Sustainable Ranges Initiative

Allocations of Resources (Money)

Money made available to support military mission sustainability. (This includes general appropriations, grants, and funds to acquire easements, land exchanges or bonding authority for infrastructure projects of benefit to the military done at the state level.)



Military Installation Fund
ARS 41-1512.01 establishes the military installation fund and ARS 41-3014.01 provides general appropriation funding of $4,825,000 for “fiscal years 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 and each year thereafter.” The fund is to be administered by the Department of Commerce and they are to work with the Military Affairs Commission to adopt procedures to receive and evaluate applications . This money is to be allocated for military installation preservation and enhancement projects and to acquire private property, real estate or property rights and related infrastructure to preserve or enhance a military airport or “any real property that services, supports or is used by the military.”

Land Exchange

  • HB 2161, in 2002, authorized a program within the State Land Department so that federal land may be exchanged with private land. For this program to be fully implemented, voters must approve a constitutional amendment authorizing land exchanges.
  • In 2003, S.C.R. 1012, was passed and asks voters at 2004 general election to amend the state constitution to authorize the state to exchange state land for other public land as long as it meets certain criteria.

S.C.R. 1012

Agriculture Preservation District

Three bills (HB 2579, 1999; HB 2060, 2000; SB 1120, 2001) collectively set forth the provisions to form and operate Agriculture Preservation Districts within ten miles of the boundary of a military airport. The provisions include:

  • Purpose, procedures and powers of the district
  • The establishment and requirements for governing board membership.
  • Mechanism to receive tax credits for participating in the district.
  • Mechanism to designate value of the tax credit
  • Appropriations (which was later reduced due to budget issues but funding remained for Department of Commerce to conduct a land use plan around Luke Air Force Base.)

HB 2060

SB 1120


SB 926

Office of Military and Aerospace Support

SB 926, 2004, also known as the “Military and Aerospace Support Act” makes numerous statutory changes including:

  • Consolidates the state’s actives relating to “defense retention, conversion, and military support” within the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency.
  • Establishes until January 1, 2007, the “Office of Military and Aerospace Support” within the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency.
  • The Director of the Office of Military and Aerospace Support (OMAS) shall be appointed by recommendation by the Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing Agency by the Governor. The Director serves at the Secretary’s pleasure.
  • The Office may establish a Military Advisory Committee to provide technical advice and assistance to the office.
  • The Office is to “(s)erve as the primary state liaison with the Department of Defense and its installations” in California and shall assist in resolving any disputes or issues with state agencies.
  • Requires the Office to apply for grants and authorizes it to seek contributions from private industry to fund its operations. Any private funds received shall be deposited into the Military and Aerospace Support Account.
  • Repeals California Defense Retention and Conversion Council.
  • The Office shall maintain a list of each active military’s installation’s local retention authority. If a military installation has multiple “affected local governments,” affected cities and counties may designate or establish a joint powers authority.
  • Provides that local governments may seek a loan from the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank for certain military infrastructure that is endorsed by the Office of Military and Aerospace Support.
  • Revised the definition of “open-space” for the purposes of general plans to include “areas adjacent to military installations, military training routes, and underlying restricted airspace that can provide additional buffer zones to military activities and complement the resource values of the military lands.”

AB 2565

California Govt. Code รŸ 13998.5a ( AB 2565, 2004) requires the Office of Military and Aerospace Support to update and submit a strategic plan by November 30, 2004 to prepare for BRAC 2005. This plan shall identify other state’s military installations or missions that may be transferred to California. This bill contained an emergency clause.


Military Grants Program

Since 1994, Florida has passed six bills relating to the military grants program. Florida’s Fla. Stat. รŸ 288.980: “recognizes that the state needs to coordinate all efforts that can facilitate the retention of all remaining military installations in the state. The Legislature, therefore, declares that providing such assistance to support the defense-related initiatives within this section is a public purpose for which public money may be used.” To date, over $19 million has been allocated for such defense grants. The most recent statutory change was with SB 1604, 2004: Defense Infrastructure Grant Program is created and the director of the Office of Tourism, Trade, and Economic Development shall coordinate and implement the program including creating guidelines. The purpose of the program is to support “local infrastructure projects deemed to have a positive impact on the military value of installations within the state.” Funds are to be used for such items as ” those related to encroachment, transportation and access, utilities, communications, housing, environment, and security.”

