[Senate Hearing 107-336]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 107-336
LOCAL PREVENTION AND RESPONSE CAPABILITIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SPECIAL HEARING
OCTOBER 25, 2001--WASHINGTON, DC
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
senate
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
78-208 WASHINGTON : 2002
___________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
______
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
TOM HARKIN, Iowa PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
HARRY REID, Nevada MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CONRAD BURNS, Montana
PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
JACK REED, Rhode Island MIKE DeWINE, Ohio
Terrence E. Sauvain, Staff Director
Charles Kieffer, Deputy Staff Director
Steven J. Cortese, Minority Staff Director
Lisa Sutherland, Minority Deputy Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland, Chairman
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
TOM HARKIN, Iowa CONRAD BURNS, Montana
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin LARRY CRAIG, Idaho
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina MIKE DeWINE, Ohio
TED STEVENS, Alaska, (ex officio)
Professional Staff
Paul Carliner
Gabriel A. Batkin
Alexa Sewell
Jon Kamarck (Minority)
Cheh Kim (Minority)
Administrative Support
Isaac Green (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Opening statement of Senator Barbara A. Mikulski................. 1
Coordination..................................................... 1
Statement of Senator Christopher S. Bond......................... 3
Statement of Senator Harry Reid.................................. 3
Statement of Hon. Martin O'Malley, Mayor, City of Baltimore...... 4
Planning and assessment.......................................... 5
Increased local costs............................................ 5
Federal programs need better coordination........................ 7
Prepared statement of Hon. Martin O'Malley....................... 8
The new paradigm for homeland security........................... 8
Baltimore's interim homeland security response................... 9
Local homeland security: extraordinary costs..................... 9
A new Federal response is needed................................. 10
Homeland defense block grant..................................... 11
The role of the private sector................................... 11
Statement of Hon. Jeff Griffin, Mayor, City of Reno, Nevada...... 12
Local governments, access to FEMA programs....................... 13
Prepared statement of Hon. Jeff Griffin.......................... 14
Public information............................................... 17
Statement of Hon. Susan Savage, Mayor, City of Tulsa, Oklahoma... 18
Disaster preparedness............................................ 18
Local access to FEMA programs.................................... 19
Local communities on the front lines............................. 20
Statement of Hon. Ronald Kirk, Mayor, City of Dallas, Texas...... 21
Local government and homeland security........................... 22
FEMA fire grants................................................. 23
Prepared statement of Hon. Ronald Kirk........................... 23
The city's use of Department of Justice Domestic Preparedness
Program funding (Nunn-Lugar-Domenici).......................... 24
The FEMA fire grant program...................................... 24
The need for additional resources................................ 24
The city's relationships with FEMA............................... 25
Improving Federal coordination................................... 26
Direct access to FEMA............................................ 26
First responders as reservists................................... 27
Interagency coordination on homeland security.................... 28
Open records requirements........................................ 29
Interaction with the Office of Homeland Security................. 31
Lead Federal agency.............................................. 32
Homeland Security Block Grant Program............................ 37
Public vs. private security responsibilities..................... 38
LOCAL PREVENTION AND RESPONSE CAPABILITIES
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2001
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and
Independent Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:06 p.m., in room SC-5, the
Capitol, Hon. Barbara A. Mikulski (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Mikulski and Bond.
Also present: Senator Reid.
opening statement of senator barbara a. mikulski
Senator Mikulski. The VA-HUD Subcommittee will come to
order.
The chair will welcome other Senators as they so appear. I
know that our ranking member, Senator Kit Bond, is on the
floor. Ordinarily I would wait for his arrival. Honoring the
fact of Mayor Griffin's schedule and many of yours and Senator
Reid's, we are going to start this hearing.
Let me start the hearing by saying, why are you here before
the Subcommittee on Appropriations on VA, HUD, and Independent
Agencies? Well, you're here because this is the subcommittee
that funds the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This agency
has the responsibility for consequence management.
In our country, we have our CIA and State Department and
Defense Department that are working overseas. Here in the
United States of America, the FBI has responsibility for crisis
management, meaning to detect, prevent, disrupt, and destroy
any of the predatory acts on the United States of America and
gather the evidence to prosecute anyone who would undertake
such a despicable deed.
