The decision to close the facilities and consolidate operations into 38 existing locations resulted from state budget cuts announced in the governor's budget reduction package on Nov. 23, and is necessary for long-term sustainment of armory operations, Kansas Adjutant General Maj. Gen. Tod Bunting said in a statement.
"This was a difficult decision, but we had little choice as the state budget was reduced and we considered what would be necessary for long-term sustainment of armory operations statewide," Bunting said. "We've been operating with much less than the necessary required funding even when the state budget was better, so an analysis of closures had been done. These latest cuts forced us to take action right away. Unfortunately, additional closures and consolidations may be necessary in the future."
Personnel working at these 18 facilities, who are all guardsmen, will be transferred to other armory locations. Training, equipment and other items needed to continue operations will also be relocated, the statement from Bunting's office said.
A total of 29 full-time National Guard staff and 412 traditional M-day National Guard soldiers will be affected by the consolidation. Traditional M-day soliders are those who train one weekend a month and two weeks a year, the statement said.
For several soldiers, the changes will mean a shorter drive to work. Prior to these closures, more than 52 percent of Kansas guardsmen lived within 50 miles of their armory. After these closures, two percent more of Kansas guardsmen will live within 50 miles of their armory, making it a shorter drive to work.
Closing the 18 armories will eliminate $156,662 from the current fiscal year's operating budgets to meet state requirements and addresses additional cuts for next year's budget for a total of $264,217 for fiscal year 2011. Significant additional savings beyond the $420,000 will result from consolidating operations and no longer maintaining or inspecting the facilities. In the past, maintenance has been deferred and later made up with millions of dollars in bonds, the statement from Bunting's office said.
"We carefully deliberated the best approach to consolidate our personnel and equipment while maintaining a strong National Guard presence in each region of the state," Bunting said. "Our closure plan allows us to do this and we will continue to support the communities of Kansas in times of need as we always have."
A comprehensive strategic analysis was conducted to consider the closure of armories and consolidation of operations. It included location and proximity to other armories, historical and projected demographic shifts in population, consolidation of operations, condition of current facilities and the potential to expand to accommodate new mission requirements in the future, required facility upgrades and maintenance costs. Another factor included ensuring a National Guard presence in each of the seven homeland security regions to support domestic response operations, the statement from Bunting's office said.
"Many of the facilities to be closed were built in the 1950s and designed for 100 to 150 soldiers; however, today several of these facilities have only 50 people training there," Bunting said. "This isn't cost effective, it reduces the cohesiveness of our units and it isn't sustainable given the budget situation we have been facing for several years and which isn't likely to improve in the near future."
Despite the consolidations, the Kansas National Guard is committed to its state mission of disaster support to communities, Bunting said.
"Although the Kansas Guard has never had an armory in every community or even every county, we have always fulflled our mission to help protect Kansans and their property during emergencies, no matter where they occur in our state, and we remain committed to this," he said. "We didn't have armories in Greensburg, Chapman, Osawatomie, Hoisington, Sublette or Parsons as well as many other communities hit by severe weather in recent years, yet we responded and stayed as long as we were needed."
Eventually all of the closed armories will be returned to the communities for local use. In the meantime, some of the affected facilities will remain unoccupied for a time while equipment and personnel are transferred and operations are consolidated, Bunting added.
"With fewer armories, strategically located around the state, we will be better postured to sustain the 38 remaining facilities and provide our Guardsmen and the local communities with the type of facility they deserve," he said.
Prior closures of armory locations have occurred in Kansas for a variety of reasons; however, usually these involved one or two at a time. A total of 14 armories have closed since 1982.
Armory personnel, community leaders, legislators and congressional staff affected by the impacted armories, as well as all Adjutant General Department staff, have been notified of the specific locations affected, the statement from Bunting's office said.
The Kansas Adjutant General's Department, on Saturday, released a list of communities where armories will be closed. Other locations include Atchison, Burlington, Chanute, Cherryvale, Council Grove, Garden City, Garnett, Goodland, Horton, Kingman, Larned, Phillipsburg, Russell, Sabetha, Salina East, Troy and Winfield.
![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.fstribune.com/images/nameplate.png)

The armory would be an excellent building for a POLICE STATION!!! HINT HINT.......
Not disputing your comment, just wondering what is wrong with the present location of the police department
I think it would make a great Homeless Shelter!!!
Maybe a new city hall? It's already handicap accessible and has plenty of parking available.
The Hawkins Public Safety building which is the police/fire dept location, was supposed to only house one of these entities(the police dept i think) and both got crammed into it. Now both entities are very crowded.
But now we have a nice building on the east side of town to house a fire department. Seems to me they could spread out a bit and make better use of the facility that the tax payers built for them.
Why not let The Beacon (or some other help agency) take over?
The Beacon is doing a great job in helping the low income of our community. Right now, they are in a small building and could use some extra space, maybe even put in a homeless/transitional housing shelter. If not, there are other agencies that could "piggy-back" their services in this building.
This would definitely be worth a second thought. If not, we know where some of the city big-wigs have their priorities (and its not with the down and out, because they don't count).
Nice new building on the east side only holds 2 or three firefighters.
I doubt that the folks living in Country Club Hills are going to stand for a homeless shelter to be put there. Might as well ask to have an animal control facility there, would be just as popular (and it's already fenced...).