Florida Partners with Department of Defense

  • Florida became the first state to partner with the Department of Defense to utilize Section 2811 to acquire land around military facilities to reduce encroachment while conserving natural resources. The federal government contributed $500,000 dollars to preserve 200 acres adjacent to Camp Blanding Joint Training Center, with the state contributed invested more than $12 million dollars in 8,500 acres.
  • Florida also partnered on the Northwest Florida Greenway with the Department of Defense that committed one million dollars to the project. Other partners include The Nature Conservancy and seven other entities.

New Mexico

Infrastructure Appropriations
The 2004 Capitol Outlay Projects (HB 293) appropriates $600,000 to “plan, design and construct improvements to the overpass and entrance” to Cannon and Holloman Air Force Bases.

North Carolina

Funding for Land Acquisition or Conservation Easements near Military Bases

HB 1264, 2004 authorizes borrowing up to $25 million for expansion of state parks and $20 million to acquire “by conservation easement or fee simple up to 17,000 acres near North Carolina military bases in order to prevent encroachment by incompatible development.” The maximum amount that may be spent for military base preservation by July 1, 2005 is $12 million. The bill also states that this “acquisition shall be a high priority because of its vital importance to the State of North Carolina.”

South Dakota

Appropriations for support for Ellsworth Air Force Base

SB 91, 2004 appropriates $350,000 to the “Department of Military and Veterans’ Affairs for a grant to the Ellsworth Air Force Base Task Force to promote and facilitate the retention and possible expansion of Ellsworth Air Force Base.” The Task Force is required to report to the Executive Board of Legislative Research Council every six months beginning November 1, 2004.


Texas Military Value Revolving Loan Fund

Texas voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 20 (SJR 55) in 2003 which authorizes state agencies to obligate up to $250 million in general obligation bonds or notes to “provide loans to defense-related communities, that will be repaid by the defense-related community, for economic development projects, including projects that enhance the military value of military installations.”

Military Preparedness Act
SB 652, 2003 established the Texas Military Preparedness Commission (previously called the Strategic Military Planning Commission) and sunsets on September 1, 2007. This office is within the Governor’s Office and reports to the Governor or his designee.
Commission duties include:

  • Advising the Governor and Legislature on military issues and their related economic and industrial development.
  • Making recommendations regarding policies and plans to support the long-term military mission viability including best methods for communities to enhance their relationship with their military installation.
  • Preparing a biennial strategic plan to assist the longevity and expand the mission of Texas military installations.
  • Preparing an annual report to the Governor and the Legislature by July 1 regarding the military installations and their communities and the associated defense related business within the state. State agencies are to assist with this report.
  • Coordinating annual meetings to discuss the report with state agencies and legislators whose district includes an active or former military installation.
  • The Commission may solicit and accept gifts and grants.
  • Military Installation Commanders may request commission assistance to coordinate with other state agencies to prepare base evaluation criteria.
  • Authorizes the Commission to provide a loan of financial assistance to defense community projects that meet set criteria including enhancing “military value of a military facility located in, near, or adjacent” to the community.
  • Loans must be paid within five years and may not exceed the total cost of the project.
  • Creates the Texas Military Value Revolving Loan Account.
    • A community that applies for financial assistance shall prepare “in consultation with the authorities from each defense base associated with the community a defense base military value enhancement statement.”
    • A community may request financial assistance to prepare a “comprehensive defense installation and community strategic impact plan that states the defense community’s long-range goals and development proposals” includes the following elements as they relate to the military base:
      • Land use, transportation, population growth, water resources, conservation, open-space, restricted airspace and military training route element.
        • The plan should minimize encroachment and control negative effects of future growth on the military mission
        • The land use element should identify “existing and proposed regulations of land uses” and their distribution and locating that may impact the military base.
        • The open space element should identify existing areas along with an analysis of the military’s need for “open-space areas to conduct its military training activities.”
        • The restricted airspace element should create needed buffer zones between the base and the community.
        • The military training route element should identify existing routes and if needed, proposes a plan for additional routes.
  • Communities that developed a comprehensive defense installation and community strategic impact plan are encouraged to develop with their military base a “planning manual based upon the proposals contained in the plan.” If changes are needed in the plan, then the community should consult with the military.
  • Defense communities that determine a proposed ordinance, rule or plan may impact the military mission shall “seek comments and analysis” from the military concerning the compatibility. The community “shall consider and analyze the comments and analysis before making a final determination relating to the proposed ordinance, rule or plan.”
  • An agency’s strategic plans are to also include an “analysis of the agency’s expected expenditures” related military installations or communities with military installations.
  • State agencies are to consider when establishing goals the enhancement of military value to a military installation or facility. If the agency “determines that an expenditure will enhance the military value” of an installation or facility (based on the base realignment and closure criteria) the agency shall make the expenditure a priority.
  • The state may sell, lease or grant easements on unused or underused state property to the United States armed forces if “after consultation with appropriate military authorities” it is determined that this property would materially assist the military in mission accomplishment.
    • The state is required to “retain all minerals it owns with respect to the land, but it may relinquish the right to use the surface to extract them.”
  • The state is prohibited from the selling and leasing “of upland within 2,500 feet of a military base” unless after “consultation with appropriate military authorities” it is determined that the sale or lease would not have an adverse affect on the military.
  • Prohibits prospecting in a “location within 2,500 feet of a military base, but prospectors may, from a location more than 2,500 feet from a base, look for minerals within the 2,500-foot strip.”
  • “Any lease covering land adjacent to a military base shall require the lessee to forego the right to use the surface within 2,500 feet of the military base while exploiting the minerals.”