Consequence management belongs to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and as we are working through our new
approaches on homeland security, we wanted to hear from those
of you on the front line.
coordination
I come from the Baltimore City Council. I know that not
only are all politics local, but all problem solving is local.
And we want to be sure that not only is the Federal Government
on the side of local communities, but we hear from local
communities what they need. This is why we are so pleased to
welcome the Conference of Mayors here today.
We know about the mayors. I just recently visited with
Mayor O'Malley in his own command and control center where we
have done an evaluation of is Baltimore ready and also our
response to the fact that Baltimore was under a possible attack
as little as just a week ago.
Just the other night, I walked the halls of D.C. General
Hospital with Mayor Williams and the Mayor of Cleveland who had
come to be there and the Mayor of New Orleans. But Mayor
Williams was at D.C. General responding to our Post Office
employees. Though they worked in D.C., they were District of
Columbia constituents and the State of Maryland constituents.
Mayor Williams was taking responsibility not only for the
District of Columbia but for those of us who lived in Maryland
but worked in the District. So, the mayors are there on the
front line.
You should know that I am very concerned. I'm concerned
about how prepared we are, how coordinated we are, whether you
have gotten the resources to match your responsibilities. I am
also concerned that the recent anthrax attacks really placed
our preparedness in the spotlight. I am concerned that our
recent response, certainly in my own capital region here, was
unclear and uncoordinated not because of Mayor Williams, not
because of County Executive Duncan or County Executive Curry,
but I believe that our Homeland Security did not have their act
together.
I am sending a letter to Governor Ridge. I have great
respect for Governor Ridge. He is a combat vet and has
extensive executive experience. But I want you to know that in
that letter, I am asking him to take as much charge of Homeland
Security as Rumsfeld has done for Defense. When we look at
Defense, we have three people in charge. They're clear. They're
coordinated. They're talking to the President. They're talking
to the American people and they're giving excellent direction
to those who are on the battlefield. But for those of you who
are on the battlefield of homeland security, I do not think we
have that same clear, coordinated, resource-rich responsibility
that we need.
So, in my letter to Governor Ridge, again I ask that we
have a battle plan for homeland defense to match the battle
plan for the military. We need a battle plan in which we manage
the incident and we manage the fear around the incident. We
need to have clear communication with the leaders in local
communities, as well as the public, just as Rumsfeld tells us
what is going on. I now know more about what missiles went into
what caves in Afghanistan than I know about what letters went
where in the State of Maryland with anthrax. This is
unacceptable.
So, we need a clear chain of command. And I believe
Governor Ridge is up to the task. But we need to be able to
shape with him our ideas, our experiences. We have now had some
experiences, and I think if we all work together--you are
already fit for duty, but because you continually face these
incredible high alerts, we need to make sure that you have the
resources to match your responsibilities.
So, we look forward from hearing from you. We look forward
to working with you. And you need to know we are working on a
bipartisan basis. This is my Republican colleague. Working on
homeland security, we are neither Democrat nor Republican. We
are the Red, White and Blue Party, and we are here to work with
you and to work for our great Nation.
So, having said that, Senator Bond, do you have any opening
remarks you wish to make?
statement of senator christopher s. bond
Senator Bond. I will wait until the applause finishes,
Madam Chair.
It is always a pleasure to work with you. What she said is
correct, that we do work together in a very bipartisan fashion.
I think we have some very challenging and interesting areas
under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee of VA, HUD, and
Independent Agencies of the Appropriations Committee.
But Senator Mikulski and I, for a number of years, as we
work on issues related to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, have been calling for greater coordination and
cooperation, greater funding, greater preparation. I do not
think any of us could have foreseen the tragedy that afflicted
this country on September 11 and the ensuing activities with
anthrax and the tragic deaths and the widespread concern that
that has caused or the fact that now we have a pretty good idea
that terrorist attacks are going to continue by some other
means in some other venue for some time.
