 0 00.00 9,5 13.0 0 9,000. 00 

10 0.00

9, 000. 00 

10 0.00

50. 00 50 .00

200. 00 200. 00 10 0.00 30 0. 00 300. 00 100. 00

400. 00 400. 00 350. 00 400. 00 400. 00

8, 0 00 .00 8, 000. 00 9, 259. 20 8, 000. 00 8, 000. 00

28, 00 0. 00 28, 000. 00 31, 482. 30 33, 00 0.00 33, 000. 00

14, 000.00 13, 958. 77 14 ,0 00 .00 14, 000. 00

100.00 75. 00 75 .00 75 .00

100.00 .. 100.00 100.00

75 .00 1,030. 30 1, 000. 00 1, 000. 00

20 0.00 573.25 200.00 200. 00

100.0 0 864. 50 1,2 00. 00 1,2 00.0 0

6,5 00.0 0 4,1 02.7 6 5, 0 00.00 5, 000. 00

1,200.00 1,85 1.71 1,500.00 1,5 00. 00

60 0.00 1,1 28. 80 1,0 00. 00 1,00 0. 00

50 .00 30. 50 25 .00 25. 00

50 0.00 535. 33 60 0.00 600. 00

25 00

30 0.00 402. 20 700.0 0 70 0.00

3, 000. 00 3,1 83. 54 3, 300. 00 3, 300. 00

6, 500. 00 7, 773.41 8, 000. 00 8, 000. 00

70 0.00 1, 750. 00 2, 200. 00 2,20 0. 00

Com mod itie s:

Office su pp lie s................................. 30 0.00

Books, pe rio dicals and su bscriptions...................................... 100.00

Statue s, referenc e bo ok s.............. 80 0.00

Cap ita l outlay: Office ...................................................

300.00 86. 25 300.00 30 0.00

100 .00 107.75 100 .00 100. 00

80 0.00 . . .

509. 96

400.00 400 .00

To tal 80,1 00.0 0 80,100. 00 88, 568. 43 90, 30 0.00 90, 300. 00

See fo otn ote s at end of ta ble .
AROOSTOOK CO UNTY ESTIMA TE 197 5-76— Co ntinued

Num be r 1973 1974 Actua l, 1974 1975 1976

1010— Sup reme ju dic ia l court:

Con tra ctua l service s:

Te leph on e .

Typew rite r (r epair and mainte210. 00 24 0.00 518. 30 240.00 260. 00

nance).. .

Cap ita l outlay: Eq uipm en t .

56 .0 0

575. 00

60 .00 

57 5.00 .

57.06 75 .00

75 0.00

85. 00 

750. 00

To tal 84 1. 00 87 5.00 575.36 1, 065 .00 1,0 95. 00

1015— Civil em ergency preparedness 

(c iv il def ens e):

Pe rsonal se rvice s:

D irecto r.........................................

C le rk -t ypis t I I .............................

Fuel alloca tio n offic e...... ..........

Con tra ctua l se rvice s:

M ile ag e.............. .............................

Mea ls................... .............. ..........

Lo dgi ng ..............______________

T o lls_________ ________ ______

Postage................................. ..........

Equ ip ment (rep airs and main 

te nance).....................................

6,6 56. 00 

4,8 70. 00

6, 994. 00 

5,11 6. 34

2, 500. 00 

950. 00 

750. 00 

10.00 

30 0.00

2, 5 00.00 

95 0.00 

75 0.00 

10.00 

300. 00

4, 6 77.63

5, 800. 00 

1, 9 50.00

1,85 2.67 

847.9 7 

723 .61 

2. 50 

274.60

7, 33 3.00 

6, 240. 00

7,8 41. 00 

6, 510. 00

2, 500. 00 

1,0 00.0 0 

85 0.00 

10. 00 

450. 00

2, 5 00.00 

1,100. 00 

850. 00 

10.00 

475. 00

su rance (i nclu din g lo o p ).. .

Dues ..............................................

Radio mainte nan ce ________

Gas, oil and gre ase................ . .

Commodities :

Office s u p p lie s .. ..................... ..

Tra in in g (salary and o th e r).. . 

Books, pe rio dicals and sub

s c rip tio n .-................................

Cap ita l outlay: Eq uipm ent, commun ications , new eq uipm en t

To tal

1020— Clerk of cour ts:

Pe rsonal se rvice s:

C le rk ...............................................

Dep uty cle rk .......................... . .

Spe cial dep ut ie s........................

Con trac tu al se rvice s:

Teleph on e......................................

T ypew rite r (r epair and m ain te ­

na nce ).....................................

Due s.............................................

Posta ge..................................

T ra ve l______ __________

Com m odities :

100.00 100.00 22 2.90 350. 00 400. 00

2,8 15.0 0 2,8 15. 00 2, 2 80.85 3, 500. 00 3, 500. 00 60 .0 0 60. 00 110 .00 50. 00 50 .00 90 0.00 900. 00 1,194 .8 0 1,2 00. 00 1,500. 00

100.00 100. 00 300. 00 300. 00

50 0.00 500. 00 572. 95 50 0.00 50 0.00 40 0.00 400. 00 28 .25 50 .00

50 .0 0

1,0 00. 00

50. 00

50. 00

1, 000. 00 1, 500. 00 1, 500. 00 2,19 2. 40

22,4 11.0 0 22,99 5. 34 22 ,7 31 .1 3 25, 383. 00 26, 636. 00

8, 500. 00 8, 5 00.00 8, 733. 48 9. 600. 00 8, 866. 80 6 ,6 50.0 0 6, 990. 00 7. 384. 00 7, 826. 00 8,0 91. 20 12, 090. 00 12,79 0. 00 14 ,0 31 .7 6 14, 362. 40 14, 830. 40

1,6 00.0 0 1,600.00 1,7 44. 37 1, 800. 00 1, 8 00 .00

200. 00 20 0.00 375. 56 200. 00 200. 00

300. 00

50 .00 50 .00 50. 00

300. 00 516.00 500. 00 50 0.00

104.38

Office su pp lie s 500. 00 500. P rinting 300. 00 300. Record boo ks. 100. 00 100. Books, pe rio dica ls, and su bs c ri p ti o n s .. 75 .00 75. Statute s, reference books

Capi ta l outlay: Office e q u ip m e n t.... 40 0. 00 40 0.00

T o ta l........................................................ 30,7 15.0 0 31, 755 .0 0

1025— Cou nty attorn ey:

Perso nal se rvice s:

Part-tim e em ploy ee s.....................

Co un ty in t e r n . . .............................

Part-tim e assis tan t attorn ey

gen er al..........................................

Con trac tu al se rvices:

La bo ratory te sts ..............................

Med ica l su rgica l, hospital............

M ile a g e .. ...................................

M e a ls .. ............................................*

Lo dg ing............................

Telep ho ne .........................................

Equ ipmen t (rep airs and mainte n a nce ). ......................................

Pos ta ge .............................................

C rim in al in ves tig atio n...................

D u e s .......... ....................................

Typew rite rs ( re pai rs and main ­

te nance)................

4, 0 00 .0 0

2, 00 0. 00

200. 00 

2, 000. 00 

1,0 00.0 0 

1, 200. 00 

1, 5 00 .00

10 0.00

75 .00 

4, 00 0.00 

5.0 0

See fo otn ote s at end of table .

4, 0 00.00

1,289. 08 1, 200. 00 1,2 00. 00

106.05 100. 00 100.00

22 4.09 100. 00 100. 00

119.90 75 .00 75 .00

29 .04 50.00 50 .00

985. 50 400. 00 400.0

35, 693.21 36, 26 3.40 36, 263. 40

4, 000. 00 8, 0 00 .00 8, 000 .0 0

72. 00

1, 269. 46

2, 000. 00 3, 300. 00 3, 50 0.00 3, 500. 00

200. 00 15.00 20 0.00 20 0.00

2, 000. 00 1, 760. 80 4, 000. 00 4, 000. 00

1,000.00 774. 96 1, 50 0.00 1,500 .0 0

1,200.00 316.00 1,2 00. 00 1,20 0.00

1,5 00. 00 1,122. 46 1, 500. 00 1,500. 00

100.00 88. 50 .

75 .00 30 .00 200. 00 200.00

4, 000. 00 8, 396. 74 4, 000. 00 4, 000. 00

5.0 0 15 .00 75 .00 75 .0 0
Number

113

AROOSTOOK COUNTY ESTIMATE 1975-76—Continued

1025—County attorney— Continued 

Comm odities:

Statutes reference boo ks.. 

Office supplie s....................

Capital outlay: Equipment........

Total.

1030—County commissioners:

Personal services:

Statutory salaries........................

Regular employees.....................

Part-tim e employee-Houlton 

and C aribou*. -.....................

Contractual services:

Consultants......................... .........

Mileage......................................-

Meals............................................

Lodging......................................-

Telephone........... .............. ........

Equipment repairs and maintenance, and typewriters---------

Advertisin g (notice and bid s)...

County reports...........................

Dues:

Maine Association...............

National...............................

Postage----------------------------------

Offi cers fees (posting notices)..

Commodities:

Office supplies_____________

Books, periodicals, and sections 

Statutes and reference books.

EEA..............................................

Dumps (Hayn esville )..................

Capital outlay: Office equipment—

Total.

1035—County treasure r:

Personal services:

Treasurer....................................

Part-time employee...................

Contractual services:

Telephone ......... . .................. . .

Equipment (repairs and maintenance)..................................... . .

Typewriter (repairs and maintenance)..........................................

Ad vertisin g.................................

Postage.......... . . , .......................

Post office box re nt ...................

1974 Dues..................................

Commodities:

Office s upplie s. .........................

Books, periodicals and sub

scriptions................................

Statutes and reference books.. 

r apita l outla y:

Office e qu ipm ent.......................

Ty pe wr ite r..................................

To tal..............................

1040—Houlton Court House:

Personal services: Custodian. 

Contractual services:

Electricity.......................

Sewerage/water.............. .

Attorney’s telephone . .. 

Grounds/snow rem oval...

pairs and m aintena nce).

nance.

na nc e.............................. .

Equipment (re pair and mainte

nance.......................................

Heating (rep air and mainte

nance......................................

Plumbing (re pa ir and mainte

na nc e....................................

Rubbish removal.......................

1973 1974 Actual, 1974 1975 1976

400.00 400.00 235.42 400. 00 400. 00

125.00 125.00 357.62 900. 00 900. 00

250.00 250.00 349. 00 500. 00 500. 00

16, 855.00 16, 855.00 22,102.96 25, 975.00 25, 975. 00

10,100. 00 10, 660.00 10,948. 38 • 12, 084. 00 * 12, 084. 00

11,258.00 11,827.40 12,571.65 13, 325. 00 13, 765. 00

*6,000 .00 * 6, 000. 00

snn on 500 00

2, 500. 00 2, 500. 00 1,216. 53 2, 000. 00 2, 000. 00

800. 00 800. 00 360. 84 250. 00 250. 00

500. 00 500. 00 326.55 500. 00 500. 00

1,000.00 1,000.00 972.01 1,100. 00 1, 200. 00

450. 00 450.00 302. 62 350. 00 350. 00

400.00 400. 00 663. 00 400. 00 400. 00

500. 00 500.00 498. 00 525. 00 550.00

1,253.90 1,253.90 1,687.90 1, 300. 00 1,300. 00

580.00 580. 00 850. 00 850. 00

300. 00 300. 00 314.05 300. 00 300. 00

50. 00 50.00 47. 50 50.00 50. 00

400. 00 400. 00 564.05 400. 00 400. 00

100. 00 100. 00 125. 35 150. 00 150. 00

50.00 50. 00 29. 05 50. 00 50.00

2,116.17 2, 000. 00

600. 00 600.00 . .

300. 00 300.00 3, 243. 00 500. 00 500. 00

31,041.90 32,171.30 36,591.66 40, 734. 00 40,699. 00

3, 500.00 3, 695. 00 3, 794. 46 4,188.00 4,144.30

1,149.20 1,209.00 1,291.55 1,374.80 1, 418.50

25.00 25.00 86.76 85.00 85.00

50.00 50.00 30.00 60.00 60.00

50.00 50.00 90.95 65.00 65.00

100. 00 100.00 15.01 50.00 50.00

480.00 480. 00 549. 22 750.00 750.00

8.2 0 8.20 8.20 10.00 10.00

25.00 25.00 25.00

700.00 700.00 312.53 500.00 500.00

)-

5.00 5.00 29. 00 50.00 50.00

50.00 50.00 29.04 50.00 50.00

70.00 70.00 . 85.00 85.00

250. 00 250.00 . 200.00 200.00

6, 437. 40 6, 692.20 6, 261.72 7, 492.80 7, 492.80

6,9 21 .60 7,273 20 7, 8 87,. 26 7, 887. 36 7, 887.36

3, 000. 00 3, 000. 00 1,966.56 3, 500.00 5 4, 500.00

1, 200. 00 1, 200.00 1,804.11 1,500.00 1, 500.00

350. 00 350.00 364.06 400.00 400.00

300.00 300.00 715.34 500.00 500.00

5,000.00 5, 000.00 3, 895. 59 4, 000.00 4, 000.00

200.00 200.00 711.13 200.00 200.00

3, 000. 00 3, 000.00 3, 485.99 3, 500.00 3, 500.00

100. 00 100.00 100.00 100.00

1, 000. 00 1,000.00 411.24 500.00 500.00

300. 00 300.00 194.65 350.00 350.00

150.00 150. 00 120.00 150.00 150.00

See footnotes at end of table.
114

AROOSTOOK CO UN TY ES TIM AT E 1975-7 6-Cont inued

Number 1973 1974 Actual, 1974 1975 1976

1040—Houlton Court House—Continued 

Contractural services— Continued 

Insu ranc e (bu ilding s and Conte n ts ). ............................. 4. 000. 00 4, 000.00 4, 057.00 4, 000. 00 4, 000. 00

Insu ranc e (l ia b ilit y).......... ......... 1. 600. 00 1,60 0.00 3, 159.00 1,8 00. 00 1,800. 00

Sure ty bonds premium s (of ­

fic er s)................. ....................... 500.03 500.00 1, 02 0.00 550.00 500. 00

Post office box rent..................... 30. 00 30.0 0 28.80 30. 00 30. 00

Com mod ities :

Fuel oil (Co urt house and ja il). 10, 000. 00 10,0 00.00 16,81 8.00 ’ 16,000.00 ’ 18, 000. 00

Agricultu ral'bot anical____ 100. 00 100.00

Clea ning and Disinfecting Su pplies.............. ............................. 1, 000. 00 1,00 0.00 1, 195.10 1, 200. 00 ’ 1, 400. 00

Maintenance supp lies........ ......... 500. 00 500.00 495.49 500. 00 500. 00

Capital outlay:

Maintenance eq uipme nt.. 5, 000. 00 5, 000.00 1, 188.65 1, 000. 00 1,0 00.00

Central Bind ing renovation_______ 187, 500.00 i 87, 500. 00

’ 37, 500.00 ’ 37, 500. 00

Fu rnish ing s............. ........................... >10,000 .00

Total............... ............. 44, 251 .60 44, 603 .20 49,5 18.07 172, 667. 36 185,8 17.3 6

1041—Caribo u Court House:

Personal ser vice s: Part-time cus ­

tod ian ________________ ______ 3, 323. 30 3, 486.34 3,867. 60 4, 094. 00 6. 000. 00

Contra ctual ser vice s:

Ele ctr icit y________ ______ ___ 500.00 500.00 440.12 600.00 700. 00

Sewera ge water______________ 200.00 200. 00 149.93 200. 00 200. 00

Attorneys telephone.................. 250. 00 250. 00 251.12 350.00 350.00

Grounds/snow remo val_______ 100. 00 100. 00 23. 00 100. 00 100. 00

Electrical repairs and maintenance________ . _________ 50. 00 50.00 50.0 0 50.0 0

Heating repairs and maintenan ce___________________ 1 25.00 25.00 146. 39 25.0 0 25.00

Painting repairs and maintenance___________ ________ 200.00 200.00 100.00 100.00

Plumbi ng repairs and maintena nce____________________ 100. 00 100.00 100.00 100. 00

Rubbish removal____________ 50. 00 50. 00 27.00 50.0 0 50.0 0

Buildin gs and struc ture ___ ___ 155.00 .

