Guest post by Steve Corneliussen
In 2005 Gov. Mark Warner countenanced Virginia’s donation of Fort Monroe to Hampton for narrowly envisioned and financially counterproductive “redevelopment.” But now, for the first time, an election campaign is engaging the fundamental issue of who really owns that special place. Prediction: this campaign will increasingly reveal that when it comes to that four-century-old, waterfront national treasure, Democratic politicians — Gov. Kaine, Sen. Webb, and others — have failed to act like Democrats.
A Sunday Daily Press article headlined “Lawyer to challenge Tom Gear for House seat” reported that Olaf F. Gebhart Jr., a Poquoson attorney, has announced his candidacy in the 91st District of the House of Delegates. That’s the district containing Fort Monroe. The incumbent automatically serves as one of the Fort Monroe Authority’s 18 members. Mr. Gebhart, the article says, immediately “criticized Gear for saying the future of Fort Monroe should be directed by the General Assembly” when it should instead “be determined by the city of Hampton.”
Aside from some minor skirmishing in the 2007 state senate contest between Tricia Stall and John Miller, no electoral campaign has yet focused on the “Hampton-owns-Fort-Monroe” presumption. That bogus presumption has hobbled the planning for post-Army Fort Monroe — and has shown many a professed Democrat unable to act like an actual Democrat on this issue.
An aerial photo at the home page of Citizens for a Fort Monroe National Park (CFMNP.org) shows the stakes: 570 superb waterfront acres of history, architecture, and green space. All of Old Point Comfort, not just the moated fortress, constitutes Fort Monroe, and all of it was designated a National Historic Landmark a half-century ago.
That’s because Old Point Comfort offers unmatched views not only across the bay and over Hampton Roads harbor, but into 400 years of America’s past. The first African Americans arrived there en route to Jamestown. Nearly a quarter of a millennium later, African Americans helped build the moated fortress still at the heart of the place. And after Fort Sumter in 1861, Fort Monroe became not just a place where slavery began to die, but the place where slavery began to die.
That happened when three stand-up Americans — Frank Baker, James Townsend, and Sheppard Mallory — risked everything to escape enslavement. Their self-emancipation led first to a flood of self-emancipation at Fort Monroe, and eventually to a cascade of self-emancipation all across the South, helping to decide the war’s outcome.
Even if Old Point Comfort had little historic significance, politicians professing to be Democrats ought to save it from financially unnecessary “redevelopment.” On the “What’s New” page at CFMNP.org, you can read excerpts from the new report of the Trust for Public Land (or you can download the whole report). It explains how Fort Monroe’s “conversion to parkland would help reduce the parkland deficit of the entire Hampton Roads area and would also have significant positive spin-offs — economic and otherwise — for the entire region.”
But unfortunately, Virginia’s Democratic leaders kowtow to a powerful “development-for-development’s-sake” handful of Hamptonians. In 2005, following the Army’s departure decision, that powerful handful began deftly exploiting the outright stupidity of the federal base-closure law. That law doesn’t distinguish a Fort Drab or a Camp Swampy from a national treasure like Fort Monroe. Virginia’s Democratic leaders could easily defeat it, if they chose. Meanwhile, at heart of that law lies a prescription for “redevelopment.”
“Redevelopment”? A National Trust for Historic Preservation official ranks Fort Monroe with Monticello and Mount Vernon. (See for yourself.) Question: If the commonwealth somehow came into possession of Monticello or Mount Vernon, would even the droolingest developer disrespect either place by suggesting “redevelopment”?
What Democratic politicians — now including this new candidate — fail to grasp is that Fort Monroe requires strategic thinking, not biz-as-usual thinking. Post-Army Fort Monroe could be made into a revenue-generating, self-sustaining, innovatively structured Grand Public Place. It could enrich Hampton and the region in multiple ways, starting with financially, but including culturally, recreationally and environmentally. One possibility is a hybrid national park working with a federal trust, along lines proven at San Francisco’s Presidio.
The Virginian-Pilot’s editors are calling for some such strategic solution. They say that Fort Monroe “is unlikely to reach its full economic and educational potential unless Governor Kaine and other local, state and federal leaders get behind an effort to create Fort Monroe National Park,” which “ideally … will become financially self-sustaining.”