Nevertheless, we have raised the concern, and Senator
Mikulski has long called for greater coordination, the
development of doctrine on how we can utilize all of our
resources and to make sure that the people on the ground, the
mayors, the local officials, who are the first ones there, know
how the State is going to come in, know how the Federal
Government is going to come in.
In addition to this duty, I serve as co-chair of the
National Guard Caucus, and the National Guard is in every
community. We want to make sure they are trained because they
are there. They know the streets. They know the people. Very
often they are even engaged in government or related work. So,
they can come in, but we have to bring in other Federal
resources and bring in the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
So, these are all concerns, and I am delighted that you are
here to give us the answers.
So, Madam Chair, thank you.
Senator Mikulski. Thank you very much, as always.
Senator Reid, our colleague from Nevada, also a member of
the Appropriations Committee.
statement of senator harry reid
Senator Reid. Madam Chair, I appreciate your allowing me to
be at this subcommittee. As you know, I am not a member of the
subcommittee, but a member of the full committee.
I wanted to be here today for several reasons. One is to
recognize your mayor and my mayor, and our mayors, but also to
introduce to you one of the two mayors of the two metropolitan
areas we have in Nevada, Las Vegas and Reno. Mayor Griffin is
the Mayor of Reno, Nevada. It is the second largest
metropolitan we have in Nevada. It has a great tradition.
And Mayor Griffin has worked through some very, very
difficult items and areas during his tenure as mayor. Like all
mayors, they are on the firing line every day. We are back here
away from our constituents. At least Senator Bond and I are.
You are with them every day, Senator Mikulski, but most Members
of the Senate are not so close to home as Senator Mikulski. And
I respect and admire the work that mayors do.
As I said to a group of mayors yesterday that I had the
opportunity to visit with, every day you deal with problems
where the buck stops right there. You have nobody to pass it on
to. I think because of this, we really need to listen to you on
this war that we are fighting now because the battlefronts on
domestic terrorism are going to be in your cities.
So, I am, as usual, very impressed with the work that is
done in this subcommittee. They are always on the cutting edge
of things that are important to America. They have such
important jurisdiction of matters that are appropriated every
year, and I commend them and applaud them for the work they do
always, but particularly today for holding this most important
hearing.
I would like to be excused. I have to go to another
meeting.
Senator Mikulski. Thank you very much.
Mayor O'Malley, we welcome you, of course, as the Mayor of
the City of Baltimore. I know that you have been a leader in
the Conference of Mayors on the issues around new prevention
and response to homeland security issues. According to the list
given me, it says Mayor O'Malley, Mayor Griffin, Mayor Savage,
and Mayor Kirk. Is that the order in which you would like to be
able to proceed?
Mr. O'Malley. That is fine unless Mayor Griffin needs to
go.
Senator Mikulski. Mayor O'Malley, why do we not ask you to
begin the testimony. We, of course, want to welcome you as the
Mayor of Baltimore and someone who has taken the leadership in
really looking at how municipal governments need to be ready,
be able to respond, and be able to recover. We know that you
have a lot of observations about the Federal Government that I
am sure you will share with your usual candor and frankness. We
welcome you.
Mr. O'Malley. Is that a warning, Madam Chair?
Senator Mikulski. No. That is being collegial, Mayor.
Senator Bond. You ought to see her when she is giving a
warning. There is a lot of difference.
You will not miss it.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN O'MALLEY, MAYOR, CITY OF
BALTIMORE
Mr. O'Malley. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, members of
the subcommittee.
The mayors before you, Mayor Griffin from Reno, Mayor
Savage from Tulsa, Mayor Kirk from Dallas, and I have just come
from 2 days of really encouraging and, at times, really
inspiring exchanges with our fellow mayors from all around the
country at the U.S. Conference of Mayors. It just adjourned
about an hour or 2 ago, and you will soon be receiving that
action plan from that conference.
I can tell you that I have never been so proud as I have in
these last few days to be able to serve with the men and women
who are serving as mayors of this great country.
I thank you for the opportunity to join you today to
discuss this topic, this topic of how we fight this different
sort of war, this very unconventional war, a war that is being
fought on two fronts, one in Afghanistan where our soldiers
have the best equipment, the best training, and intelligence
rushed rapidly to the front so that they can do their job,
accomplish their mission as safely as possible.