Com modities:

F u e lo il _____________ ____ 1, 5 00.00 1,50 0.00 4,556.93 i 4,0 00.00 4,00 0. 00

Agricultural,'botanical grounds. 50 .00 50.00

Cleaning and disinfecting sup ­

plies _____________________ 250.00 250. 00 65.13 300. 00 300. 00

Tools and impleme nts________ 50. 00 50. 00

Maintenance___________________ 533.11

Capital outla y:

Equ ipm ent-he atin g____ _____ 3, 000. 00 3,000. 00

Equip ment office ____ _____ 300. 00 300. 00

Fur niture _________ ____________ i 20, 000. 00 i 5, COO. 00

Land acq uis itio n________________

To tal_________ ___________ 9, 948. 30 10, 111. 34 10,21 5.33 29,96 9. 00 16, 975 .00

1042—Fort Kent r egistr y bu ildin g:

Personal se rvic es: Custodian___ _ 3, 02 1.2 0 3.169 . 40 3, 385. 20 3, 585. 40 3, 702. 40

Contra ctual serv ices :

Ele ctricit y___________________ 1,000. 00 1, 000. 00 777.97 1, 000. 00 1,0 00. 00

Sewerage water___ ____ 350.0 0 350.00 287. 92 400. 00 400. 00

Grounds/snow rem oval______ 150. 00 150. 00 142. 75 150. 00 150. 00

Buildin g (repairs and mainten a n c e ) .._______ 500. 00 500. 00 33. 46 500.00 500.00

Elect rical (rep airs and maintenance )........................... ................. 12.00 _

Heatin g (repairs and maintenan ce)_______________ ___ 50. 00 50. 00 21.2 5 .

Plumbi ng (repai rs and maintenance )_____ ______________ 50.0 0 50.00 6.00 50.0 0 50. 00

Rubbish rem oval____ ________ 100. 00 100. 00 50.0 0 50.0 0 50. 00

Post office b ox.............................. 25 .00 25. 00 7.20 25. 00 25. 00

Commodities:

Fuel o il _____________________ 1,000. 00 1, 000. 00 1,598. 09 ‘ 2,0 00 .00 2, 000. 00

Clea ning and disinfecta nt sup ­

plies __________________ 150. 00 150. 00 73.2 5 150.00 150. 00

Tools and implements _______ 50.00 50.00 146.08 50.00 50. 00

T o t a l. .. ............ . .................... 6, 446. 20 6, 594. 40 6, 541.17 7,9 60 .40 8, 077. 40

See footnotes at end of table.
Number

AROOSTOOK CO UN TY ES TIM AT E 1975-76-Contin ued

1973 1974 Actual, 1974 1975 1976

1043—J ail b uild ing:

Contractua l serv ices :

Ele ctr icit y............................ . .......

Building s and structu res (re ­

pairs and mainte nance)---------

Elec trica l (repairs and maintenan ce)........ .....................- .......

Heating (rep airs and maintenance )______________ _____

Paintin g (repai rs and maintena nc e) ........... ...........................

Plumbi ng (repairs and maintenance ).......... ............................

Po stof ice bo x........................ —

Commod ities: Sup plies and maintenance__________________

3, 500. 00 3, 500.00 2, 383. 80 3, 500. 00 3, 500.00

1, 000. 00 1, 000.00 415.73 1,0 00.00 1,000.00

1, 000. 00 1, 000.00 426. 92 1, 0 00.00 1, 000.0 0

300. 00 300.00 152. 51 300. 00 300.00

739. 36 500. 00 500.00

1 000. 00 500.00 708. 83 1, 000. 00 1, 000. 00

15.0 0 15.00 . . 20. 00 20.00

400. 00 400. 00 109.83 400. 00 400. 00

To tal............................................

1044— Ja il residen ce: Contractual serv ­

ice s: Repairs and maintenance, build1045— Jail/g arag e (probation and parole): 

Contractual se rvic es:

Buildin g and structure (repairs 

and maintenance)............ —

Elec trica l (repairs and maintenan ce)_________ _____

Heating (repairs and maintenan ce)_______________ -

nan ce)...........—

Comm odities: Fu eloi l.

To tal .

1050—Sup port of priso ners : 

Personal serv ices :

Deputy sheriff, sala ry.

Guard, sa la ry .............

. Matron's sa lary..........

Tu rnk ey’s sal ary ........

Cook sa lary.................

Contractual serv ices:

Ambulance se rv ic e. . . 

Board of priso ne rs ... 

C le rg ym en .. .............

Mileage.................... - - - - -

Priso ners far e...................

Lodging ..............................

M ea ls. ...............................

Utility serv ice, telephone.

tenanc e)...........

Rubbish removal.

ten anc e)................ . .

Po stag e. ........................

Commodities:

Food groceries and tabacco------

Cleaning and disinfectant supplie s.........................................

Institutional (dis h and b e d ). ..

Maintenance sup plies................

Medical, med icine......................

Office s upp lies............................

Fingerpr intin g, photo laboratory

supp lies_______- .................-

Clothing, guards uniform..........

Clothing, prisoners....................

Capital outlay: Office e qu ipm en t.. .

7, 21 5.00 6,7 15. 00 4,9 36 .98 7, 72 0.00 7, 720.00

1, 000. 00 1,00 0.00 1, 967. 86 1,0 00. 00 1, 000.0 0

200. 00 200.00 . . 500.00 200. 00

100.00 100.00 100.00 100. 00

50. 00 50.00 .. 100. 00 100. 00

100. 00 100.00 .. 100.00 100.00

500. 00 500.00 863. 48 900. 00 1,000. 00

950.00 950.00 863. 48 I, 700. 00 1,5 00. 00

7. 300. 00 7, 300. 00 8,164. 00 8, 654. 00 9,1 70. 00

58, 000. 00 58, 000. 00 54, 574. 30 58, 000. 00 62, 000. 00

5, 200. 00 5, 200. 00 7, 596. 40 6, 890. 00 7, 303.00

7, 300 00 7, 300. 00 7, 644. 00 8,1 04 .00 8, 589. 00

7, 000.00 7, 644. 00 8, 104. 00 8, 589. 00

400 00

?OO 00

500. 00 500.00 5.85 25.66 25.0 0

11, 000 .00 12, 000. 00 3, 583. 22 4, 000. 00 4, 000.00

' 300. 00 300.00 324. 88 500.00 500. 00

200. 00 200.00 161.60 200.00 200. 00

75 00 75.00 .. 75.0 0 75.00

50 00 50.00 .. 200.00 200.00

1,0 00. 00 1,10 0.00 1,11 4.89 1, 200. 00 1,2 00 .00

500.00 500.00 49.41 150.00 150.00

500.00 500.00 300.00 300.00 300. 00

100 00 10C. 00 85.6 5 100.00 100.00

200. 00 200.00 2.45 100.00 100.00

20 ,00 0.0 0 21,000. CO 28,5 92.9 1 25 ,00 0.0 0 25, 000 .00

1, 400. 00 

1, 200. 00 

800. 00 

300. 00 

300.00

700. 00 

1,6 00.00 

1, 500. 00

5CO. 00

1, 400. 00 

1, 200. 00 

900.00 

350.00 

300.00

700.00 

1, 800. 00 

1, 600. 00

500.00

1, 739. 43

1, 7 41.27

2, 226. 86 

331.51

22.7 0

180. 00 

784. 42 

573. 40 

1,186. 22

1, 400. CO 

1, 200.0 0 

900.00 

500. 00 

100.00

100.00 

750. 00 

1, COO. 00 

500.00

1, 400. 00 

1,200. 00 

1, 000. 00 

500. 00 

100.00

100.00 

750.00 

1,000. 00 

500. 00

To tal .

121 ,125.00 130,675 .00 128,5 84.37 128 ,052.00 J 3 4 ^

5 1

!

0 ?

See footno tes at end of table.
Nu mbe r

116

AROOSTOOK COUNTY ES TIMAT E 1975-7 6-C ontinued

1065— Re gistry of deeds (so uthe rn ): 

Personal service s:

Re gister, sa lary ...............................

De pu ty register, sa lary..................

Re gular em plo yees.......................

Co ntractual se rvices:

M ileage.............................................

Mea ls................................................

Lo dg ing..............................................

Telep ho ne .........................................

Equ ipmen t (rep ai rs and mainten an ce ),

Posta ge..............................................

Due s....................................................

Com mod itie s:

Office supplie s................................

P rin tin g ...........................................

Record book s...................................

Sta tu te s and reference b o o k s .. . 

Pe rio dica ls and subscriptions.. . 

Ca pital out la y:

T y p e w ri te r.......................................

Equ ipmen t micro ............................

Ma ps ( cabin ets )..............................

T o ta l...............................................

1066— Re gistry of deeds (n orthern ): 

Personal se rvices :

Register.............................................

Spe cial deputy .................................

Re gular em ploy ee . ....................

Part-tim e em ploy ee .

Inde x (10 yr . re venue). ................

Con tra ctua l services:

U tilities, te le phone......... ..............

Plumbing (rep ai rs and maintenan ce )......... .................................

Typ ew rit ers (repairs an d m ain te ­

n a n c e ).........................................

Po stage........................ .....................

Com mod ities :

Office su pplie s.................................

Record bo ok s_____ ______ _____

Books, pe rio dica ls and su bs c rip tio n s ..................................

Statute s and referenc e b o o k s .. .

Film s and re c o rd s .. .......................

Ca pital outlay:

T yp ew rite r........................................

M a p s .. ..;____ ______ _________

M ic ro -r e p ro d u cin g .. ....................

Total

1070— Regi ster of Pro ba te:

Perso nnel se rv ices:

Judge sala ry ................................

Re gister, s a la ry ..................... ..

Sp ec ial de pu ty, s alary_________

Probate c le rk , sa lary__________

Co ntractua l s er vice s:

M ile ag e............................................

Mea ls........... J______ _____

L o d g in g .. ............. .....................”

U ti lity , t elep ho ne .........................

Equ ip m ent (r ep ai rs and mainte nance)....................................

Du es ______________________

Posta ge............................................

Com mod ities :

Office supplies_______ ____ _

Record b o o k s .. ______________

Statutes a nd reference books.... 

Books, per iodica ls and sub sc rip ­

ti o n s __________ ________ ___

Ca pital o utlay:

F ilin g ca bin e ts ........................ .......

T y p e w rit e r s ...............................

T ota l.............................................

See fo otn ote s at end of table .

1973 1974 Ac tual, 1974 1975 1976

7, 500. 00 7, 500. 00 7, 046.46 7, 778. 00 7, 778. 00 6, 656. 00 6, 905. 60 7, 384. 00 7, 826. 00 8, 091. 20 26, 806. 40 28, 095. 60 27, 667.60 23, 712. 00 24, 726, 00

150. 00 150. 00 81. 70 150. 00 150 .00 20. 00 20. 00 8.0 0 20. 00 20. 00 50. 00 50 .00 .. 50 .0 0 50. 00 600. 00 600. 00 679. 62 650. 00 650. 00 500. 00 500. 00 340. 32 600. 00 600. 00

95 0. 00 950.00 95 0.00 1, 050. 00 1, 050. 00

10. 00 « 25. 00 «25. 00

3, 500. 00 3, 500. 00 6, 6 67.24 2, 500. 00 2, 500. 00 800. 00 800. 00 4.8 89. 63 .

12, 634. 00 12, 634. 00 3, 046. 90 4, 850. 00 4, 250. 00 40. 50 40. 50 29. 04 50. 00 50. 00 30. 50 30. 50 65 .00 35. 00 35. 00

500. 00 50 4.00 . 600. 00 1, 000. 00

8, 000. 00

1, 000. 00

8, 000. 00

636.4 1 .. 

13 ,130 .54 ..

69, 73 7. 40 73,136. 46 48, 696. 00 50. 575. 00

7, 500. 00

16 ,7 02 .4 0

5,00 0. 00

200. OC

25.0 0

15 0.00 

37 5.0 0

2, 500. 00 

750 .00

25.0 0 

50.0 0

70, 776. 20

7, 500, 00

17 ,545 .02

200.00

25 .00

150 .00 

37 5.00

2, 500.00 

750. 00

25 .00

50 .00

7,04 6. 46 7,778 . 00

»7, 488. 00

7,0 66. 80 7,826. OO

11 ,2 94 .40 7,0 00.6 0

__________ < 3, 500. 00

---------------- < 3,0 00.0 0

83 2.06 85 0. 00

28 1.52 

444.02

17 5.00 

500. OO

2,7 65.8 6 

1,0 65. 06 .

1, 000. 00

37 .00

29 .04

35 .0 0

75 .00

2, 000. 00

50 0. 00 

6,0 00.0 0 

1,0 00.0 0

6, 000. 00 

1,00 0.00

576.00 .........................

5,8 52.5 4 ..................

22 8.00 .........................

g g g g g

7, 778. 00 

» 7, 826. 00

8,0 91.2 0 

7,5 11.2 0 

« 3, 500. 00 

< 3,000. 00 

897. 00

175.0 0 

500. 00 

1, 200. 00

35 .00 

75. 00 

2, 000. 00 

65 0.00

40, 777. 40 36 ,1 20 .0 2 37, 518. 76 33, 401. 60 35 ,147. 20

5, 500. 00 5, 800.00 5,962.44 6, 581. 00 6, 5 81.00 5, 000. 00 5,2 75. 00 5,4 19. 98 5, 982. 00 5, 982. 00 6, 6 56 .00 6, 994. 00 7, 384. 00 7, 826. 00 8. 090. 00 6, 3 38 .80 6,6 56. 00 5, 0 59.15 7, 488. 00 7, 737. 00

150.00 150 .00 122.4 0 175. 00 175. 00 50 .0 0 50.00 54 .00 80. 00 80. 00 70 .0 0 70.00 14.18 80 .0 0 80 .00 450. 00 45 0.00 45 2.76 50 0.00 500. 00

14 0.00 140. 00 142.70 160. 00 160. 00 30.0 0 30 .00 25 .00 35.0 0 35. 00 40 0.00 400.00 42 5.00 460. 00 460. 00

1, 360. 00 1, 360.00 467.4 1 1, 50 0.00 1, 500. 00 70 0.00 700.00 1, 275. 78 800. 00 800. 00 30 .0 0 30 .00 48. 50 35.0 0 35.00

65.0 0 65 .00 29 .04 75.0 0

30 0. 00

75 .00

300. 00 30 0.00 30 0.00 61 3.50 . .

