Space Command HQ Location Debate Continues: Uncertainty Clouds the Future, GAO Report Reveals

The future location of the U.S. Space Command Headquarters remains shrouded in uncertainty, impacting staffing and construction plans, according to a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report. This ongoing debate between Colorado and Alabama has significant implications for national security and taxpayer dollars.

The GAO report highlights that U.S. Space Command, despite reaching full operational capacity in 2023, is struggling to fill 355 positions as of October 2024. Officials attribute this shortage to the uncertainty surrounding the headquarters' final location, with Alabama vying to become its permanent home.

"I don't know where the decision is, whether it's a done deal or not, but I do know that I'm still waiting to hear the arguments about why. Where's the military value in moving it?" said Colorado District 5 Representative Jeff Crank. "We need to get this figured out. It should not, we should not allow it, to have an impact on readiness. It is here. It makes sense to leave it here."

The command has been relying on over 380 contractors to bridge the employment gap since 2023. "...the Command hired contractor personnel to bridge the gap between authorized and assigned civilian personnel, thus increasing personnel costs and preventing the growth of longer-term institutional knowledge," the report reads in part. "Another U.S. Space Command official further noted that filling gaps with contractors is a temporary solution because contractors cannot perform the sensitive, unique work performed by government civilian personnel."

The report also raises concerns about the long-term sustainability of the current setup in Colorado Springs without new construction. A proposed $1.5 billion multi-story headquarters, slated to begin construction in January 2029, has been put on hold, adding to the uncertainty.

"There was language put in [the 2024] Defense Bill, that stopped [the plan] from happening. That language is not in effect anymore and they can do it," Crank said. "Do they do they put it in Colorado Springs or do they build it somewhere else? And so, you know, I do think that uncertainty is not good."

Meanwhile, Alabama politicians are pushing for the headquarters to be established at Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville. Rep. Dale Strong emphasized, “Keeping the headquarters in Colorado Springs is projected to cost the taxpayer $426 million more than it would to transition to Huntsville.”

The Air Force's initial preference for Redstone Arsenal was largely based on cost savings. However, the GAO report questions the validity of these savings, stating that some of the cost benefits attributed to a move to Redstone “were not rooted in complete or reliable analysis.”

The report points to Space Command’s continued trouble attracting civilian staff, which is expected to account for 60% of overall staff. Space Command has filled only 1,024 of 1,379 authorized positions as of October, including 576 of 809 government civilian positions.

The ongoing debate highlights a fundamental conflict between cost-effectiveness and operational readiness. While Alabama proponents emphasize potential cost savings, Colorado supporters argue that moving the headquarters would disrupt operations and harm national security

The GAO report emphasizes “officials stated the command's posture is not sustainable long term and new military construction would be needed to support the headquarters' operations in Colorado Springs, Colorado.”

The unresolved situation raises critical questions: What are the true long-term costs and benefits of each location? How can the staffing shortages be addressed? And most importantly, how can the U.S. ensure the readiness and effectiveness of its space command in the face of these uncertainties?

What do you think should be the deciding factor in this ongoing debate? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

• Colorado Springs
• GAO
• Space Command