Over 2300 citizens in Hampton have begun taking this whole issue into their own hands, as reported in another Sunday article in the Daily Press (and by Channel 13’s Mike Gooding ).
For me as a Democrat from over four decades back — my whole adult life — it’s deeply ironic and discouraging that the person acting like an actual Democrat in this picture is an ultra-conservative Republican. (Though don’t get me wrong: as a conservative in some ways myself, I believe Fort Monroe requires the best in conservative thinking. This should not have to be a partisan issue.)
Nevertheless the only Virginia politician really to have distinguished himself concerning this imperiled national treasure is the 91st District incumbent, Republican Del. Tom Gear. I might deplore some of his stands, but because of his standing up for Fort Monroe, I consider him like a brother. Policies on roads and bridges will vary in the coming years, but bad thinking will ruin Fort Monroe for the next thousand.
The article quotes Del. Gear saying, “Fort Monroe is a crown jewel, and it belongs to every citizen in the United States. It’s not the city of Hampton’s property.” He’s right. Democrats ought to catch up with him on that.
“Gebhart describes himself,” says the Daily Press article, as “a conservative Democrat.” To my mind, given what Mr. Gebhart has said so far about Fort Monroe, he can be neither a conservative nor a Democrat.
Steve Corneliussen is a media advisor to the head of the American Institute of Physics, semi-retired as a Jefferson Lab science writer, and a vice president of Citizens for a Fort Monroe National Park. He was the original candidate for Senate in 2007 in the 1st District.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
It is indeed ironic that Mr. Gebhart in particular, and many (not all) Virginia Democrats in general, have hitched their wagon to diminishing rather than enhancing the potential of Fort Monroe. Emphasizing Hampton City Council’s short term interests, as Gebhart would, means more development inevitably “mediocritizing” Fort Monroe, in order to gain more near term net tax revenues for fulfilling Hampton City Council’s current off-post spending agenda.
Putting the broader and more medium and longer term interests of America, Virginia, Hampton Roads and Hampton first, by maximizing public open space (including reserving the Wherry Quarter as largely open space for the long term) to go with adaptive reuse of historic buildings, limited new construction in North Gate, Entry Gate and Historic Village and a national park unit at least in moated fort and other key historic areas, would produce a magnificent and self-sustaining Fort Monroe. And a magnificent Fort Monroe, ironically, does far more for Hampton, including for its economy, than the course Gebhart advocates. And, yes, Corneliussen is right, Republican Tom Gear displays far more understanding of this than Gebhart and other Democrats who supposedly are more attentive to protecting our nation’s historical, architectural, scenic and natural heritage.
A Virginian Pilot article reports that Bill Armbruster, Executive Director of the Fort Monroe Authority, is asking the federal government for nearly a hundred million dollars to help with the transition of Fort Monroe to state management. He’s doing this, I suspect, because his requests for state funding have been ignored or turned down. If he fails to get federal help, there is a very real danger that the state will overdevelop or sell off parts of Fort Monroe in order to pay for the rest. This makes it even more imperative that Virginia’s state and federal legislators (I’ve given up on Governor Kaine) do all they can to involve the federal government in Fort Monroe’s future, perhaps by backing a hybrid national park/federal trust along the lines of the Presidio, now on its way to being self-sustaining after years of federal support. And in saving Fort Monroe from developers, our legislators would also be giving an economic boost to Hampton and the region. National parks are strong contributors to the economies of the towns and cities near them. A recent National Park Service study, for example, shows that Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park contributes about $50 million to the local economy, half of which comes from non-local visitors. Saving historic and beautiful Fort Monroe for all Americans to enjoy, and enriching Hampton and the region at the same time—it’s the best possible outcome. Who besides the shortsighted and the greedy would oppose it?
Saving Fort Monroe for future generations while allowing for appropriate use, should be a goal for all of Hampton Roads. Saving the 570 acres for open space, recreation, and adaptive use of historic buildings for things such as craft shops, rental homes, day care centers, art shops, restraunts, and many other similar uses is something all of Hampton Roads needs because it would become another center for shopping and tourism. Drawing in non resident tourists.