27, 239. 80 28, 570.00 27, 495.84 32, 07 7.0 0 32, 590. 00
117

AROOSTOOK COUNTY ES TIMAT E 197 5-76— Co ntinued

Nu mbe r 1973 1974 Actua l, 1974 1975 1976

1075—She rif f d epartm ent:

Perso nal se rvices :

S heriff's s alary ____________ 9, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 8, 030. 42 •• 8, 97 4. 00 « 8, 974. 00

Staff d ep ut y (f u ll t im e ) _______ 31, 200. 00 40, 684. 00 73, 7 31 .00 « 60, 098. 00 « 59, 850. 00

Staff deputy (p a rt -t im e )_____ 20, 000. 00 18, 000. 00 24, 627. 40 < 20, 000. 00 4 20. 000. 00

Sp ecial ev en ts (d iv is io n of treat -

m e n t) ............... ........................ 3, 800. 00 4, 066. 00 7, 238. 30 « 5, 000. 00 4 5, 000. 00

Special tr ain in g (i n te rn )____________ 1, 000. 00 1,50 0.00 130.0 0 1, 500. 00 1, 650. 00

Con trac tu al se rvices :

M ile a g e .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25, 000. 00 27, 500 .00 26, 54 8.93 30, 000. 00 33, 003. 00

Mea ls______________ ________ 1, 800. 00 1,89 0.00 2,9 27.0 0 2, 500. 00 2, 759. 00

Lo dgi ng ______________________ 300. 00 315. 00 257.1 1 350. 00 385.00

T o lls. . . . ____ . . 50 .00 50. 00 12.25 100. 00 100. 00

Gas, o il, and grea se ___________ 2, 500. 00 2, 675. 00 9, 283. 76 3, 000. 00 3, 300. 00

Re pairs to co un ty owned veh id e s ______________ _______ 3, 000. 00 3, 300. 00 1,5 62. 83 3, 500. 00 3, 850. 00

Insu ra nce fo r co un ty owned

vehic le s................ . ............. 1, 600. 00 1,760. 00 1,544 .0 0 1, 500. 00 1,650. 00

E le ctricity ( Tower, Perham , and

S m yrn a )___________________ 600. 00 660. 00 67 6.95 75 0.00 82 5.00

Tele ph on e___________ _ _______ 2, 500. 00 2, 875. 00 4, 342. 60 3, 500. 00 3, 850. 00

T ele ty pe____ . _____________ 700. 00 770. 00 54 1.75 770. 00 803. 00

Equ ip m ent (repairsand m aintenan ce )___ . . . __________ 250. 00 312. 00 52 .95 300. 00 300. 00

Radio base to w ers ____________ 2, 800. 00 3, 080. 00 2, 541.60 3, 000. 09 3, 303. 03

Radio m o b il .__ _____ . . . 4, COO. 00 5, 000. 00 2,970 . 44 5, 000. 00 5, 033. 00

Typew rite rs (r epair and m aintenan ce )____________ _______ 75. 00 95. 00 50. 80 100. 00 100. OO

Posta ge_____ ___________ . . . 250. 00 300.00 32 1.88 275. 00 300. 00

Sp ec ial crim in al inv es tig ation

(u n d e rc o v e r). . ____________ 5, 000. 00 5, 250. 00 1,2 03. 52 < 5, 000. 00 ‘ 5, 003. 00

Missin g pe rson s search c o s ts .. . ICO. 00 125 .00 37 1.85 250. 00 250. 00

Missin g pe rsons fo od__________ 500. 00 550. 00 503. 00 503. 00

Commodities :

Office supplie s_____ __________ 1,500. 00 1,725 .0 0 1,211 .7 2 2, 000. 00 2, 000. 00

P rin ting ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750. 00 938. 00 13. 00 1, 000. 00 1,030. 00

Clo th in g uniform s_____________ 2, 800. 00 3, 500.0 0 1,8 43. 75 2, 500. 00 2, 500. 00

Books, pe riod icals, and subs cri ptio ns___ _____ _________ 200. 00 250. 00 233. 75 250. 00 250. 00

Statutes and refer ence books.. 200. 00 250. 00 29 .04 200. 00 200. 00

Cap ita l outlay:

Com m unicat io ns ra dio _____ . 3,0 00.0 0 . 100. 00 1, 500. 00 1,50 0.00

Office equip m ent___ . . . _ _____ 1,8 00. 00 2,2 50.0 0 200. 00 200. 00

Patro l ve hicle s____ __________ 3, 000. 00 3, 600. 00 15, 100. 51 4, 000. 00 4, 000. 00

Radio netw ork res. fu n d _________ 5, 000. 00 2, 500. 00 2, 500. 00

Tota l 129, 275. 00 14 8,27 0.00 18 7,59 9.14 17 0,7 69. 00 174, 884. 00

1077— Fire m ars hal :

Perso nal se rv ices: Fire ma rsh al

sala ry ...................................................... 6, 50 0.00 6, 500. 00 3,2 50.0 0 3, 250. 00 3,2 50.0 0

Con tra ctua l se rvices :

Mileag e____ _____ ____________ 2,40 0. 00 2, 400. 00 2, 293. 42 2, 400. 00 2, 400. 00

Mea ls.............................................. 250. 00 250. 00 346. 65 300. 00 300. 00

Lo dg ing.............................................. 250. 00 250. 00 54. 35 30 0.00 300. 00

Utilities se rvice s te le phone____ 300. 00 300.0 0 222. 82 30 0.00 300. 00

Radio re pair m aintena nc e_____ 50. 00 50 .00 ..

Du es................................................... 42. CO 42 .00 57. 40 4C.00 40. 00

Pos ta ge ........................................ .. 40. 00 40 .00 39. 95 50. 00 50.00

P rinting____________________ 40. 00 40 .00 .

Com mod itie s:

Office supplie s________________ 78 .0 0 78.00 3,61 8. 52 10 0.00 100. 00

Books, pe rio dica ls, and subscriptions....................................... 50 .0 0 50.00 105.00 70 .00 70 .00

Ca pital outlays:

Equ ipmen t (n ew State and

co un ty ra dio sy st em )__________ 80 0.00 800. 00

Fire pre ve ntio n and fire dep ar tmen t tr a in in g material and

equip m ent___________________ 2, 390. 00 2,39 0. 00

T o ta l.......................................... 10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 9, 988. 61 10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00

1080— Advertisin g and pro m ot io n:

Con tra ctua l Ser vice s:

Lan d re nta l (c ounty s ig n )........... 15. 00 15. 00 15 .00 ..

Maintan an ce co un ty sign ___ 20 0.0 0 200. 00 20 0. 00 .

Public ity b u r e a u . . . ______ 200. 00 200. 00 20 0.00 .

15, 000. 00 Advers itin g (county bookle t)___ 1,50 0. 00 1, 500. 00 1, 850. 00 > 5, 000. 00

T o ta l____________ _____ _____ 1,9 51.0 0 1,915 .0 0 2, 265. 00 5, 000. 00 5,0 00. 00

1090— A uditin g: Co ntra ctua l services___ 2, 000. 00 2, 0 00.00 2, 844. 54 2, 200. 00 2,2 00.0 0

2005— Extension se rv ice: Co ntractua l

(d onation)_____________________ _____ 30, 000. 00 30, 000.00 30, 000. 00 30, 000. 00 30,0 00.0 0

See fo otn ote s a t end o f ta ble .
AROOSTOOK COUNTY ESTIM ATE 197 5-7 6-C ontinued

Nu mber 1973 1974 Ac tual, 1974 1975 1976

2020— Law lib ra rie s:

Ho ulton 4, 100.0 0 4,1 00. 00 5,1 00, 00 15, 600. 00 > 5, 600, 00

Car ib ou................................................. 1,100. 00 1,100.00 1, 100. 00 ' 3, 000. 00 '3 ,0 0 0 . 00

T o ta l_____ 5,2 00.0 0 5, 200.00 6, 20 0.00 8, 600. 00 8, 600. 0 0

2025— Employees be nefits :

Blue Cross and Blue S hie ld _____ . . 3, 000. 00 3,000.00 16,163. 56 4

 4, 500. 00 4

 4, 50 0.00

So cia l secu rity _________________ 15 ,000 .00 15 ,000 .00 24, 080. 00 22, 000. 03 22, 000. 00

Ma ine State re ti re m e n t. _______ 21 ,0 00 .0 0 21 ,000 .00 34, 386. 58 4

 31, 500. 00 4

 31, 500. 00

Workm ens co mpens ation_______ 1,52 5.00 1,52 5.00 10, 627 .00 5,0 00. 00 5, 000. 00

T o ta l____ ___ ___________ 40 ,5 25 .00 40 ,5 25 .00 85, 2 57 .14 63,000. 00 63, 0 00 .00

5050— X ero x:

Co ntinu ous services (re n t) ______ 75 0.00 750.0 0 1.4 12. 27 800 .00 800. 00

Com m odities __________________ 300. 00 300.00 503. 74 300. 00 300.00

T o ta l....................................................... 1,050. 00 1,050 .0 0 1,916. 01 1,10 0.00 1,1 00. 00

204 1— 3M copier:

Co ntinu ous services (re n t)____________________ ___________________ 66 3.00 936.00 936.00

Com m odities ..................- .......................................................... ......................... 91 6.14 264.00 264.00

Har dw ar e.............. ................................................................................................ 180 .31 _____________________________

T o ta l.............................: ................................................................................... 1,759 .4 5 1,2 00 .00 1,2 00. 00

2035 — Watts line 1,9 31. 83 2,0 00. 00 2, 00 0.00

2045— Fe de ral, Sta te and co un ty

sponsored prog rams:

Aroostook Home Care Age nc y______ 3, 000. 00 3,0 00. 00 3, 000. 00 3, 000. 00 3, 000. 00

Green Va lley As socia tio n. _____ ____ 100. 00 10 0.00

St. John Va lley Retarded 5, 000. 00 5,0 00. 00 5, 000. 00 1

Cen tral Aroosto ok Retarded . . 12, 000. 00 12,000. 00 12, 000 .0 0 1 20, 000. 00 20, 000. 00

Sou ther n Aro ostook Re tarded ______ 8, 000. 00 8, 000. 00 8.0 00.0 0 f

Green Va lley Re tarded _____ ____ 4, 000. 00 4,00 0. 00 4, 000. 00 J

Ecolog y plan ning ( NMRPC)________ 10, 000. 00 10, 000. CO 10, 000. 00 10, 000. 00 10, 000 .00

Men tal health 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00

Roads and brid ge s____ . . . . . . 25 ,000. 00

Ma dawa ska Historica l S oc ie ty ______ 1, 000. 00 1, 000. 00 1, 000. 00 2, 0 00.00 2, 000. 00

Maine Potato Blossom Festival 3, 000. 00 3, 000. 00 3, 000. 00 8, 000. 00 8, 000. 00

Cou nty ban d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 000. 00 1,00 0.00 500. 00 500. 00

Silv er Ridge Ce metery_______________ 15 0.00 150 .00 150. 00

Sin cla ir ( T-1 7. R -4 )_____ > 5, 200.00 ' 1, 300. 00

A ir p o rt s:

Nor th er n Aroos took Regional

A ir p o rt. . . . . . . . . 14, 20 0.00 14, 200. 00 14, 200. 00 4, 0 00.00 4, 000. 00

Houl to n. ____________ . . . . . 15, 000 .00 15, 000. 00 15, 000. 00 17 ,000 .00 17, 000. 00

Presque Is le __________ _____ 25, 000. 00 25, 000. 00 25, 000. 00 25, 000.00 25, 000. 00

Food stam ps _________ _____ _______ 50, 00 0.00 50, 0 00.00 50, 0 00 .00 10 ,000 .00 48, 000. 00

Regional a rt s.............................................................. ......................................................................................................................................

Cereb ral Palsy of Ce ntral Aro osto ok..........................................................................................................................................................

4-C ’s....................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Hu ma n relatio n se rvices ................................................................................................... ............... 50 ,0 00 .0 0 5,0 00. 000

Pine Tree le ga l.................................................................................................................................................................................................

Roger Randall Cen te r............................................................................................. ......................................................................................

Aroos took Co unty soil and wat er

cons erv atio n.......................................................... ......................................................................................................................................

Norther n Ma ine Fair Ass oc iatio n.................................................................................................................................................................

Hu ma ne so cie ty......................................................... - .............................................................................................................. .....................

Aro os took regional task force fo r

older citizens.................................................................................................................................................................................................

T o ta l................................................... 191 ,200 .0 0 19 1,20 0.00 19 0,35 0.00 17 4,95 0.00 18 4,05 0.00

2050— Volun teer firem en s insu ra nc e........ 1,8 08.0 0 1,8 08. 00 2,0 23.3 3 2,0 50.0 0 2,0 50.0 0

Ash land Quebec Highw ay .......................................................................................... ....................... ...................................................................

1

 Revenue sharing .

3

 Ad de d costs (c entral build in g).

3

 D is tr ic t co urt.

4

 Com missio ne rs rec om me ndations.

3

 Error in re po rting no rth ern regio n of Deeds deputy ’s salary.

‘ Sta tu to ry salary fo r 1975 and 1976, $8,974.

Note : Changes in em ployees be ne fit s: So cial se cu rity due to grants ther e w ill be som e cre dits; Ma ine S tate re tire m ent: 

cre dits due to grants (e xtra em plo yees in sheriff's departm ent); work m en's compe ns ation (2 audits in 1974); no t a ll 

em ploy ee s have re tir em en t, only socia l security (o ptional fo r short-term em ploy ee s).
119

ESTIMAT ED RECEIPTS

1973 1974 1975 1976

D is tr ic t Co urt re n t....................

D is tr ic t Co urt d is tr ib u tio n ___

Sup er ior Cour t----- ------------

Civil defense match ing fund s

Cle rk of C ourt s_____________

Re gis try of Deeds (S ou th er n) . 

Re gis try of Deeds (N orthern )

Registry of Pro ba te---------------

Sheriff's d epart m ent..............

Prob ation and pa role (r e n t) . .

9,000 9,0 00 9, 000 9,000

120, 000 120,0 00 > 50, 000 150, 000

35,000 35, 000 35, 000 35, 000

9,00 0 9, 000 10, 000 10, 000

1, 400 1,4 00 2, 500 2. 500

45, 000 45, 000 50, 000 50, 000

15, 000 15, 000 20, 000 20, 000

3,500 3, 500 4,00 0 4,00 0

1,0 00 1,0 00 15, 500 18. 500

900 900 900 900

T o ta l................................

Total es tim ated ex pe nd itu re s

To tal es tim ated re ceip ts -------

Reserve fu nd " D ” .....................

T ota l................................

T ota l.................................

Inc reased by le gis la tu re ..........

T o t a l. . . . .......................

Revenue sh ar ing cre d its.........

Amou nt to be ra is ed..

Revenue sh aring (b u d g e t)... 

Dis tr ic t Co urt ( C en tral Bldg .)

Estimate d re ceip ts _________

Balance revenue sharing____

Reserve fund “ D " .................

239, 800 23 9,80 0 196 ,9C0 199,9 00

887?240 91 5,37 2 

~2 39 ,800 23 9,80 0 . ________________

100, 000 100,000 ____

339, 800 339, 800 . . . . ____ . . . .

574, 440 574,572 ____ ____________________

93, 800 95 ,2 85 __________ . _______

641, 240 670,851 _____ _____ ______________

54, 200 54 ,200 ____ __________________

587, 040 616,65 7 _________________________

200, 800 226, 900

37, 500 37, 500

196, 900 199, 900

104, 681 78, 581

20, 000 20,0 00

To tal cre dits............