The other front is the home front that we are talking about
today. And in that fight, we have all been doing our very best
to step up. We are the first line of defense on the home
front--our fire departments, our police department. And yet, we
have some critical needs, needs for equipment, needs for
technology, and also a need for better intelligence to be
rushed to our front.
In Baltimore, we have chosen to make the investment as many
other mayors have, without so much as a promise if our budgets
will be reimbursed. We have stepped up to the plate because we
have to. We are not waiting on Annapolis, and indeed, if
Baltimore waited on Washington for civil defense advice, we
would all still be singing God Save the Queen.
Mr. O'Malley. So, we are moving forward as many cities are
moving forward.
And Baltimore, Madam Chair, is a fairly typical city in
terms of our vulnerabilities. All cities have vulnerabilities.
We are the economic centers. We are the cultural and gathering
centers. I would like to think we are somewhat unique in terms
of our greatness, and I think what we are doing today provides
a pretty decent illustration of what cities are being asked to
do in our Nation's defense as we move forward on three fronts:
intelligence, security, and emergency preparedness.
planning and assessment
We have completed an assessment of all of our
vulnerabilities in terms of private infrastructure and public
infrastructure, you know, your major buildings, water systems,
stadiums, railways, highway bridges, tunnels, and the like. We
have put together a local intelligence network to act as a
point of contact with the whole metropolitan area for the FBI
as we try to forge a new relationship with them so we can share
part of the workload that is facing us. We have created, in
very short order at very little expense, a surveillance system
to provide real-time reporting of common symptoms, flu-like
symptoms, so that we can watch for spikes in uncommonly high
numbers of those symptoms. We test our reservoirs now several
times a day.
increased local costs
In order to make those adjustments, to make our city more
secure, and in periods of heightened alert, to deploy our
officers accordingly, we will have to spend money. We
anticipate spending an additional $8.8 million for police
officers to secure vulnerable sites for the remainder of this
fiscal year, which in Baltimore began July 1st. We have already
spent $2.3 million in unanticipated overtime just since
September 11. We will spend $4 million to better secure our
water and waste water systems, securing perimeters and the
like.
On the emergency preparedness front, we have coordinated
with experts. Our fire department has been the beneficiary of
Federal training. Thank you very much. And we have coordinated
with experts from the U.S. Army Soldier and Biological Chemical
Command, as well as experts at the Civilian Biodefense at Johns
Hopkins University. In order to be prepared, we are going to
have to spend about $4 million for additional personal
protective equipment, which will allow our first responders not
only to respond to a large, single accident, but will equip us
so that we can safely respond in the event of two simultaneous
attacks.
We have also had to spend $400,000 just to upgrade a backup
emergency operations center, which we hope never to have to
use.
On the local homeland security, it carries with it some
extraordinary costs. We cannot long sustain a war on these two
fronts if we are only willing to fund one of them. Some of
these things we have been able to accomplish with relatively no
money at all. The biosurveillance system is one example. The
improved cooperation that is now just starting to happen--just
starting to happen--between the FBI and local law enforcement
when it comes to the collection, dissemination, and
investigation of the hundreds of thousands of leads that have
come to us, is another thing that has not cost a whole lot of
money.
But other things do. Every time our Attorney General calls
on us to go to our highest level of alert in response to a
generalized threat, it has caused us a massive unfunded,
unanticipated mandate on every city in America. We calculate
that prudent steps we have taken since September 11 has already
cost us about $2.7 million, again largely from police overtime.
When we go on alert, our police department still has to fight
crime, and the chemicals that are still killing more people in
Baltimore today than anthrax or these other agents we talk
about are the chemicals of heroin and cocaine.
So, rather than pulling officers away from their duties, we
call officers back or we ask them to work 12-hour shifts.
Through the end of the fiscal year, we anticipate spending
another $11.5 million in expenses directly related to security
and preparedness for a total of more than $14 million at a time
when we are taking hits in our tourism industry and our hotel
revenues and the like.
This is not a complaint. This is not a complaint. We
consider it our patriotic duty, our obligation to step up to
the plate now, and it would be irresponsible to fail to act in
the face of this current emergency.