Matching Funds

Tex. Gov. Code Ann. รŸ 431.017 (SB 1439, 2003) permits the Governor after consultation with the adjutant general and the executive director of the Texas Military Facilities Commission, to authorize matching funds to obtain federal funds for projects at military facilities.

Defense Community Assistance

Tex. Gov. Code Ann. รŸ 481.501 – 481.504 (SB 1295, 2003) dictates that the Office of Defense Affairs in coordination with the Texas Strategic Military Planning Commission “shall assist defense communities in financing for economic development projects that seek to address future realignment of closure of a defense base that is in, adjacent to, or near the defense community.” (SB 652, 2003 alters these provisions in that the Office of Defense Affairs is abolished and all duties, power, obligations, etc. are transferred to the Texas Military Preparedness Commission on the date on which a majority of the initial appointed Commission members have taken office.)


Utah Code Ann. รŸ 63-49a-1 through 63-49a-3 (Chapter 31, 1995) requires the Department of Community and Economic Development to ensure specific easements that are located in a critical operating area of Hill AFB are acquired by purchase or condemnation. The state is to acquire the easements “restricting the use of those lands and air space above them in order to assure the continued operation of Hill Air Force Base as an active military base” and to protect the public. The restricted land uses are identified in the amended, October 1982 Hill Air Force Base AICUZ Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Study. The laws stipulate that if “Hill Air Force Base runways have not been used for seven years to accommodate the arrival and departure of airplanes than the easements may be sold back to the owner of the party of the land.”

Utah State Legislature



Partnership with Department of Defense

In May 2004, Governor Pawlenty announced that the “U.S. Army gave formal approval to the Minnesota National Guard for its Army Compatible Use Buffer (ACUB) project for Camp Ripley.” This project is a partnership with the Guard, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and conservation organizations. This project will work to develop a three-mile buffer around the camp to enhance conservation and to preserve the mission of the base.

Camp Ripley

North Carolina

North Carolina Conservation Efforts

  • North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources provides information on the state’s Conservation Tax Credit Program which is to “assist land-owners to protect the environment and the quality of life.”

Conservation Trust for North Caroline

  • The Conservation Trust for North Carolina was created in 1991 and is “the only statewide land trust working with communities, landowners, land trusts, and other conservation organizations to protect North Carolina’s natural and cultural resources.”

The Nature Conservancy

  • In 2002, The North Carolina Department of Transportation acquired 2,500 acres of land that borders Ft. Bragg and establishes “a preserve for the federally-endangered red-cockaded woodpecker.” This land will be turned over to The Nature Conservancy for “long-term management, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.”

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

  • Efforts are underway to develop North Carolina’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plan.


Appropriation for Infrastructure Improvements
Governor announced in 2004, a $20.5 million commitment “made through the Texas Department of Transportation” to build new and improved roads and other needed infrastructure to support expanded operations at Fort Hood if the Department of Defense adds 5,000 new soldiers and civilian employees at Fort Hood in 2005. Texas will also commit $16.2 million “to improve infrastructure, mobility and traffic flow on and around Fort Bliss” if the Department of Defense adds 3,800 troops in 2006. The Governor has asked that the Transportation Commission place both projects on its August 26, 2004 agenda.

Gov. Rick Perry