To tal am ou nt to be raised

559,881 56 2,88 1

646, 694 666, 367

To tal es tim ated ex penditu res

1, 206, 575 1,2 29, 248

1

 C om miss ion ers recomm enda tions.

COU NTY OF AROOSTOOK, SU MM AR Y OF BUDGET ESTIM ATES

Proposed by co un ty 

comm iss ion ers Le gisla ture

1975 1976 1975 1976

^ E x p e n d it u r e s ............................................................................ 1,2 04, 753 .5 6 1,2 30,6 72.2 6 1,2 06,5 75.5 6 1,2 29,2 48.3 6

Contin gent ac co un t--------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ - -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ca pital rese rve fu nds(S ).......................................................................................................................................- ......................................

O th er....................................................................................................................................................................................................................

To tal re quirem ents _____________________________ 1,2 04, 753 .5 6 1,2 30,6 72.2 6 1,2 06,5 75.5 6 1,229, 248 .3 6

Ava ila ble cre dits:

Revenue_________________________________________

Unexpe nded balances— prev iou s ye ar d is tr ic t

Ex cess-re venue— Previous ye ar—Cap ita l reserve 

fu nd " D " .............................................. ............................

Surplus (a d ju stm e n ts )..........................................................

Other :

196, 9 00.00 199, 9 00 .00 196, 900. 56 199, 90 0.36

37, 500.00 37, 50 0.00 37, 50 0. 00 37 ,5 00 .0 0

20, 000.00 20,0 00.0 0 20,0 00.0 0 20 ,0 00 .0 0

20 0, 80 0.00 226, 90 0.00 200, 80 0.00 22 6,900.00

10 4,68 1.00 78, 581.00 104, 68 1.00 78, 5 81.00

Amou nt t o be ra ise d by ta x a ti o n .............................................. 64 4,87 2.56

Exp en diture s:

5000— Commodities . 

6000— De bt serv ice..

.. 55 9,88 1.00 562, 881.00 559 ,8 81. 56 56 2, 88 1.36

64 4,87 2.56 667, 79 1.26 646, 6 94 .0 0 66 6,367.00

. . 43 9, 86 3.56 454,140. 26 441,68 5. 56 45 2, 71 6.36

. . 52 1,75 1.00 535 ,1 43. 00 521,7 51. 00 53 5,14 3.00

81 ,514 .00 83, 514 .0 0 81,5 14.0 0 83, 514 .0 0

. . 161,62 5.00 15 7,87 5.00 16 1,6 25. 00 15 7,87 5.00

1,204, 753 .5 6 1,2 30,6 72.2 6 1,2 06,5 75.5 6 1,2 29,2 48.3 6
120

COUN TY OF ARO OSTOOK

Expend itures 1975 1976

1020— Cler k of cou rts— Personal services (sta tut ory ).............................................................. +$ 39 4. 00 —$845.20

1030—County commissione rs— Personal services (sta tuto ry).................................................. —6,41 6.0 0 —6,41 6.00

1035—County treasurer— Personal services (st atu tor y)............ ............................................... —312.00 —355.70

1065— Register of deeds (southern)— Personal serv ices (sta tuto ry)....................................... —72 2.00 —722.00

1066— Register o, deeds (northern):

Personal services (statutory )................................................................................................. —72 2.00 —722.00

Personal services— Regular................................................................................ +3 ,0 0 0 .0 0 +3,0 00 .0 0

To tal ..................................................................................................................................... + 2 ,2 78.0 0 +2 ,2 78 .0 0

1070— Register of probate—Personal service s (statu tor y)................................. ..................... +876 .0 0 +3 13 .0 0

1075—Sh eriff:

Personal services (statutory )................................................................................................. +626 .0 0 —526.00

Personal services (dep utie s)................................................................................................. + 5 , 098.00 + 4 . 850. 00

To tal ..................................................................................................................................... +5,7 24.0 0 +4 ,3 24 .0 0

Budget increase or (decre ase), expe nditures............................................................... . ........... + 1 ,8 22.0 0 —1,423. 90

Available cred its: Estimated revenue miscellane ous— To adju st to dollar figur e................. + .5 6 + .3 6

Net bud get.......................................................................................................................... + 1 ,8 21.4 4 -1 ,4 2 4 .2 6

Note: To be applied to amount to be raised by taxation,

Mr. Coiiex. Could you tell us what percentage of the county budget 

is paid by the areas directly related ?

Mr. Leblanc. Yes. It is 40 percent, Congressman Cohen. Madawaska, for example, presently is paying 14 percent of the county 

budget. I would anticipate that they would he paying 25 percent if 

the base were to close.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you.

Our next witness is Dorothy Kelley.

STATEM ENT OF DOROTHY KEL LEY, MA INE POTATO COUNCIL

Ms. Kelley. Thank you. Senator Hathaway, Congressman Cohen, 

and Congressman Emery. My name is Dorothy Kelley. I am executive vice president of the Maine Potato Council, which is an organization representing all potatogrowers of 5 acres or more in the State.

Aroostook County and agriculture are synonymous, as the county 

is economically supported by agricultural products; namely, potatoes 

and forestry.

Last season, 1,200 potatogrowers planted 122,000 acres of potatoes, 

and 94 percent of this acreage was grown in the county. Aroostook 

County encompasses 6,453 square miles. In other words, it is larger 

than the size of Rhode Island and Connecticut combined. Nearly 

90 percent of this total area is woodland. The industries within the 

county are interrelated to potatoes and forestry.

We have potato processing plants that process french fries and 

dehydrated products and also starch and livestock feed. The county 

also manufactures wood products, such as prefabricated houses, paper, 

tennis rackets, fences, and. of course, lumber.

Our available labor force of 34.650 works within these agriculturerelated industries. At the present time, we have 11.8 percent of this 

available labor force which is unemployed.

It has been estimated that some 22.000 people worked in the 1975 

potato harvest. Of those employed. 95 were Indians; 49 of these people 

were bonded Canadians; the remaining 21,856 employed were local 

residents.
121

Loring Air Force personnel play an important part in the potato 

harvest, as the Air Force men, women, and children take to the fields to help with the potato harvest, to get the potatoes in storage before 

our frost. The. cooperation of Lorin g personnel received din ing the harvest is 

greatly appreciated, as the additional labor force is certainly needed 

at that time because it is very short-term labor. Special programs have been planned to acquaint the Loring residents with the potato industry. (Lowers cooperate with Loring per­ sonnel in conducting bus tours of farming operations and processing 

facilities. Oftentimes a special potato banquet has been served following the tour.

Loring personnel are included and invited to all special agricultural 

celebrations.

Aroostook County has wide-open spaces, with the hub of activity 

centering around Presque Isle. Caribou, and Loring. Loring personnel are welcome residents in all our nearby communities, and they pa rticipate in business, recreational, and social activities within each 

community.

Many Loring families have purchased homes and farm property in 

the area, thus increasing our property value.

To suddenly vacate these homes and farms would place a great 

burden on each community within the area and increase the taxes 

for local citizens to cover the costs of community projects already commenced, such as schools, urban renewal, and housing projects.

Even though some Air Force families have retired and settled in this area, the benefits they enjoy from being near an Air Force facility—such as the medical care, hospitals, commissary, social clubs, 

and family services—will force them to relocate near a base facility.

Aroostook natives are reserved and cordial with strangers. They 

are seldom hostile or suspicious, and they do develop very deep friendships once they are properly introduced. There are few native Aroostook citizens who don't count among 

their very closest friends at least one couple from Loring Air Force 

Base. We welcome them as highly respected citizens who add to our 

cultural, social, and economic standards.

To suddenly disrupt a large community such as Loring from such 

a small populated, integrated area of extremely limited resources will 

have a drastic effect, socially and economically, on the entire area. Thank you for allowing me to address the relationship of agriculture and Loring.

Senator Hathaway. Thank you very much. Dorothy.

Before recessing the hearing. T want to thank all of the witnesses 

and the audience, just for being here, for the outstanding contribution you have made. T am sure it will be of significant benefit in the efforts 

of the Maine delegation to keep the Loring Air Force Base open. Thank you very much. The hearings will recess, subject to the call 

of the Chair.

[Whereupon. at 4 p.m., the subcommittee was recessed, subject to 

the call of the Chair.] | The following statements and a letter from civilian employees 

were submitted for inclusion in the record:]
122

BROS. MEAT PACKING, INC.

Suppliers of Beef - Pork - Veal - Lamb - Poultry

Potato-Pro duct - Frozen Foods - Ice Cream

Janitorial & Pap er Supplies

10 MAY 1976

TO - SAVE LORING AIR FORCE BASE COMMITTEE 

SUBJECT • LORING AIR FORCE BASE CLOSING

MY NAME IS ALBA N E. CYR - PRESIDENT OF CYR BROTHERS MEAT PACKING

OF CARIBOU. MAINE. I RES PE CT FU LLY SU BM IT MY PERSONAL INTERPRETATION

OF THE EFFECT OF THE LORING AIR FORCE BASE CLOSING.

I WAS BORN IN NORTHERN MAINE . AFTER FOUR YEARS OF NAVY DUTY WHICH

ENDED IN 1945. I WENT INT O THE MEAT BUSINESS WITH MY BROTHER. I WAS

ON HAND WHEN THE FIRS T SPADE FU LL OF SOIL WAS MOVED AT LORING.

ALSO. AT THIS SAME TI M E. CARS AND TRUCKS WERE GETTING STUCK IN THE 

MUD HOLES OF NORTHERN MAINE 'S HIGHWAYS DURING THE SPRING. ESPE CIALLY 

ON ROUTE 2 TO BANGOR. MAINE. PLUS CARIBOU TO LIM ESTO NE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF LORING AIR FORCE BASE BROUGHT AN IMPROVEMENT TO OUR HIGHWAY 

SY STEM . WITHOUT LORIN G'S TO TA L IMP UT. IMAGINE WHAT OUR HIGHWAYS. AND 

THOSE OF SURROUNDING CO MM UNITIES. WOULD BE LIKE.

REMOVE THE IMP ACT OF LORING. NORTHERN MAINE W IL L RECEDE IN GROWTH

AND DEVELOPM ENT. THE SAME AS WASHINGTON COUNTY - SOU THEAST OF

NORTHERN MAINE. LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO EAS TPO RT. MAINE AFTER THE

TI DAL ELECTRIC GEN ERATING DEVELOPMENT CAME TO A HA LT . KNOWN AS

THE QUODDY TI DAL PROJECT.

OUR COMPANY EMPLO YS W ELL OVER 100 PEOPLE. LORING’ S PURCHASING 

POWER. PLUS THE SPIN -O FF THROUGHOUT THE LOCAL COMM UNITIES. AMOUNTS

TO 25 TO 30% OF OUR BU SIN ESS.

220 Washburn Road • Ca rib ou , Main e 04736 • Te l. 207-496-3331
123

WE VISION A DRAMATIC POPULATION WITHDRAWAL TO FOLLOW LORIN G'S CLO SING.

NORTHERN MAINE IS NOT HOLDING ITS POP ULA TION TOOAY. OUR CENSUS W ILL 

PROVE TH IS. AROOSTOOK COUNTY IS BLES SE D WITH 68 CITIES. TOWNS AND

VILL AG ES - MANY MAY REVERT BAC K TO WILDERNESS. LOOK AT THE PER

FA MILY INCOME OF APPROXIMA TELY $ 5.500 TO 5 6.000 PREVAILING IN THE

NORTHERN REGION. IT DOES NOT TA KE TOO MUCH TO TIP THE SCALE AND

MAKE THE AREA A WELFARE REGION. THERE WILL BE DRAMATIC REPERCUSSIONS 

ON EVE RY COMMUNITY. AS TA X RESOURCES FOR COMMUNITY EXISTANCE W IL L BE

IN CRITICA L BALANCE.

IF ISO LATED. GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS SUCH AS NORTHERN MAINE ARE TO CONTINUE 

TO EX IST. ES PE CIAL LY AN AREA TH AT RECEIVE S ITS BASIC LIVELIHOOD STR IC TL Y 

FROM AGRIC ULT URE AND ITS FLU CTUATIN G INCOME. ADD THE SEPERATION OF

LORING AND ITS LONG-RANGE STRANGULATING EF FE CT . - IT W IL L BE DE VESTATING

FOR THE NEXT GENERATION. FORESIGHT IS VERY IMPO RTANT.

I TRUST PRIME CONSIDERATION W IL L BE GIV EN AFT ER A LL FACTORS ARE

AN ALYZ ED - SAVE LORING NOW - IT IS ES TA BL ISHE D AND OPE RAT IO NAL ...

RATHER THAN LET THE REGION BECOME A WE LFARE AREA.

RES PE CT FU LLY SU BM ITT ED.

CYR BROTHERS ME AT PACKING. INC.

ALBA N E. CYR 

PRESIDENT
124

5-1 4-7 6

MAINE PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 

STATEMENT WITH REGARD LORING REDUCTION

Ma ine P u b li c S e rv ic e Company i s an e l e c t r i c u t i l i t y 

se rv in g A ro os to ok Co un ty and L o ri n g A ir F orc e Ba se w it h e l e c t r i c 

en erg y . A re d u c ti o n as pro pose d a t L ori ng A ir For ce Base wo uld 

s u b s ta n tia lly re duce Ma ine P u b li c S e rv ic e Company’ s re v e n u e s. 

T his lo s s o f re ven ue wo uld mea n in c re a se d e l e c t r i c r a t e s to th e 

Co mp any's re m ai nin g cust om ers a s th e Co mp any's annual fix e d 

c o s ts o f p la n t in vest m ent wou ld n o t d e c re a s e .

L ori ng A ir Base h a s i t s own g e n e ra ti n g c a p a b i lit y . 

Ho we ver, over th e p a s t few y e a rs th e Company h as bee n su pp ly in g 

th e Ba se w it h o ff -p e a k po wer. The Company a ls o se rv e s o u tl y in g 

and a s s o c ia te d f a c i l i t i e s su ch as Wh erry Hou sing in P re sq u e I s le 

and th e fu e l pum ping s t a ti o n in L it tl e to n . The d i r e c t lo s s of 

e l e c t r i c re ven ue from th e s e f a c i l i t i e s h as be en e sti m a te d to be 

$6 00, 00 0 a n n u a ll y .

The g re a te r lo s s o f re v en u e, ho w ev er , wo uld be th e 

in d i r e c t lo s s e s r e s u ltin g fro m b u sin e ss re d u c ti o n an d re duced

r e s i d e n t i a l fa m il ie s .

I t i s v ery d i f f i c u l t fo r Maine P u b li c S e rv ic e Company 

to e v a lu a te co m p le te ly th e im pac t o f th e se in d i r e c t lo s s e s . We 

b e lie v e i t w ill be c o n s id e ra b le . S upport s e rv ic e s fo r L ori ng 

a re e x te n s iv e and an im m ed ia te cu tb ack o f 83% a s pro pose d w ill 

e li m in a te many b u s in e s s e s an d s e rio u s ly c u r t a i l o th e r s . We 

b eli ev e t h a t th is lo s s o f b u sin e ss p lu s th e lo s s o f m i li ta r y 

fa m ilie s w ill s e r io u s ly e f f e c t th e economy o f th e a re a . The
125

re d u ced p o p u la ti o n , to g e th e r w it h th e re duced income an d sp en di ng 

o f a la r g e segm en t o f our cu st o m ers w ill m a te ria lly re d u ce th e 

Co mpa ny 's re v en u e.

We a p p re c ia te th e e f f o r t bein g made by th e Ma ine 

d e le g a ti o n to p re v e n t th e L o ri n g re d u c ti o n .