But when we approved our budget, none of us anticipated
these sort of expenditures in our police budgets or in our fire
budgets. We never anticipated that our police and fire would
become local militia on these constant states of alert. We need
to strengthen our supply lines from Washington because again we
cannot long sustain a war on two fronts if we are only willing
to fund one of them. A new Federal response is needed.
federal programs need better coordination
Federal support today for local homeland security is a
patchwork--a patchwork--of programs that will make your eyes go
crossed. They are largely uncoordinated. They provide no common
standards for how States and localities should best use these
funds. Even the programs that have the highest potential
impact, like FEMA's fire grant programs, meet only a fraction
of local government needs. FEMA provided just $100 million last
year, despite nearly $3 billion in applications from fire
departments.
Our own dealings with the Maryland Emergency Management
Agency illustrate why support must be provided directly to
local governments in our major population centers. MEMA is
eligible for millions of dollars from the Department of
Justice's Office of Domestic Preparedness, which could be
distributed to localities based on risk assessment and
equipment needs. Yet, they have not released the fiscal year
1999, the fiscal year 2000, or the fiscal year 2001 funds. We
are now 4 months into fiscal year 2002, and I am told that
Maryland is not the only State where bureaucracy is a barrier
to timely emergency preparedness. Local governments need stable
and timely funding for this effort.
We also need one place where we can go for the assistance
in gearing up quickly to defend our citizens. This balkanized
collection of programs, I would suggest to you, could and
should be replaced with the equivalent of a community
development block grant program for homeland security. Such an
initiative, what one might call homeland defense block grants,
should be based on formula, commensurate with security needs,
and a threat assessment of how vulnerable an area is.
Then they should have accountability strings attached to
them. They should be targeted to emergency personnel,
equipment, training, and security related capital expenses.
Their receipts should also be conditioned on the requirement
that cities do not cut local investments to backfill with
Federal dollars as we saw happen with the tremendous windfall
that States experienced by supplanting the welfare reform
dollars.
Just like the CDBG program, homeland defense block grants
should be provided directly to cities and urban counties which
are the primary targets on the home front of our war against
terrorism.
One final point that cannot be ignored is the fact that in
many cities, some of the most sensitive targets are privately
owned. In Baltimore, we essentially have been called upon in
this interim period as we adjust, to provide private security
for exposed rail yards, industrial and chemical plants,
utilities, and other large facilities at great expense to local
taxpayers. And this cannot continue without eventually
bankrupting and harming our cities. Only the Federal Government
has the ability to require companies with operations in many
States to change their operations to reflect the new dangers of
this world in which we live.
In conclusion, under your leadership, Madam Chair, this
subcommittee changed the way our Nation provides housing for
our poorest citizens, getting rid of those disgraceful human
filing cabinets that our public housing had become and
replacing them with new opportunity through HOPE VI. Under your
leadership and the members of this committee, you changed the
way our Nation responds to natural disasters, reforming FEMA
into an agency that has become a model of effectiveness and
compassion after these sorts of events happen.
Now we are asking this subcommittee to, once again, change
how our Nation prepares to defend itself in this war, a war
fought on one front in our cities, on our doorsteps, and the
very halls of this great institution. You too are fighting on
the home front, and my prayers are with you and the men and
women, your colleagues, who have been touched by these threats.
America is going to emerge from this stronger than ever
before. I have no doubt of that. The fabric of federalism will,
no doubt, be stretched to its limits, but fear cannot conquer
freedom.
prepared statement
And we want to thank you for your leadership. We want to
ask you for your assistance, and we pledge to you that we will
do everything in our power to protect the citizens of this
country who happen to live in our population centers.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Martin O'Malley
Madam Chair. Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to join you today to discuss a topic critical to our
nation's cities and to our nation: How do we best protect our people in
the wake of the tragic events of September 11th?
In times of crisis--when there are dramatic shifts in our nation's
priorities--the Members of this Committee are called upon to wisely
invest our nation's resources. This is such a time. And America faces a
different kind of crisis. We need your leadership.
the new paradigm for homeland security
Today, we are fighting a different kind of war--on two fronts. One
front is in Afghanistan, where we have the best technology, the best
equipment, the best intelligence being sent right to the front, and no
expense is spared.
