Citizens for a Fort Monroe National Park's report on the Hampton Federal Area Development Authority's (FADA) July 21-27 public planning process about the future of Fort Monroe

I. Overview of the FADA Process

These public meetings made it clear that many people care passionately about Fort Monroe. On July 22 the main hall of the Hampton Roads Convention Center was filled with citizens collaborating on detailed visions of Fort Monroe's future. A number of the participants, and others, dropped by over the next several days to look at the three plans being drafted by Dover, Kohl, and Partners, the planning consultants hired by the Hampton FADA.

As citizens indicated in their group presentations and informal reports to us, they were primarily interested in historic preservation and education, environmental conservation, plenty of open green space, and access to the seawall walk and the beaches.

However, it became increasingly clear that the FADA considers Fort Monroe a Hampton redevelopment project. Victor Dover asked the workshop participants to unfetter their imaginations, and then undercut his own request by saying that their focus should be on the "what" (the details of Fort Monroe's re-use) and not the "how" (how and by whom the re-use will be determined, funded, and overseen). As a result, talk of a national park at Fort Monroe was inhibited and often actively discouraged. And although the national park concept still made its way into the group reports, it didn't figure in Mr. Dover's July 27 summary presentation. On the other hand, the FADA's connection to Hampton carried the strong implication that Hampton would be the "how." The force of this unspoken idea was evident in the assumption of some participants that their vision for Fort Monroe must include an economic benefit to Hampton in the form of commercial and residential development. In the FADA's own overview of the proceedings, posted on its web site, that assumption is very close to the surface: "Another consideration is the negative economic impact the fort's closing will have on the city and the region." The Hampton FADA is all but admitting that it wants ownership of Fort Monroe to strengthen the city's economy. It is perhaps no coincidence, then, that all three of the plans presented by Mr. Dover include some significant amount of development, and two of the three stress more rather than less development.  It is also telling that the Dover, Kohl presentation offered no specific ideas of its own for the enhancement of historical education at Fort Monroe. This omission creates the strong impression that the FADA hired Dover, Kohl chiefly to further its purpose of turning the post into a revenue source for Hampton.

In its insistence on the "what," the Hampton planning process has thus far failed to address the crucial issue of jurisdiction. Who is best suited to shape and control Fort Monroe's future? Until this question is answered, the "what" remains problematic. There is no guarantee that it will be realized--or if realized, maintained. Also, the precise nature of the "what" isn't strictly separable from the "how." Depending on who has jurisdiction, the "what" may very well differ from any of the plans drawn up by Dover, Kohl, especially in regard to new development.

II. Our Vision for Fort Monroe

Fort Monroe is a national historic treasure. Its history and that of Old Point Comfort are bound up with the history of colonial Jamestown, all of America's major wars, the technological and strategic evolution of the American military, and all of African-American life from the beginnings of slavery in the English colonies to the provision of sanctuary for escaped slaves during the Civil War to the national debate among African Americans that led to the civil rights movement. In recognition of its rich historic significance, the federal government designated it a National Historic Landmark District. Therefore it absolutely must have what Dover, Kohl described as "first-quality stewardship of these shared treasures."

In our view, Hampton is not capable of such stewardship. We agree with the judgment of the Hampton Roads Daily Press, expressed in an August 2, 2006 editorial: "Which of the custodial options makes the least sense? The city of Hampton. It hasn't the financial resources, nor the expertise, nor the experience. Historic preservation is not likely to be a priority in a city government that is, necessarily, focused in other directions. It is too risky, leaving Monroe's fate in the hands of seven people--the City Council--any four of whom could make decisions in the future, about funding or development, that are radically at odds with historic stewardship."

We believe that of the other possible stewards, the best and most appropriate choice is the federal government. It has the requisite expertise, experience and detachment to do the job, and it will confer on Fort Monroe a status that signifies both its national importance and the identity of its true owners, the American people.

In general, we envision a Fort Monroe National Park with diverse educational, cultural, and recreational opportunities, one that offers not only a rich experience of history but interesting architecture, vistas, public beaches, fishing piers, a marina, picnic areas, hiking and biking trails, and a nature and wildlife sanctuary. We also see a national park that partly or fully sustains itself through the imaginative enhancement of historical education and the adaptive re-use of buildings that could be leased for business and residential purposes. And we believe that the combination of these qualities will make Fort Monroe an extremely attractive tourist destination, to the economic benefit of Hampton and the whole region. For a more specific description of our ideas, please read the attached vision statement.

III. The Next Step

Members of Citizens for a Fort Monroe National Park participated in the Hampton FADA workshops, and met with Victor Dover and his associate Margaret Flippen, in the hope of incorporating our point of view into the process, and in the fainter hope of moving FADA to seek a federal feasibility study of Fort Monroe as a national park. In these hopes we were disappointed. Mr. Dover seemed to suggest in his closing remarks that a FADA consideration of jurisdiction, including the national park concept, was still to come; but so far as we know, the FADA has scheduled no other event intended to elicit and record public opinion on the issue of jurisdiction.

Our goals, therefore, are: (i) to keep making our position known, (ii) to serve as a source of information and of advice about taking action, and (iii) to persuade state and federal legislators to do what is necessary to initiate a feasibility study.

As demonstrated by many of the items available at our web site (CFMNP.org)--radio broadcasts, references to television appearances, and copies of newspaper articles, editorials, and letters--we have had some success in achieving the first two goals; and we plan to build on this success not just by doing more of the same, but by reaching out to the public in new ways. We will hold, for example, a fund-raising get-together for people who want to know more about us and who would like to share their own ideas about Fort Monroe. If responses to polls in the two major Hampton Roads newspapers (the Virginian Pilot and the Daily Press), call-ins to radio talk shows, and innumerable comments to us are any indication, most Hampton Roads residents favor a national park. We must continue to encourage them to make their views known to the media and their legislators.

We have also communicated with some legislators and are actively engaged in bringing our concerns to the attention of others. This will be a major initiative over the next few weeks. Recently, we were heartened by a Daily Press opinion piece by Delegate Tom Gear, whose district includes Hampton. Mr. Gear said that his visit to the Presidio, a national park on track to being self-sustaining, and the inspiration for our concept of Fort Monroe, had persuaded him that the idea of a Fort Monroe National Park should be actively explored.

We believe that Fort Monroe's unique combination of historic significance and natural beauty, as well as its status as a National Historic Landmark District, demands a national park designation. No other identity can guarantee the level of expertise that its preservation deserves. We thus intend to take all reasonable actions appropriate to achieving this result, and it is our hope that long before the post closes in 2011, our state and federal legislators will see as clearly as we do that making Fort Monroe a national park is both the honorable and the sensible thing to do