7 3 -4 4 4 0 - 76 - 9
126

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HE AD QU AR TERS 42D COMBAT SUPP OR T GROUP ISACI

LO RING AIR FORCE BASE. MAIN E 04 7S I

1+2 CES/DEH

1 Apr11^1976

Hon orab le Edmund S. Mu skie ,

U nited S ta te s Senate 

W ashing ton DC 20510

RE: Lor in g AFB - C an did at e A ct io n fo r R ed uction

De ar S enato r Mu skie

The e n tir e a re a su rr oundin g Lo ring AFB h a s, over th e p a s t 20 y e a r s , b u i l t 

i t s econom y ar oun d th e Base. Th ere is no in d u s tr y in to which c iv ilia n 

pers ons p re s e n tl y em plo yed a t th e Bas e ca n tu rn to fo r jo b s . As a r e s u l t , 

a d d it io n a l su p p o rt in th e form o f une mployme nt wou ld be re q u ir e d fro m th e 

Go vernm ent. A f u r th e r im pa ct would be le v ie d on th e sc hools as both m i l i ­

ta r y an d c i v i l i a n de pe nd en t c h il d re n would no lo n g e r be a tt e n d in g - th e 

m ilita r y beca use o f tr a n s f e r s an d th e c i v i l i a n be ca us e th e p a re n ts wo uld 

no lo n g e r be em ploy ed on a Governm ent in s t a i T a ti on . T h ere fo re , Gov ernm ent 

su bsi dy wou ld be d is co n ti n u ed .

Many c iv i l i a n fa m il ie s wo uld be re q u ir e d t o move from th e a re a in an e f f o r t 

t o o b ta in em ploy me nt. T his , in tu r n , wou ld ha ve a tre men do us e f f e c t on 

b u s in e s s e s , ch u rc h es, and lo c a l a c t i v i t i e s . W ith th e la rg e number o f m i l i ­

ta r y an d t h e i r de pen den ts hav in g l e f t th e a re a p lu s th e c iv ilia n s bein g 

re q u ir e d to le a v e due to la c k o f em plo ym ent, th e e n tir e Co unty wou ld be 

pl unged in to a s ta t e o f d ep re ss io n . At th e p re s e n t tim e th e unemployment 

r a te i s in th e ra nge o f 15$ an d th e pro pose d a c ti o n to cu t ba ck Lo ring AFB 

would c e r ta in ly ad d a d d it io n a l s tr e s s to th e bre akin g p o in t. The chai n 

re a c tio n c re a te d by su ch a cu tb ac k would c rip p le th e Co unty to mammoth p ro ­

p o rti o n s . C iv ilia n fa m il ie s would be re q u ir e d to o b ta in h e lp fro m v ari o u s 

w e lf a re pr og rams and, in f a c t, would n o t be earn in g an income an d would 

n o t, th e r e f o r e , be re tu rn in g some o f th o se earn in g s to th e S ta te an d F e d e ra l 

Governments in th e form o f ta x e s . B an kru ptc y a c ti o n s wo uld be num erous 

both on an in d iv id u a l b a s is as w e ll as on b u s in e s s e s .

U nl ik e Pre sq ue I s l e AFB, when i t c lo se d some y ears ag o, th e commun ity s u rro undin g Lori ng AFB wo uld not be a p p ro p ria te fo r p riv a te in d u s trie s as th e 

Bas e is in a s p a rc e ly popula te d a re a . Raw m a te ria ls wo uld ha ve to be 

sh ip ped in an d th e n th e re fin e d pro duct sh ip p ed out to th e la r g e r c i t i e s .

The c iv ilia n p e rs o n n el would be re q u ir e d to o b ta in p riv a te m edic al in s u ran ce p o lic ie s on a sh o rt n o ti c e which wou ld be a bu rd en to an unem plo yed 

pers on.

P e a c e . . . . ( a o u r P r o l e i t i o n
127

Housing complexes have b ee n constr uc te d for the sole pur pose o f ren tin g 

to tar y as wel l as civilian personnel, and by tr ansferr ing t he mi li ­

tary personnel a number of ap artments wo ul d be l eft vac ant a nd no i ncome wo ul d be realiz ed b y the lan d owner. Car sales w ou ld dro p o ff and motels 

and restaurants who d epend pri ma ri ly on patronage from b ase pe rsonnel 

wo ul d be in danger of bankrup tcy .

As an ad dit ion al item for consid era tio n, Loring AFB is located i n a ver y spa rcely pnjmi are a a nd has no problem s w it h enc roa chm ent from the 

surroun din g community. This in i tself should be a definite asset when 

a mis si on for L oring is b ein g de ci de d upon.

This letter expresses the opi nio ns of the per sons listed be lo w wh o are pr es en tl y e mployed as civ ili an pe rs onnel owning homes in the community as we ll as milita ry dependents w or ki ng at the base who have a knowledge of 

the impact wh ic h woul d be caused i f the candidate actio n to r educ e the 

strength by some 80-83$ is approved.

Cy to: Sen ator Cohen

Congressman Hat haway 

Congressman E me ry

----- ---------

\

A P P E N D I X

Social Science Research I nstitute, P reliminary Report

Loring Air F orce B ase I mpact Study : E conomic and

Social Costs

(129)

I

131

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITU TE

PRELIMINARY REPORT

LORING AFB IMPACT STUDY:

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COSTS

Pre pare d fo r :

SAVE LORING COMMITTEE

P re p are d by:

D r. Ke nn eth P. Haye s, P r o je c t D ir e c to r

D r. A .M . Hu q, S en io r U n iv e r s ity C o n s u lt a n t

Pau l C. Dunham, S en io r U n iv e r s ity

C o n s u lt a n t

MAY 1 0 , 1976
132

I .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

In tr o d u c ti o n

Page

1

I I . The Impacted Area 1

I I I . H is to ric a l S e tt in g 2

IV . Lorin g A ir Fo rce Base and The Economic

Base o f N eig hboring Co mmun itie s 5

V. Towards a Co mp rehensive S o cio - 

Economic Im pa ct A n a ly s is 6

APPENDIX

L is t o f Towns in Groups by D is ta nce A -l

SIC Code D is c r ip tio n A-2

Q uestionnaires A -5

Codebook A-17
133

I. INTRODUCTION

This re po rt, prepared by the Social Science Research In s ti tu te , at the 

Unive rs ity of Maine at Orono, presents a prelim inar y analysis o f the socio ­

economic impact of the po tential clos ing o f the Loring A ir Force Base in Limestone, 

Maine. I t is based on cu rren tly av aila ble informa tion which is lim ited. As 

such, i t serves only as a preview o f the fin dings of a more comprehensive stu dy, 

cu rren tly under way. I t is to be noted th at the fi e ld surveys are s t i l l in progress and many addition al data remain to be analyzed. Selected data from p a rti a ll y 

completed surveys and from oth er av aila ble sources have been reviewed and are 

being presented in th is inte rim re po rt fo r the Save Loring Committee's in te rn al 

use in connection with the hearing to be held by the Maine Congressional Delegation 

on May 10, 1976.

I I . THE IMPACTED AREA: SIZE AND CHARACTERISTICS

I t is conceivable th at the to ta l impact o f the clo sin g of a major m ilit a ry 

in s ta lla ti o n li k e the Loring A ir Force Base w il l have "r ip ple effects " th at may spread 

across the State, the region and beyond. The th ru st of th is presentation,

however, is on the impact on loca l communities around the base. For th is purpose, 

the impact area is defined as a clu ste r o f 40 communities in Aroostook County, 

h a lf o f which are with in a radius of 30 mile s. Presumably, the in te nsity of 

the economic impact w il l decay, as distan ce from the base increases.

These communities, with a to ta l population of nearly 86,000, are sm all, 

re la ti v e ly isolated and within lab or market areas characterized by chronic high 

unemployment rates. The average unemployment rate is over 11 per cen t. Furthermore, 

in co ntrast with larg e me tropolitan areas, these loc al economies are fa r less 

d iv e rs if ie d , fa r less via ble and fa r more vulne rab le to any major economic 

disturban ce such as the Loring A ir Force Base clos ing. I t is understandable why
134

-2 -

the p o s s ib il it y o f 831 re du ct ion o f the base and the th re at th a t i t poses no t 

only to the curr ent economic sta tu s o f the lo ca l co wn un ities bu t also to th e ir 

fu tu re gr ow th, is a m atter o f deep concern. To what ext ent th is concern is 

sup ported by observed fa cts is. o f utm ost Importance to the communities and to the 

decis ion-mak ers In vo lved. The purpose o f th is stu dy is pre cis ely to generate a 

set o f re le v a n t, em pirica l data and le t the fa cts speak fo r themselve s.

I I I . HISTORICAL SETTING

Lo rin g A ir Force Base which re qu ired the b e tt e r part o f 6 years to constr uct 

(194 7-1953) was crea ted from w ild ern ess . The I n it ia l development Invo lved 7,200 

acres p rim a ril y in Limestone, Caribou and Ca sw ell. An additio nal 1,563 acres 

were ac quire d in 1948. Today, Lo rin g A ir Force Base is sa id to consis t o f 8,881 

acre s.1

 as fo llo w s :

Improved 

Semi-improved 

Unimproved 

Mis c. grounds

1,664 acres 

1,013 

4,751 

1,453

At the tim e o f its o rig in a l development, th er e were fi e ld s a t Presque 

Is le , Caribou and Houlton (and a base a t Presque Is le ) , bu t the heavy bombers 

which would be ope ra tin g needed much st ro nger co ncrete runways. I t was es tim ated 

i t wou ld-cos t an additio nal $1.5 m il li o n to re constr uct the fa c ilit ie s a t

2

Presque Is le .

The two prim ar y reasons fo r the base development at Limestone appear to 

have been s tr a te g ic m il it a ry purposes and en gin ee ring a c c e p ta b ilit y .

C o ri n g A ir Force Base, Economic Impact Statem ent, 1975, p. 12.

Z Bangor D aily News, May 1, 1974. The base is sa id to have been scheduled 

fo r es ta blishm en t in Newfoundland o r ig in a ll y
135

-3 -

The base was sa id to be 4200 m ile s from Moscow, 3000 from London, 3300 from 

P aris, and 4400 from the Darda ne lle s. The New England in d u s tr ia l area , 

situate d on the d ir e c t pola r a ir li n e s was also conside red to be vulnera ble 

to atta ck in case o f war. The bas e, th e re fo re , was I n it ia lly designed to 

house long -ran ge bombers w ith ro u n d -tr ip , 10,000 m ile c a p a b il it y .3

The Limestone area w ith it s rocky un de rpinning was well suited to one o f 

the ma jor en gine ering req uir em ents fo r the base — runways, capa ble o f su pp ortin g 

heavy bombers, which might be made im perviou s to the e ff e cts o f the co ld weather. 

The second engine ering or desig n requ ire men t was le ve l land w ith s u ff ic ie n t 

cle aran ces fo r bad weather land ings guide d by ground Contro l approach systems.

The Limestone area was perf ect o r co uld be made p erf ect fo r such requ ire men ts.

The base is loc ated 745' above sea le ve l and is on a le vel w ith the nea re st 

hig h p o in t o f ground in a ra dius o f 30 m ile s. The runways have s u ff ic ie n t 

safe ty fa c to rs fo r ta keoffs and bad weather la ndin gs, being ov er 2 mile s in 

length w ith overruns a t each end fo r emerg encies.

The base was to be the la rg e s t in th e Northea st and one o f 4 capable o f 

ha nd lin g B-36 bombers; the othe rs were F o rt Worth, Texas; Rapid C it y , South 

Dakota; and Wrig ht F ie ld , Dayton, Ohio. Most o f the acreage taken fo r the base 

was v ir g in fo re s t; very l i t t l e a g ric u lt u ra l pro du ction acreage - the es tim ates 

va ry from 200 - 700 a c re s /

O ri g in a l developmental costs : I t is d if f i c u l t to know the to ta l, in it ia l 

inv es tm en t in development o f the base. The i n it ia l auth orization appears to have

3

I b id ., also May 30, 1947.

^Bangor D aily News, May 5, 1947; May 6 , 1947
136

-4 -

been ap prox im ately $28 m illi o n in 1947.® In 1949, when an additio nal

auth orization o f $25, 134,200 was being co ns ider ed , i t was in dic ate d th at 

$18,000,000 had alre ad y been spent.® In 1947, the Limestone Town Manager,

S. Waldo Burgess, who was als o a member o f the Maine House o f Representative s 

estim ate d the o v e ra ll co st to be ap pr ox im ately $200 m ill io n . 5 67

In 1975, to ta l base assets o f $579,345,348, in clu din g $173,869,000 fo r

b uild in g s, improvements, and land suggest th a t the $200 m il li o n may no t have 

been fa r wrong:®

Ai r c r a ft 

Equipment in use 

♦B uild in gs 

♦Improvements

( U t ilit ie s , Runways, Roads, e tc .) 

Supply In ve ntor ies 

Spare Engines 

♦Land

Petroleu m Products In ve nto ries

$351,840,000

35,386,107

102,115,000

71,038,000

8,109,586

5,500,665

716,000

4,639,99 0

$579,345,348

♦These items to ta l $173,869,000

The base u t i l i t y network includ es the fo llo w in g among oth er ite ms:

.. .w a te r tre atmen t and supp ly f a c ilit y w ith 1,200,000 

gallons per day ca paci ty w ith 58.5 mile s o f d is t r ibution pip e from 1-2 inches

...se wa ge tre atment p la nt w ith ca pacity o f 1,000,000 

• gallons per day

...E le c tr ic a l d is tr ib u ti o n system (110 m ile s) and one 

o f the la rg est e le c tr ic power pla nts in A ir Force 

w it h ca pa city o f 15,350 KWH (Base power consumption is 

ap prox im ately 40,000 ,000 KWH per ye ar) .

.. .o n base roads - 70 mile s

5

Ib id ., May 1, 1957

6

Ib id ., Ju ly 20, 1949

7

Ib id ., May 3, 1947

Q

Economic Impact Statem ent, 1975, p. 15.
137

-5 -

Goodwill: In business term s, goodw ill is often an economic as set 

which enhances the value o f the busine ss e nte rp ri se. C e rt a in ly , the goodw il l and community co op eration which has been a v ita l c h a ra c te ris ti c o f 

the atmosphere fo r success a t Loring A ir Force Base cannot be disc ou nted .

IV. LORING AIR FORCE BASE AND THE ECONOMIC BASE OF NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES:

MUTUAL INTERDEPENDENCE

The Lo rin g A ir Force Base in Lim es tone , whetever its m il it a ry or 

s tr a te g ic m ission, very d e fin it e ly in te ra c ts w ith the lo cal economy and 

ov er tim e, has become in te gra te d, in vary in g deg rees, w ith the lo cal economy 

and oth er economies in the su rrou nd ing area . The long er the oe rio d o f tim e 

the base remains in opera tion, the g re a te r is the degree o f economic in te g ra ti o n 

Such a process nec ess arily im plies mutual interde pendence between the base 

and the lo ca l economies.

The base provide s a market fo r lo c a l jobs and va rio us goods and serv ices 

produced and d is tr ib u te d by the lo ca l busin ess community; i t provides a 

source o f revenue to the lo cal governm ent; i t is inst ru m en ta l in pro vid in g 

su pp ort to lo ca l school systems; i t co ntr ib u te s to lo cal c h a rit ie s and va rio us 

community a c tiv it ie s ; i t no t only stim ula te s lo cal consumption ex pe nd itu res 

but a ls o ; throug h lo cal money markets, contr ib ute s to lo cal investment expend itu re s and to c a p ita l form ation in the are a, thereb y becoming a part o f the 

process o f lo ca l economic grow th. Th is is espe cia lly s ig n if ic a n t because o f the 

genera lly known lag ging economic growth o f the re gion .