But for the first time in nearly 200 years, the second front is
right here at home. And to date, it's where we've seen the greatest
loss of life. Yet, we have insufficient equipment, too little training,
and a lack of intelligence sharing with federal authorities--although,
on this last point, we're working with FBI Director Mueller to make it
better. And currently, we have very little in the way of national
funding targeted for homeland defense where it is truly needed--at the
local government level.
Local government must be the first line of defense on the home
front. It can't be a federal or state function. There are no federal or
state Fire Departments or medics. There are about 11,000 FBI agents
compared to 650,000 local police officers. And as we saw in New York,
there is no time to bring people and equipment in from somewhere else
when terror strikes. For those critical first hours--when there is the
greatest opportunity to save lives--local governments are largely on
their own.
Baltimore has first hand experience in this regard--although given
what New York and the Washington area are dealing with, it seems like
we got off easy. When a CSX train derailed and caught fire in a tunnel
beneath Baltimore this past summer, local emergency responders rushed
to the scene. But the State didn't show up for a few hours. And the
NTSB--although only 40 miles away--didn't arrive until the next
morning. Our firefighters, police and health officials relied on their
own training and resources.
Today, in the new world in which we live, every mayor has a choice
to make: your city can be prepared or not; it can be a hard target or
it can be a soft target; you can make a huge unanticipated investment
now to keep your people safe, or you can cross your fingers, wait for
help from a higher level of government, and hope for the best.
In Baltimore, we have chosen to make the investment. We are taking
responsibility for doing as much as we can. We are not waiting for
Annapolis. We are not waiting for Washington. That is the American
way--neighbors take care of each other. If our city had waited for
advice on self-defense from Washington in the war of 1812, all of us
would be singing ``God Save the Queen.''
baltimore's interim homeland security response
I am told Baltimore is a fairly typical city--of course, if that's
true, I think it's the greatest typical city in America. I think what
we are doing today provides a good illustration of what cities are
being asked to do in our nation's defense. We are moving forward on
three fronts:
First, on the Intelligence front, because it's better to catch
terrorists--or lone nuts--before they commit horrible acts, than it is
to react in the aftermath. We have:
--Hired Richard Hunt, retired Chief of Criminal Intelligence for the
FBI.
--Developed a statewide security intelligence network, working with
other law enforcement agencies
--Engaged in a ongoing dialogue with the FBI and Department of
Justice.
--Met daily with Federal authorities to obtain intelligence.
--Created a web-based surveillance system to provide real time
reporting from hospitals, ambulances, animal control, school
attendance and over-the-counter medicine to track common
symptoms in uncommon amounts--as well as hospital bed
availability.
--Tested reservoirs and the water system several times daily.
Second, on the Security front, we have:
--Secured and protected City's vulnerabilities, such as major
buildings, water system, stadiums, major rail and interstate
highway bridges and tunnels.
--Called daily security briefings with Police, Health, Fire, Public
Works, Transportation and IT Departments and State officials
almost every day.
--Bolstered police and security presence at City buildings.
--Arrested and charged people who make bomb threats.
Third, on the Emergency Preparedness front:
--Hired a civil preparedness expert, former NYPD Chief Louis Anemone
to develop our emergency preparedness blueprint.
--Reviewed the findings of the Hart-Rudman Commission and its
applicability to Baltimore--and consulted with Senator Hart.
--Coordinated with experts like the U.S. Army Soldier and Biological
Chemical Command (SBCCOM) in Aberdeen at Aberdeen and the
Center for Civilian Biodefense at Johns Hopkins University.
--Worked with hospital CEO's on preparedness and data collection.
--Met with local news directors to discuss City's ongoing
preparedness and dissemination of information in the event of
an emergency.
local homeland security: extraordinary costs
While some things can be done relatively cheaply--the
biosurveillance system is one example--other measures require huge
capital and personnel outlays. For example, every time the Attorney
General calls on us to go to our highest level of alert, in response to
a generalized threat, it is a massive unfunded mandate on every city in
America.