Leases of the historic structures for the types of uses listed above will go a long way towards providing the necessary funds to support the forts infrastructure and preservation needs. But that alone, will not bring enough money.
What will bring significant dollars to the region is National Park Service management of the 570 acres. When Fort Monroe becomes a park, federal funding will come and, because of the public knowledge that National Parks manage only the highest value historic tourism sites, people will come, with the result that non-residents will be spending their money in our region.
Hampton will prosper. Our region will prosper. But most of all, we will, by saving the open space at Fort Monroe, save something we and future generations need, a bit of space. A place to roam and recreate as we renew our spirits.
This is it folks. If we loose the wonderful vistas of the bay and the beach areas of Fort Monroe to excessive and inappropriate development, or to inadequate funding, it is over… There is no other large open area close to Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Newport News, Hampton, and the other cities in the area.
Folks, brace yourself. Talk abounds that Oceana Naval will be next to go by the wayside. It barely manage to survive BRAC before and talk is that it will not survive the cuts that will be coming to the military infrastructure. Webb and kaine will not be able to help as many of the advisors to Obama have ties to Bill Clinton’s downsizing of the military and facilities during the 90’s as a means of reining in the budget. Odds are these advisors will advise Obama to do the same; cut defense related spending and reduce infrastructure.
Steve,
I noticed that Jody Wagner was not in attendance at today’s FMFADA meeting. Is she still on that board? If she still is, how’s her attendance been? Just curious…
Let me add that today was Glenn Nye’s swearing into office. But in the future, I hope he sends one of his staff members to these meetings. I’ve now seen Charlie, Sen. Webb’s aide there twice now. That’s a good thing.
Some new information and then three answers for Eileen:
* I was glad to get the chance to meet Mr. Gebhart at Sen. Miller’s Poquoson town meeting tonight. He says that the Daily Press article leaves the entirely wrong impression concerning his position on post-Army Fort Monroe. I take him at his word. I’ll be grateful if he chooses to join the fight to save Fort Monroe. And I’m all ears to hear if he’ll choose to do better than his fellow Democrats have done so far concerning that national treasure that — despite what Gov. Kaine and Sen. Webb think — belongs not to a powerful handful of people in Hampton, but to all of us. (Again, please note, in my view many Republicans have also failed concerning Fort Monroe. Gov. Kaine’s chief collaborator in the General Assembly, in fact, was former Republican Sen. Marty Williams, who really did believe — and who acted on — the nonsense in those Daily Press quotations that Mr. Gebhart disowned this evening.)
* Eileen: Lieutenant governor candidate Jody Wagner, who has left the Fort Monroe Authority to campaign, is a nice lady and an able leader, in my view. I’ve been to her house for a Democratic Party event, and I wish her well. But sometime when I haven’t already been as long-winded as I’ve been here, I’ll tell you a revealing story about her lack of awareness — which I can always hope is now only a _former_ lack of awareness — that Fort Monroe is anything but an economic plum for one single city to exploit short-sightedly.
* Eileen again: Sen. Webb, as you know, is the U.S. Senate’s leading Civil War preservationist. So it’s ironic and troubling that he has failed so completely in the fight to stop inappropriate disposition of a place that helps confer on the Civil War its actual meaning: Fort Monroe, which as I said above, is not just _a_ place where slavery began to die, but is _the_ place where slavery began to die. However, there’s hope: his staffer Charlie Stanton faithfully attends Fort Monroe Authority meetings, and not only listens carefully to the program, but also listens carefully to people like me who attend to watch. We appreciate that. (Full disclosure: Charlie and I regularly played golf together back in the 80s. I disclose that, but Charlie knows full well that if I had a Fort Monroe criticism about him, I’d make it publicly. My only criticism of him is that he works for a senator whom I’ve admired for decades, whose work generally as a Democrat I admire, but who has nevertheless failed to act like a real Democrat when it comes to Fort Monroe. But then, I guess I might already have mentioned that here in Vivian’s blog.)
* Eileen yet again: Congressman Nye’s office has promised to invite a delegation from Citizens for a Fort Monroe National Park to meet with him. Fort Monroe is in his district. He could do wonders, if he chose to. What will he choose to do?
Thanks.