Local comm unitie s, on the oth er hand, o ffe r the base a pool o f s k il le d and 

u n skille d la b o r, va rio us goods and se rv ices through the p ri va te se ct or and 

va rio us e ssential goods and se rv ices fo r c o ll e c ti v e consumption through the 

p ublic secto r.
138

-6 -

In th is manner, the base has become an in te g ra l p a rt o f the economic 

base o f the su rro un ding comm unities through a v a rie ty o f in te rre la ti o n s h ip s , 

commercial o r ot herw ise. The 1975 Economic Impact Statem en t, prepared by 

the A ir Fo rce, documents many o f the se interde pe nd en cies .

The in fo rm ation co ntaine d in th is re port c le a rly documents the economic 

ro le played by the Lo rin g A ir Force Base in the lo cal comm unitie s. The 

dependence o f the se com munities on the base can be regarde d e it h e r as a measure 

o f benefits re ce ived by the lo cal communities or as a measure o f v u ln e ra b il it y , 

depending on on e's p oin t o f view and on s p e c if ic circum stan ce s. Given the 

p o s s ib il it y o f clo sin g the base, i t is Im pe rativ e th a t th e economic v u ln e ra b il it y 

o f the lo cal community be se ri o u s ly taken in to consid era tion in a ll its 

dim ensions. Th is is im po rtant not on ly from the p oin t o f view o f the Impacted 

comm unitie s, but also th a t o f the de cision makers re sp onsi ble fo r the ext ent 

and tim in g o f base clo sin g . The se t o f s ta tis tic s developed by the A1r Force 

t e ll an im po rta nt but p a rtia l s to ry . A more comprehensive impact statem ent 

needs to be c a re fu ll y prepared and documented.

V. TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

As gllu ded to in the pr eced ing section, the so cio -economic impact o f a 

m il it a ry base clo sin g must be regarded as m ulti-dim ensio nal. Time, fo r inst an ce , 

is an Im po rta nt dim ensio n: The sh ort -r un im pa ct, 1n a ll li k e li h o o d , w ill be 

one o f se rio us economic d is lo c a ti o n ; the long-run Impact may be as se rio us o r 

more because i t re la te d to the fu tu re growth and v ia b ilit y o f the lo ca l co nm unitie s 

Space is an ot he r Im po rta nt dim ensio n. Does economic im pa ct va ry w ith sp atia l 

distan ce ? Are the com munities clo ser to the base more vu ln era ble than ot hers in 

more o utlyin g areas? These are Im po rta nt qu es tio ns th a t need to be answered.
139

-7 -

Additio nal dimensions Includ e d if fe re n tia tio n between the p ri va te and the 

p ub lic se ct ors o f lo cal economies and d if fe re n tia ti o n among va rio us subse ctor s w it h in the p riva te se cto rs . F in a ll y , one must co ns id er the im p lic it 

socia l co sts th a t tran scend lo cal comm unitie s.

For example, the clo sin g o f the base w ill in v a ri a b ly in volv e co sts o f 

re lo ca tio n o f personnel and equip ment, co sts as sociated w ith e a rl y re tire m e n t, 

co sts o f non-use and und er-mainte nance o f immovable ph ys ical pro pert y, and 

some measure o f loss o f p ro d u c ti v it y o f re so ur ce s, ph ys ical and human. These 

are "s ocia l opportunity co st s" th a t shou ld be inc lude d in a com plete so cioeconomic impact statem ent.
140

-8 -

The fo ll o w in g c h a rt id e n t if ie s , in a s im p li fie d ma nner, th e p r in c ip a l 

el em ent s o f a co m pr eh en sive , socio -e conom ic im oa ct s tu d v :

Lo ca l Busin ess 

Conmuni t y

D ir e c t lo ss o f sale s

In d ir e c t lo ss o f sale s

C a p it a l E xpenditure s

Negative e f fe c t on re a l 

e s ta te valu es

Lo ca l Lab or 

M arke t

D ir e c t lo ss o f jo b s

■> Indu ced lo ss o f jo b s

Ad verse E ffe c ts on 

wage le v e ls .

LAFB

CLOSING Lo ca l Governm ent

D ir e c t lo ss o f re ve nu e

In d ir e c t lo s s o f revenu e

A d d it io n a l fis c a l burden

Jz.

Lo ca l Comm unity 

As A Whole

Loss o f supp ort o f com munity 

a c t iv it ie s

Loss o f supply o f lo anable 

fund s

D ir e c t and in duced income 

lo ss

TIME

S o cie ty a t La rge

Non-use o f p h y s ic a l assets 

R e lo catio n costs 

Cos ts o f e a rly re ti re m e n t 

Loss o f g o o d w ill

N

J

SHORT-RUN LONG-RUI
141

-9 -

Because o f the lim ite d in fo rm ation c u rre n tl y a v a ila b le , i t is not 

po ss ible to pr es en t a comprehensive impact sta teme nt in corp ora ting a ll the 

elements o f the impact model sketched above. However, se lected elem ents 

can be documented a t th is tim e .f or the purpose o f pre lim in ary discussi on.

Hou sing. Of the 5,000 m il it a ry and c iv il ia n employees in 1975, 766 

owned or were purchasing re gula r, or m obile, homes and 308 were re nting 

houses, ap artm ents, or mobile homes in the area.

Employment c re a tio n . I t is c e rt a in th a t the existen ce o f the 5,000 

m il it a ry and c iv il ia n employees a t Loring cr ea te s an additio nal number o f 

job s in the area . An attempt w ill be made la te r in th is stu dy to suggest

th is impact d ir e c tly from surveys being conducted . I f the ra ti o s po rtr ay ed 

g

in an ana lysis rega rding the Rome A ir Development Center are applic able 

to the Lo rin g s it u a tio n , one might ex pe ct the stu dy to suggest between 10,000 

and 15,000 a d d itio na l jobs crea ted by th e 83% o f the Lo rin g personnel to be 

lo s t by the base re du ct ion.

The RAOC stu dy suggests th a t fo r ev er y 100 c iv il ia n and m il it a ry personnel 

employed a t a defense base, 258 ot hers are dependent fo r liv e lih o o d in the 

primary employment fie ld s and an a d d it io n a l, va riable number in secondary 

employment fie ld s .

A second methodology in the above st udy places the ra ti o a t 4:1 .

Q

See “ Economic Impact o f the Loss o f RADC at G rif fis s A ir Force Base," 

December 17, 1974.

73 -4 44 0 - 76 - 10
142

-1 0-

Spending by base and base pers onnel. The Impact of the re du ct ion 

w il l be f e lt in va rio us oth er ways i f i t oc curs. In 1975, $3.1 m il li o n 

in constr uction pro je cts were com pleted by co ntract ors loca ted w it h in a 

50 -m ile ra dius o f the base. Several m illi o n s o f d o lla rs were spent lo c a ll y 

by th e m il it a ry in purch asing commoditie s, su pp lie s and serv ices.

Base employees purchased $3.7 m il li o n o f automo tive devic es in 1975 

in clu d in g 136 motorcy cles , 142 tr u cks and 875 au tomobiles. An add itio na l 

$2.3 m il li o n (e xc luding purchases a t Lo rin g AFB exchange) was spent on 

majo r household ap plia nce s, fu rn it u re and oth er ite ms. $400,000 was 

expended fo r va rio us re cre ational equip ment, $2.5 m il li o n fo r fo od, ente rtainmen t and misc ellaneous purch ases. $100,000 was co ntrib ute d to lo cal 

churches and c h a rit ie s and $50,000 to the Un ited Fund and re la te d campaigns.

Governmental opera tions. The base employees have an e ff e c t upon st ate 

and lo ca l governmental opera tions. The 1975 pr op er ty valu ation o f th e 40 

com munities was $455 ,730,000 excludin g the va lu ation o f the m il it a ry base 

it s e lf . The 766 base personnel owning or purchasing th e ir own homes contr ib u te d to th is valu ation and pa id tax es le vie d ag ains t th e ir pro perty.

The to ta l 1973 loca l ta x commitment fo r these 40 comm unities was $13 ,63 5,7 00. 

Excis e ta x re ce ip ts in 1973 amounted to $1.4 m il li o n . 4,000 of these ve hicles 

belong to base personnel or are re la te d to base opera tio ns .
Education. 2,441 dependents of m ilit a ry personnel attend loc al schools 

which in 1975 received $956,205 1n fed era l aid. This enrollm ent is 10% of 

the to ta l enrollme nt in the 40 communities, but in Limestone i t accounts fo r 

nearly 70S.

Profession al Services. Preliminary data from a survey of the ef fe ct s of 

an 83% red uction in Loring A ir Force Base operation on profe ssion als in the 

area indic ates th at 54% of the respondents are with in 1-15 miles of the base. 

The respondents estimate a cli e n t load from 100 to 10,000 and over; the 

average is 2,250 clie n ts . Twenty-five percent of the respondents indica te th at 

20% to 35% o f th e ir clients are Loring re late d.

Approximately 50% of the respondents Ind ica ted th e ir profession al pr ac tic e 

would be severely impacted by a red uction at Loring A ir Force Base, however,

92% fe lt they would be able to survive .

Miscellane ous. Three-qua rter of a m illio n do lla rs was paid to loc al 

insurance agents fo r automobile, house and lif e insurance in 1975 by 

base personnel. While the impact of base personnel upon banking in sti tu ti o n s 

is not ye t known, the $43 m illion base pa yroll and it s m u lt ip lie r ef fe ct s 

flow through loca l banking in sti tu ti o n s to a gre at extent. The Loring 

Federal Cred it Union, as one example, with 11,500 members has approved nearly 

100,000 loans since it s inception in 1956 valued over $88 m illio n . During 

1975, 9,500 loans were approved fo r $11 m illio n . The cre dit union share 

deposits equals $9 m illion and i t paid $659,000 dividends to it s members
144

-12-

The e ff e c ts o f a base cl os in g on so cia l se rv ic e ag encie s, both 

governmental and p riv a te , w il l be d if f ic u lt to a n ti cip a te u n til the e ffe cts 

upon primary and secondary employment o pp o rt u n itie s are b e tt e r understood.

I f unemployment does incr ea se , c e rta in ly one can a n tic ip a te increa sed 

ex pe nd itu res in the se areas. The fi n a l re p o rt of th is stu dy may be able 

to suggest these im plicatio n s.

The rem ain der o f th is pre lim in ary re p o rt is concerned w ith in it ia l 

revie w o f surve y in fo rm atio n being ob ta ined from the re gion surroundin g 

Lo rin g A ir Force Base.

The survey o f lo ca l businesses in the 40-community economic area , 

conducted by the So cia l Science Research In s titu te , is s t i l l in progress.

The fo llo w in g analy sis is subm itte d on the bas is o f lim it e d in fo rm atio n generated 

by the survey a t th is poin t in tim e.

On the bas is of responses from ap pr ox im at ely 10 per ce nt of more than 

1700 busin ess firm s in the 40-community are a, the fo llo w in g es tim ates have 

been made:

TABLE I

To tal employment, 1975 

To tal ne t sale s, 1975 

To ta l sa les to LAFB

2,612

$50,784,024

(Base and personnel and fa m ilie s ) 

To ta l sales to lo ca l buyers 

To ta l sales to no n-loca l buyers

$10,078,659

$31,114,317

$ 9,954,774

To ta l replacement value 

To ta l planned investment

on expa nsion 

Tota l expenses

Tota l purchases from lo cal sources

$31 ,220,621 

$ 1,512,000

$46,952,162

$ 9,264,900
145

-13-

A simple ca lculatio n shows th at loca l businesses are dependent on the Loring 

A ir Force Base fo r 20 per cent of th e ir sale s (d irect sales only). In order to 

generate to ta l sales of over $50 m il li o n , these firm s have to purchase over $9 

m illio n worth of supplies from othe r loca l business establishments. A good fraction 

of the to ta l sale s of those su ppliers , th ere fo re , must be attribute d to the 

demand generated by the base.

Assuming th at employment is pr op or tio na l to sales, direct purchases by 

the base, It s personnel and fa m ilies accounted fo r 562 jobs out of a to ta l 

of 2,812. I f there 1s a cutback o f 83S o f base operations, the dire ct loss 

of job is estimated at 466. The to ta l los s of job s, however, w il l be considerably greater than th is because of a neg ativ e m u ltip lie r eff ect.

Following the export-base m u lt ip li e r approach, one can de fine the 

m u ltip lie r as:

1+ loc al employment 

non-local employment

Using th is m u lt ip lie r, one can estimate the impact of a change in the 

non-local secto r as follows:

change in to ta l employment =

local employment X change in non-local employment

' +

 non-local employment

For the purpose of th is an alys is, we sh all div ide the loc al economy in to 

two broad se ctors: (a) the loca l secto r which accounts fo r 1688 jobs due to 

sales to loca l buyers, and (b) a non-local sector which accounts fo r 1124 jobs 

due to sales to the Loring A ir Force Base, it s personnel and fam ilies plus 

sales to othe r non -local buyers.

Applying the export-base m u lt ip li e r technique, i t is estimated th at 

an 83X reduction of Loring A ir Force Base operations w il l re sult in a to ta l loss
146

-14-

of 1165 jobs out of a to ta l of 2,812 (t h is is based on a m u ltip lie r coe ffic ie nt 

of 2.5 ,. A rough pr ojec tio n of th is estimate to the entire 40-comnunity 

economic area ind ica tes a loss of nearly 12,000 jobs , excluding those c iv il ia n jobs 

that w il l be lo st d ir e ctl y due to base clos ing. Such a magnitude of job losses 

superimposed on a ch ro nica lly high-unemployment area w il l spell economic di sa ster .

I t should be noted that economic impact of 83% reduction in Loring 

A ir Force Base w il l not be evenly fe lt in a ll communities and in sectors of 

the loc al economies. This is due to the fa ct that diffe re n t communities 

and d if fe re n t types of businesses w il l exhib it diffe re n t degrees of dependency 

on the base. In a survey of loca l businesses in Fort F a ir fi e ld , fo r instan ce, 

the degree of dependency ranged from 0 to 85%. In the forthcoming fin a l 

repo rt of th is pro je ct, the degrees of dependency w il l be shown by communities 

and by business categories. This informa tion w il l add another dimension to the 

assessment of the to ta l socio-economic impact of the base on loc al communities.

