MacDill families getting new digs

TAMPA -- Staff Sgt. Randy Redman won't complain about his family's housing at MacDill Air Force Base. It's got a great view of Hillsborough Bay. And he can't beat the three-minute commute to work.

Still, it's typical, no-frills military fare: plain, unexciting, old.

But a makeover is afoot.

MacDill is joining a quiet revolution that over the past decade has transformed life on military bases as the government turns over most of its family housing -- nearly 200,000 units nationally by the end of next year -- to private developers. They rebuild or rehabilitate most of it, serving as owner and landlord for the next half-century.

The military says the private sector, driven by the old-fashioned profit motive, can do what Uncle Sam can't: quickly replace antiquated housing and maintain it better than the government.

Supporters see the effort as a vitally important way to retain personnel in wartime.

"If you're happy at home, then you're probably happy at the job," said Redman, 32, who lives with his wife and two children in an apartment of 1960s vintage.

Privatization has attracted surprisingly little criticism around the nation, given the usual storm surrounding such plans. Early fears that developers wouldn't maintain housing or might erode the close-knit sense of community in military neighborhoods by renting to outsiders haven't been realized, some say.

"When they first started privatizing, I think there was a good deal more skepticism among military families than we see now," said Michelle Joyner, a spokeswoman for the National Military Family Association in Alexandria, Va. "The quality of the housing has really been extraordinary."

The Air Force says it intends to award MacDill's privatization project to Clark Realty, a Bethesda, Md., developer, which will demolish 512 homes and build 331 new units. Another 240 homes built by the military in recent years require no work. Once final contract details are worked out, probably by July, demolition may not begin for several months.

It could take as long as six years for all work to be completed. The project, officials say, is paid for entirely by Clark, which declined to comment.

The 571 homes will be owned by Clark under a 50-year lease, with military personnel paying their housing allowances to the developer.

"We own a lot of bad housing" around the country, said Lisa Tychsen, a senior analyst at the Defense Department office overseeing privatization. The department has "traditionally underfunded housing maintenance. The money's stolen for a new tarmac or a new tank. So housing's gotten the short end of the stick."

Old, poor housing has long plagued the military. The oldest housing at MacDill, for instance, dates to 1941, and some other base housing dating to the 1950s and 1960s stands abandoned, awaiting demolition.

In 2001, five years after Congress enacted privatization, the Pentagon estimated that nearly two-thirds of all military housing needed to be replaced.

"Sustaining the quality of life of our people is crucial to recruitment, retention, readiness and morale," Philip Grone, a deputy undersecretary of defense, told Congress last month in a report on privatization efforts.

One Pentagon study found that retention rates for recruits at bases with higher-quality housing are 15 percent higher.

Grone said that 71 projects had been awarded nationally with a total private-sector investment of more than $20 billion.

Defense officials say it would have taken the government 30 years to do the work itself under existing budgetary constraints.

A few critics have worried that developers may have incentives to skimp on repairs, especially if occupancy goals aren't met and revenue slides.

A 2006 General Accounting Office report said 16 of 44 projects awarded by the end of 2005 had occupancy rates below expectations, leading developers to rent to civilians. All residents must pass a background check, including defense contractors and retired veterans.

Developers are allowed to do so if occupancy falls low enough, otherwise developers might shy away from projects viewed as financial risks.

"It's hard for developers to raise that kind of money to build a community if they're handcuffed," said Bob Hughes, MacDill's deputy base civil engineer. "They have to have access to the community."

Steve Ellis, vice president for programs at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a government watchdog in Washington, D.C., said he sees no need to worry in the short term.

But the condition of homes in 20 or 30 years, Ellis said, may tell the tale. "Once you go private," he warned, "you can't go back."

The Defense Department's Tychsen said fears have so far proved baseless. Housing is kept in good repair, residents have few complaints, rental to nonmilitary personnel is minimal and security isn't compromised, she said.

"Some people worry that we're going to have Osama bin Laden on post," Tychsen said. "That's not going to happen."

MacDill personnel aren't required to live in the housing. In fact, the overwhelming majority of MacDill families -- up to 90 percent -- live off base. If people want something better, Tychsen said, they can look elsewhere for better digs.

"People," she said, "can vote with their feet."

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070408/NEWS/704080436/1017/NEWS0501