The follo wing tables give a lim ited p ro fi le of the degrees of dependency 

on the base by communities, (grouped according to distan ce) and by indu stry 

catego ries (1 -d ig it SIC code):
147

TABLE 2

Net Sales

NET SALES BY TOWN GROUP *

3

(3 1*

1

( 0-1S )

2

( 16-30 )

Group 1 (0-24,999) 18 4 2

2 (25,0 00-74,9 99) 17 5 1

3 (75,000-9 9,9 99) 3 2 0

4 (100,000-999,997) 57 32 4

— — —

95 43 7

Below 9,999

TABLE 3 - DISTRIBUTION OF

5

SALES

1 0

10,000 -49,999 21 6 3

50,000-99,999 10 4 0

100 ,000-199,999 10 7 2

200 ,000-299,999 15 6 0

300 ,000-399,999 2 2 1

400,000-499,999 4 3 2

500,000-599,999 4 1 0

600,000-699,999 3 0 0

700,000-799,999 5 1 0

800,000-899,999 3 1 0

900 ,000-999,999 1 1 0

999,999 ♦ above 11 10 0

— — -

94 43 6

These town grou ps ar e gr ou pe d a ccord in g to t h e ir d is ta n ces from 

L o ri n g A ir Force Base. Fo r a li s t i n g o f towns in eac h gro up, 

see Ap pe nd ix.
148

16

TABLE 4

Sales to LAFB and Personnel by Town Groujf 

By D is ta n ce

Sales

.. 1

(0 -1 5 )

2

(1 6- 30 )

3

( « ♦ )

Group 1 (0-1,999 ) 11 8 6

2 (2,000-14,999) 19 4 0

3 (15,0 00-54,9 99) 20 6 0

4 (55,000-9 99,99 9) 26 10 0

— — -

76 28 6

TABLE 5 - DIST RIBU TION OF SALES TO LAFB AND PERSONNEL

Below 9,999 IS 3 1

10,000-4 9,999 26 7 0

SO,000-99,999 8 5 0

100 ,000-199,999 7 4 0

200,000-299,999 5 0 0

300 ,000-399,999 4 1 0

400 ,000-499,999 0 0 0

500,000-599,999 1 0 0

600,000-699,999 0 0 0

700,000-799,999 2 0 0

— - -

68 20 1

* See Ap pe nd ix fo r th e l i s t i n g o f tow ns in each grou p
149

TABLE 6

EMPLOYMENT BY TOWN GROUP *

By Distan ce

Employme nt (o -is )

2

( l6 - 3 0 )

3

(3 1 * )

Group 1 (0 -2 em p lo yee s) 31 17 3

2 (5 -5 " ) 31 15 4

3 (6 -1 2 " ) ••2 8 17 1

4 (1 3 -9 9 7 " ) 24 14 3

114 63 11

B elo w 25 104 53 10

2 5 -9 9 7

8 0

10 0-1 99 1 1 1

200* 0

1 0

11 2 63

See Appendix fo r lis t in g o f towns in each group.
T A B L E 7

S al e s t o L ori n g A F B b y T o w n Gr o u p s

S al e s ( $) ( 0- 1 5 ) ( 1 6 - 3 1 ) ( 3 1* )

0- 1, 9 9 9 3 8 1 5

2, 0 0 0 - 1 4, 9 9 9 18

1 5, 0 0 0- 5 4, 9 9 9 12

5 5, 0 0 0- 9 9 9, 9 9 7 14

T A B L E 8

N E T S A L E S B’ T SI CI*f O R E A C H G R O U P OF T O W N S

( 0- 1 5 Mil e s)

S al e s ( $)

0- 2 4, 9 9 9

2 5, 0 0 0- 7 4, 9 9 9

7 5, 0 0 0- 9 9, 9 9 9

1 0 0, 0 0 0- 9 9 9, 9 9 9 3 5

( 1 6 - 3 0 Mil e s)

0- 2 4, 9 9 9

2 5, 0 0 0- 7 4, 9 9 9

7 5, 0 0 0- 9 9, 9 9 9

1 0 0, 0 0 0- 9 9 9, 9 9 9 1 8

( 3 1*)

0- 2 4. 9 9 9

2 S, 0 0 0- 7 4, 9 9 9

7 5, 0 0 0 - 9 9, 9 9 9

1 0 0 , 0 00- 9 9 9, 9 9 9 0 

* SI C I O n e d i g it st a n d a r d i n d u s t ri a l c l a s s ifi c a ti o n c o d e
151

TABLE 9

EMPLOYMENT BY SIC I*

19

No. o f Employees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

0-2 0 0 2 0 18 8 24 0 1

3-S 1 2 0 3 28 7 8 0 0

6-12 0 2' 0 7 26 5 4 2 0

13-99 7 4 4 1 4 17 2 1 2 0

Sale s to AFB

Net Sale s 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9

1- 9 4 4 2 41 10 16 2 1

10-19 0 1 3 8 1 1 0 0

20 -2 9 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 0

30 -3 9 1 0 1 3 2 1 0 0

40 -4 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

SO-59 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0

60 -6 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

70 -79 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

80 -8 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

90+ 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

* SICI Standard in d u s tr ia l c la s s if ic a tio n . For purposes o f th is analy sis

two d ig it codes have been co nverted to one d ig it codes fo r ex. 

00 - 01 = (A ). 1 0 - 1 9 - 2 (B) and so on. For a lis tin g o f 

SIC codes, see Appendix.
152

A -l

DISTANCE FROM LORING A.F.B .

IS m il es o r le s s 16 - 30 m il es . 30 m il es and o v er

C ar ib ou B la in e A ll ag ash

Cas w el l E a sto n A sh la nd

Connor TWP Gra nd I s l e B ri dgew ate r

Hamlin M ap le to n Eag le Lake

F o rt F a ir f i e ld Mars H ill F o rt Ken t

Lim es to ne Pe rham F re n c h v il le

New Sweden P re sq u e I s le Hodgdon

St oc kh ol m S t. A ga th a H ou lto n

Van Bu ren Washb urn Is la n d F a ll s

Woodland W e stf ie ld L i ttl e to n

Madawaska

M as ar dis

New Canad a

New Lim er ic k

O ak fi eld

P o rt ag e Lake

S t. F ra n cis

S t. Jo hn

W all ag ra ss

W in te rv il le
153

A-2

. . S . I . C . CODES

art I. Titles and De scr iption s of Industries ......................................................................

Division A. Agr iculture, forestry, and fisheries:

M ajor G rou p 01. Agric ultural pro duction------ ------------------ -

M ajor Gro up 07. Agric ultural services and hun ting an d tr ap ­

pin g.....................................................................

Mnjo r Gro up 08. Fo restry--------. ------------- . . . . . . — . . . . . .

M ajor Gro up 09. Fisheries----------------- ---------- - — . . . . . —

Division B. Mining:

M ajor Group 10. Metal min ing----------------------------------------

M ajor Gro up 11. An thracite m in in g .. .. .--------- . . . . . . . . . . .

M ajor Group 12. Bitumin ous coal and lign ite min ing-----------

M ajor Group 13. Crude petro leum and natura l gxs..................

M ajor Gro up 14. Mining and quarryin g of nonroctallic mi nerals, except fuels__ _____ — . . . . . . . . — .

Division C. Con trac t con struction:

M ajor Gro up 15. Building con struction—general contractors. 

M ajor Group 16. Con struction other than build ing constru ctio n—general c o n tr a c to r s .......-------- —

M ajor Group 17. Construction—special tra de con tr a cto rs .. .. 

Division D. Manufacturin g:

M ajor Gro up 19. Ordnance an d ac ce ssor ies..-------- ------------

M ajor Gro up 20. Food and kind red products--------------------

M ajor Group 21. Tobacco ma nufac tures--------------------------

M ajor Gro up 22. Textile mill prod uc ts............... ..................—

M ajor Gro up 23. Apparel and ot he r finished pro ducts made

from fabrics and simi lar mate ria ls----------- -

M ajor Gro up 24. Lum ber and wood products, exc ept fu rn i t u r e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — .. . . — . . . . . — .

M ajor Group 25. Furni tur e and fixtures------ . . . . . . . . . . . —

Mnjor Gro up 26. Pap er and alljcd prod uc ts...........................

M ajor Group 27. Printin g, publishing, and allied in dust ri es ..

M ajor Gro up 28. Chemicals and allied prod uc ts........................

M ajor Gro up 29. Petroleum refining a nd related in dust ri es ... 

M ajor Gro up 30. Rubber and miscellaneous plastics p rodu cts.

M ajor G rou p 31. Lea ther a nd lea the r p ro d u c ts .. .......... . . . . .

M ajor Gro up 32. Stone, clay, glass, and concrete pro d u c ts .. . 

M aj or Gro up 33. Primary inctal indu stries ... — . . . . . — — 

M njor Gro up 34. Fabricated metal prod ucts, except or dnance, machinery, an d traits|»o rtal ion eq uipm en t.__ . . . . . . . ------- - — ............ . . . . . .

M ajor Group 35. Mach inery, except electri cal. — . . . . . . — -
154

CONTENTS A-3

kart I. Title* and Descriptions of Industries—Continued

Division D. Manufacturin g—Continued

Major Group 3G. Electrical machinery;’equipment, and supp l i e s . . . . . . . . __ _

Major Group 37. Transportation eq u ip m ent. ...____ . . ___.

Major Group 38. Professional, scientific, and controlling in-

. . struments; photographic and optical goods;

watches and d o c k * ......__ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 39. Miscellaneous manufacturing ind ustries.__

Division E. Tran sportation, communication, electric, gas, and sanitary

services:

Major Group 40. Railroad transportation.__ . . . ___. . . . . . . .

Major Group 41. Ix>cnl and suburban transit and intcrurban

passenger transport at ion_____ ___________

Major Group 42. Motor freight transportation and warehousing__ ______. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 44. Water t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ....................

Major Group 45. Tr:tns|>ortntion by nir .................... ................

Major Group 46. Pipe line transportation______ ___________

Major Group 47. Transportation s e r v i c e s . . . . . . . . . . . . __ . . .

Major Group 48. C o m m u n i c a t io n .........................

Major Group 49. Electric, gas, and sanitary services____ . . .

Division F. Wholesale and retail trade:

Major Group 50. Wholesale tr ade______ . . . __ . . . . _______ _

Major Group 52. Building materials, hardware, and farm

. equipment dealers____ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 53. Retail trade—general m er ch an di se ...____

Major Group 54. Food stores___________________ _________

Major Group 55. Automotive dealers and gasoline service

stations______________ . . . ___. . . . _______

Major Group 56. Apparel and accessory s t o r e s . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 57. Furniture, home furnishings, and equip ­

ment st ore s. . . . . . . . __ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 58. Ealing and drinking places___________ . . .

Major Group 59. Miscellaneous retail s t o r e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Division G. Finance, insurance, and real estate:

Major Group 60. Banking_____________ . . . . ___. . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 61. Credit agencies other than banks_____ . . . .

Major Group 62. Security and commodity brokers, dealers,

exekanges, and s e r v i c e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 63. Insurance carriers.__ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 64. Insurance agents, brokers, and s er vice .__ _

Major Group 65. Real estate.............. ..

Major Group 66. Combinations of real estate, insurance,

loans, law ofliers....... ....................

Major Group 67. Holding ami other investment co m pa nies .. . 

Division II. Services:

Major Group 70. Holds, morning houses, camps, and other

lodging plac es.1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major Group 72. Personal servic es_____ ____. . . . . ___- _____

Major Group 73. Miscellaneous business services___________

Major Group 75. Automobile repair, automobile services,

and garages

Major Group 76. Miscellaneous repair services.
CONTENTS

Pnrt I. Titl es And Descriptions of Industries—Continued

Division H. Services—Continued

Mnjor Croup 78. Motion pictbrc s............. ........................-

Major Cr oup 79. Amusement mid recreation services, e>

mol ion pictures--------- . . . . . . — . . . . .

Major Croup 80. Medical ami other health servic es.........

Major Croup 81. Legal services............. - ....................

Major Group 82. Educational services................................

Mnjor Group 84. Museums, art galleries, botanical

zoological gardens........................ ............

Major Group 80. Nonprofit membership orga niza tions..

Major Group 88. Private house holds--------------------------

Major Group 89. Miscellaneous services.............................

Division I. Government:

Mnjor Group 91. Federal govern me.....................................

Major Group 92. State government.....................................

Major Group 93. Local government....................................

Major Group 94. International government.....................

Division J. Nonclnssifiablc establishments:

Mnjor Group 99. Nonclnssifiablc establishments...............
156

CONFIDENTIAL

T he in fo r m a tio n c o n ta in e d h e r e i n w i l l be 

u s e d o n ly f o r s t a t i s t i c a l p u r p o s e s an d 

o n ly in c o m b in a ti o n w it h o t h e r d a ta so 

t h a t p u b lis h e d in fo r m a tio n c a n n o t be 

i d e n t i f i e d w it h an y on e f ir m .

A-5

S tu d y 7017

In te rv ie w Number

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

SURVEY OF NORTHERN MAINE BUSINESS

K in d o f B u sin e ss _ _ ________ ______________ _______________________________

(e . g . R e s t a u r a n t, G a ra g e , e t c . )

Co mmun ity ____________________ __ ___________________________________________

Kin d o f Firm __ ____________________________________________________________

( C o r p o ra tio n , P a r t n e r s h i p , S in g le Ow ner)

%____________________________________ L o c a lly Owned

T h is su rv e y i s d e s ig n e d t o d e v e lo p in fo r m a tio n o f th e b u s in e s s a c t i v i t y , 

p l a n t f a c i l i t i e s an d im p a c ts o f L o rin g AFB up on b u s in e s s in N o rth e rn M ain e.

T h is in fo r m a tio n i s b e in g g a th e r e d by th e S o c ia l S c ie n c e R e se a rc h I n s t i t u t e

o f th e U n iv e r s ity o f M aine a t O ro n o . A ll re s p o n s e s w i l l b e t r e a t e d a s c o n f i d e n t i a l .

Q l. F i r s t , when was y o u r b u s in e s s e s ta b l is h e d ? ____________________

Q2 . How many em plo yees d id t h e b u s in e s s hav e a t th e ti m e o f e s ta b lis h m e n t? _________

C o n c e rn in g y o u r em pl oym en t f i g u r e s , p le a s e f i l l o u t th e f o llo w in g :

19 75 19 70 196 5 19 60 1955 19 50 194 5

T o ta l em pl oye es 

(A vera ge Week)

F u llt im e em plo yees

P a r ttim e em plo yees 

(w o rk in g l e s s th a n 

a f u l l work wee k)

Q6 . In 19 75 w hat w ere y o u r t o t a l e x p e n se s f o r m e rc h a n d is e , m a t e r i a l s , s u p p lie s 

( in c lu d in g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t s ) ?
157

A-6

(DEFINITION OF LOCAL AREA: LOCAL AREA MEANS ANY PLACE WITHIN TEN (1 0) MILES OF 

YOUR BUSINESS

Q7. Of th i s t o t a l , how much was p u rc h ased lo c a li y ? _______________

Q8. Of th e se lo c a l p u rc h ases how much was purc h ased lo c a lly fro m th e fo ll o w in g 

so u rc es? .. ••

Amount $

a . W hole sa le rs

I d e n t ity o f P ri m ary Sou rc e

b . R e ta il e r s

c . M an ufa ct ure rs

d. A g ric u lt u re

e . tr a n s p o r ta tio n

O th er (p le ase 

s p e c if y )

f .

gWhat we re yo ur t o t a l ex p en se s in 1975 fo r e

Amount $

Q9. S a la r ie s and wag es

ach o f th e fo ll o w in g :

% fro m lo c a l a re a

Q10. Ren t on b u sin ess 

p ro p e rty

Q ll . Tax es on b u sin e ss

p ro p e rty : p ro p e rty ta x

a l l o th e r ta x

Q12. D e p re c ia ti o n and

A m o rt iz ati o n (n o t a p p lic a b le )

Q13. R ep a ir s an d m ai nte nan ce 

by c o n tr a c to r s

7 3 -4 4 4 0 - 76 - 11
158

A-7

Q14. Utilit ie s and 

te lephone

Amo unt $ % fro m local are a

Q1S. Tr an sp or ta ti on

(Non-loca l)

Q16. Int erest ex pense

Q17. Ad ve rt is in g

Q18. In surance

Q19. Ot her exp en se s

Q20. (Please Sp ecify)

Q21. What we re yo ur net sales (gross sal es in cl ud in g sales tax es less sal es re turns 

and al lo wa nc es an d sales dis cou nts ) in 1975?

Q22. What pr op or ti on of you r net sales in 19 75 wa s to Lor ing A ir Fo rce Base?

2

Q2 3 - anat f£ ni fi es ?° n °f X °U r S # l M 1 9 7 S W 8 S t 0 b a s e n i l i t a r y person ne l

__ __________________________ %

Q24. What pr op or ti on of yo ur ne t sales in 197 5 was sol d out side the local are a?

i

Q2S. Whe re we re th ese custome rs loc ate d?

Mos t im po rt an t c u s t o m e r :

Se co nd m os t im portant custome r:

Th ird no st import an t cust ome r:

’•".at we re yo ur net sal es (gross sales in cl ud in g sales tax less sal es re turn and 

allo wa nc es an d sal es dis counts) for:

Q26. 1970 _________

Q27. 1965 ___________

028. 1960 _____
159

A-8

Q29.

Q30.

Q31.

19SS _________

1950 _________

1945 _________

Who are the three la rg est su ppli er s of your mer chandise, m at er ia ls and supplies?

Q32.

Q34.

Q36.

Q33. (Where loca ted)

Q3S. (Where located )

Q37. (Where located )

Q38.

Q39.

Q40.

Q41.

Q42.

Q43.

Q44.

Q4S.

Q46.

Q47.

Q48.

How much of your to ta l sa le s is de riv ed from:

Local buy ers _______________________________

Loring Air Force Base ______________________ (in clud ing sa le s to base personn el

and th e ir fa m ili es )

Non -local buy ers ___________________________

What was the replace ment va lue of your busin ess in :

1975 ___________________

1970 ___________________

1965 •___________________

I9 60 '___________________

Do you have any pla ns to expand your business in the nex t 5 years?

Y e s

 ___________ 

No ------------------ (Go to Q47)

(If yes ) How much do you plan to spend on th is expa nsio n? _ ____________________

(If no) What is your prim ary reason fo r not expanding? ____ _____________________

Have you expanded your bu sine ss in the la st 5 years ?

Yes No ___________

---------------- (Go to Q50)

Q49. (If yes ) Did growth of sa le s to Loring AFB aff e ct th is de cision ?

Yes ___________ No ____________ (Go to QSO)
1 6 0

A-9

Q49a. (If yes) In what ways? ___________________________________________

QSO. Do you have any plans to relocate your business in the next five years?

Yes _____________ No ____________ (Go to Q52)

QS1. (If yes) Why do yo u plan to relocate? _______________________ ________ __

Q52. Would the proposed redu ction of Loring Air Force Base by 83 percent affect your 

plans to relocate?

Yes ____________ No ____________ (Go to Q54)

QS3. (If yes) How will this reduction affect your plans to relocate?

Assuming that Loring AFB w as reduced 83 per cent, what impact w ould this 

have on:

Q54. Your business? _ ________________________________________________________________

Q55. Number 'of employees? ______________________________________________

QS6. Anticipated total sales ?________________________________________________________

Q57. Future business plans?(as for example: cuts on plans for new expansion)

Q58. In your opinion, could you r business survive a reduction of 83 per cent at 

Loring AFB?

Yes _______________ No ____________

Q59. How much do you presently owe (mortgage or loan) on your business?

Q60. How much do yo u owe throu gh the federal government? _____ _____________ _______ _
Q61. What chances between 0 and Iff Woul d you estimate to be the possibility of 

your business facility being converted to another business use?

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Q62. Are there any other comments you would like to make concerning the impact of 

Loring Air Force Base upon your business?

Thank you very much for your assistance.
7017D

SURVEY OF. HIGHER EDUCATION 

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Name of i n s t i t u t i o n ____________________________

Community in which lo ca te d____ ____________________

Total'number of students. Fall 1975s

Full-time _________ Part-time ________

(NOTE: A copy of OE Form 2300-2.3, "Opening Fall Enrollment

in Higher Education, 1975" would be useful.)

Number of students who are base personnel or dependents?

Full-time ________ Part-time ________ (Estimate, if necessary)

Total number of courses offered by the institution, Fall 1975 _ 

Total number of course sections _____

Numer of courses offered by the institution at Loring Air Force

Base, Fall 1975 _____ Total number of course sections offered

by the institution at Loring Air Force Base, Fall 1975

Characteristics of enrollment in base courses: What percent of

enrollment is regular, degree credit program enrollment _____;

non-degree courses _____, and vocationa l-tec hnica l courses

Number of Staff, Fall 1975 and salary outlay:

Number Salary Outla y

Faculty

Full-time _____ __________

Part-time

No. tenured

Professional, non-faculty staff: 

Full-time 

Part-time

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

Other staff: 

Full-time 

Part-time

XXXXXXX

XXXXXXX

Number of staff 

reduced 83»: 

Faculty

Full-time _ 

Part-time

who would have to be released

Non-faculty professional s

Full-time ___

Part-time

if LAFB were

Other

Full-time

Part-time

Number of course offerings which would be dropped? _____ Number

of course sections which would be drop ped? ______ Percent of

student credit hour generation which would be lost? _

What would be the impact of this reduction on space utilization 

buildings, etc.?
163

A-12

11. What is the institution’s total current fund revenues and 

expenditures? What proportion is derived from student tuitions 

and fees? (NOTE: A copy of OE Form 2300-4, "Financial 

Statistics of Institutions of Higher Education for Fiscal

Year ending 1975" would be useful.

12. What is the institution's total indebtedness currently outstanding?

13. What is the book value and current replacement value of the 

institution’s physical plant?

14. What proportion of the physical plant was constructed primarily

because of pressures generated by military personnel or 

dependents? _________ __

15. What impact would an 83% reduction have on the fiscal standing 

of your insttution, particularly upon debt repayment?

16. What other impacts would you anticipate from such a reduction?
164

CONFIDENTIAL

The information contained herein w il l be 

used only fo r s ta tis tic a l purposes and 

only in combination with oth er data so 

that published inform ation cannot be 

Id entified with any one firm .

Study 7017 E

A-13

Int erview Number

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

SURVEY OF NORTHERN MAINE PROFESSIONALS

Kind of P ro fe ssio n_________________________________________

Communi t y __________________________________________________

Kind of Profe ssional Organ ization ___________________ _____________________

(C orpo ratio n, Partners hip , Single Owner)

X___________________________Lo ca lly Owned

This survey is designed to develop inform ation o f your profe ssion al business and 

the possible impacts of Loring AFB upon you r business. This information is being 

gathered by the Social Science Research In s ti tu te of the Unive rsity of Maine at Orono. 

A ll responses w il l be tre ate d as con fidentia l.

Ql. F ir s t, when was you r profe ssion al business established? _______________________

Q2. How many people did you employ at the time of establishment?_________________

Q3. How many people do you pr es en tly employ (1975)? ____________

Q4. How many d if fe re n t clients did you work fo r in 1975?__________________________

Q5. How many of these clients (Q4.) were personnel or dependents from Loring AFB?

Q6. What was your to ta l net income from your profe ssion al business in 1975?

Q7. What percent o f your to ta l net income was derived from Loring AFB personnel 

or dependents?

Q8. What is the replacement value o f your profe ssion al business?__________________

Q9. Do you have any plans to expand you r business in the next five (5) years?

NO

T5o“ to Q12.)

YES
165

A- 14

Q10. ( I f yes) Did the growth of business with Loring AFB personnel or 

dependents aff ect your de cis ion to expand?

YES____ NO

------ (Goto Q12.)

Q ll . ( I f yes) Would you describe these affects of Loring AFB on your decision?

Q12. Do you have any plans to re loca te your pro fes sion in the next fi ve (5) years? 

YES____ NO____

Q13. ( I f yes) Why do you plan to relocate ? ___________________________ ____

Q14. Would the proposed 83S redu ction of Lo ring A ir Force Base a ff ect your plans to 

relo cate?

YES____ NO

(Go to Q16.)

Q15. ( I f yes) How w il l th is redu ction aff ect your plans to reloc ate ?____________ _

Assuming th at Loring AFB was reduced 83 per cent, what impact would th is 

have on:

Q16. Your profe ssion al business? _ ___________________________________ _________

Q17. An ticipated to ta l net business ($ per year)? ____________________ _ ________ _

Q18. Future business plans? (as fo r example: cuts or plans fo r new expansion)

Q19. In your op inion, could your business survive a reduction of 83 per cent at 

Loring AFB?

YES____ NO____

Q20. Are there any othe r comments you would li k e to make concerning the impact of Loring A ir Force Base upon your business?_______________________ ___________

Thank you fo r your assis tance.
Co nfide ntial

Social Science Research In stitu te 

Survey of Loring A ir Force Base Impact

Study 7017 H

Intervie w Number

The informa tion contained herein w il l be used only fo r 

s ta ti s ti c a l purposes and only 1n combination with other 

data so that published informa tion cannot be id entified with any one organiz ation .

This survey is designed to develop informa tion about the basic economic and socia l s ta ti s ti c s of 

each organization in th is reg ion. This data 1s being gathered by the Social Science Research In sti tu te of 

the Unive rsity of Maine at Orono 1n order to estimate the Impact of the Loring A ir Force Base upon the 

economy of Northern Maine.

Concerning your or ga niza tio n, please f i l l out the fo llo wing:

Ql.

Q2.

Q3.

Q4.

Q5.

1975 1965 1955 1945

Total number of peo pleQerviced by 

your organization ?

Approximate o f th is number which belong to the A ir Force base?

Total No. of people employed by your org anization?

a. Fu ll Time?

b. Part Time?

Total expenditure on salar ies ?

Total expenditure on ca pita l equipment, 

in te re st payment, etc.

O i

O i

A15
1975 1965 1955 1945

Total expenditure on maintenance u tilitie s :

heating, e le c tric it y , et c.

Total expenditure on tran sp or tatio n, off ic e

supp lies, misc.

Q8. Assuming th at Loring Air Force Base was reduced by 83 perce nt, what impact would th is have on:

your organ!z ation_______________________________________

Q9. Are there any comments you would li k e to make concerning the impact of Loring Air Force Base

clo sin g on your orga niza tio n._____________________________ ___ ____________________________________ .

05

- I
168

A17

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

SURVEY OF NORTHERN MAINE BUSINESS

CODEBOOK

Column

Number

Card 1

1-4 Study Number (701 7)

5- 8 In te rv ie w Number (4 D ig it No. on the rig h t hand corn er)

9-10 Kind o f Bu sin ess (fro m th e f i r s t li n e on the questionnaire) 

Check the S .I .C . code attach ed to fi n d the r ig h t number 

to code fo r th e busi ness . Use th e f i r s t two d ig it s only .

11 Community. Comm unities are div id ed in to th re e groups 

ac co rd ing to th e ir dista nce s from Lo ring A ir Force Base.

See atta ch ed l i s t fo r th e grou ping s

1. 15 m ile s or le ss

2. 16 - 30 m ile s

3. 30 m ile s o r ov er

12-14 Q3. Tota l Employees (Averaae M eekl

Code only th e res ponse fo r 1975.

3 D ig it Code

Code act ual number up to 996.

For ex. 001 = 1 em plo yee, 996 = 996 employees

997. 997 o r more

998. OK

999. NA

15-20

* 1

Q6. In 1975 wha t were your to ta l expenses fo r merchandis e, 

m a te ria ls , supplies (i n c lu d in g tr a n s p o rt a tio n cost s)?

D ig it Code

Code actu al numbers

99 9.997. $999,99 7 o r more

999.99 8. DK

999.99 9. NA
169

Column A18

Number

22-27 07. Of th is t o t a l, how much was purchase d lo c a ll y ?

6 D ig it Code

Code actu al numbers

999.99 7. $999,997 or more

999.99 8. DK

999.99 9. NA

28-32 09. S ala ri es and wages.

5 D ig it Code

Code actu al numbers

99 .997 . $99,997 or more

99 .998 . DK

99 .999 . NA

33-42 O il. Taxes on bu sine ss pro perty (Code only amount)

Space allo wed fo r two 5 D ig it Codes

Code actu al numbers

Code respon se to p ro p e rt y ta x in c o ls . 33-31 and a ll 

oth e r taxe s in c o ls . 3S-41.

99 .997 . $99,997 or more

99 .998 . DK

99,999 NA

43-48 Q21. What were your net sa les (Gross sa les in clu d in g sa les 

taxe s le ss sale s re tu rn s and allowa nc es and sa les 

dis counts ) in 1975?

6 D ig it Code

Code actu al numbers

99 9.997. $99 9,9 97 or more

99 9.998. DK

99 9.999. NA

49-50 Q22. What p ro p o rt io n o f yo ur net sa les in 1975 was to Loring Ai 

Force Base?

2 D ig it Code

Code actu al pe rcen tage s

01. IX

97. 97X or more

98. DK

99. NA
170

Column

Number

51-52

A19

Q23. li h a t p ro p o rt io n o f yo ur ne t sa les in 1975 was to base 

______ m ili ta r y personnel and fa m ilie s _____________________

2 D ig it Code

Code actu al percentages

53-54

b5-56

57-58

59-65

01.

97.

98.

99.

IX

97X or more 

DK

NA..

038. Loca l Buyers

2 D ig it Code

Code a ctu al pe rcentages

01 . .

97 .

98 .

99 .

IX

97X o r more 

DK

NA

Q39. Lori n g A ir Force Base (i nclu din g sa les to base personnel 

and th e ir fa m il ie s ) ________ ____________________ _

2 D ig it Code

Code a ctu al pe rcentages 

01 . IX

97 . 97X or more

98 . DK

99 . NA

Q40. N on-loca l buyers

2 D ig it Code

Code a ctu a l percen tage s

01 . IX

97 . 97X o r more

98 . DK

99. NA

Q41. Replacem ent va lue o f business in 1975.

7 D ig it Code

Code a c tu a l numbers

9.9 99.9 97. $9,999,99 7 or more

9.9 99.9 98. DK

9.9 99.9 99. NA
171

A20

Column 

Number

66 Q. 45. Do yo u. ha ve any plan s to expand your bu sine ss in the

next 5 ye ar s?

I f coded 5 1. Yes

fo r Q45, ......... — 5. No (Go to Q.48)

code 00,000 8. DK

in c o ls . 9. NA

-66-70 Z.7 • 7 /

67-71 Q46. ( I f yes) How much do you plan to spend on th is

______ exp ansion ?_____________________ ________________

5 D ig it Code

Code actu al number

99 .9 97 . $99,997 or more

99 .9 98 . DK

99 .9 99 . NA 

00 ,0 00 . I NAP

72 Q48. Have you expanded yo ur busin ess in the la s t 5 ye ars?

1. Yes

I f coded 5 —- — - 5. No (Go to Q54)

fo r Q48. 8. DK

code 0 in 9. NA

c o l. 73

73 Q49. ( I f yes) Did grow th o f sa les to Loring AFB a ffe c t th is 

decis io n?

1. Yes 

5. No

8. DK

9. NA 

0. INAP

Q54. Impact o f Loring AFB cut on yo ur bu sin ess?

1. Gre at im pa ct (code 1. i f the answ er is bu sine ss would 

be fi n is h e d )

2. Some impa ct

3. L it t l e im pa ct

5. No im pa ct a t a ll

8. DK

9. NA

74

O