Just to secure our Water and Wastewater system--Baltimore provides
water for our entire region--we will need to spend $28 million in the
next year:
--$24 million to convert our water treatment facilities from
chlorine--a dangerous and highly regulated chemical--to safer
and far less volatile bleach;
--$2.4 million for security improvements like cameras, barricades and
fences; and
--$1.6 million to place security personnel at sites that previously
were unsecured.
And we calculate that taking the prudent steps we've taken since
September 11th already has cost the city nearly $2.7 million--largely
from police expenses during heightened states of alert immediately
following September 11th and subsequent alerts issued by the federal
government, including the beginning of the campaign in Afghanistan on
October 7th.
When we go on alert, our Police Department still has to fight
crime. The chemical attack that has taken the most lives in Baltimore
still is heroin and cocaine. So rather than pulling officers away from
their duties, we call other officers back, or they work 12-hour shifts.
Either way, our overtime goes up. I expect virtually every other city
does the same.
We get hundreds of calls every week reporting threats like
suspicious envelopes, packages and powder. And while these drain
resources, the real impact is when we have credible threats and must
raise our state of readiness. In these cases--which we anticipate will
happen periodically in most large cities, and already have happened in
Baltimore--our Police Department is providing national wartime defense
with city resources.
Through the end of the fiscal year, we anticipate spending another
$11.5 million in expenses directly related to security and
preparedness, for a total of more than $14 million--$9.1 million in
personnel costs and $5 million in capital and equipment expenses.
I'm not complaining. We consider it our patriotic duty to step up
to the plate, and it would be irresponsible not to take action. But
when we approved our budget for this fiscal year, we did not anticipate
that our police, fire and emergency responders would double as local
militia in a war on terrorism. We need to strengthen our supply lines
from Washington.
In addition to the $12 million I've mentioned, we also have a $3.5
million request pending with the Maryland Emergency Management Agency
for personal protective equipment. Our first responders--fire, police
and medics--need adequate equipment to enable them to safely do their
jobs: gloves, masks, protective suits and communications equipment.
Right now, we are not fully ready.
a new federal response is needed
September 11th changed the rules of engagement on terror forever--
at least for the rest of our lives. No longer are military combatants
or U.S. civilians in foreign lands with high profile national security
functions the sole targets. Now, everyday Americans going about their
daily routines are at risk.
Fighting terrorism and safeguarding our citizens from terrorism
always has been a national challenge. But now the paradigm has
changed--our homeland is vulnerable. And those of us here today from
local government are asking for the Congress and the Administration to
devote the necessary Federal resources to do all that we know can and
must be done.
Without a dramatic shift in how we finance a portion of our
homeland security, protecting our homeland will become an unfunded
mandate on local governments. And, eventually, with competing
priorities, it truly may become unfunded. Our nation will be unprepared
and our citizens more at risk.
Federal support today for local homeland security is a patchwork of
programs. They are largely uncoordinated and provide no common
standards for how states and localities should best use these funds.
Twenty federal agencies provide anti-terrorist training through 120
different courses--but there are no common requirements, there is no
integrated strategy to make sure that the proper people get trained or
that they get trained to the proper level of readiness.
Even the programs that have the highest potential impact--like
FEMA's FIRE Grant programs--meet only a fraction of local government
needs. FEMA provided just $100 million last year, despite an
application list of nearly $3 billion from fire departments all over
the country. And the pre-September 11 view at OMB targeted this program
for elimination because it was not seen as a ``federal
responsibility.''
In addition, the current federal tool to operationalize anti-
terrorism response outside of the Federal Government is the Federal
Response Plan. Its goal is to guarantee continuity of government and
services in the event of a national emergency. It envisions non-federal
emergency response as a function driven by state government--like the
National Guard. It is an appropriate model for handling natural
disasters like hurricanes or earthquakes. But in the wake of September
11, it is ill suited for anti-terrorism, because most law enforcement
and emergency response functions are local in nature.
Our dealings with the Maryland Emergency Management Agency (MEMA)
illustrate why support must be provided directly to local governments.
MEMA is eligible for millions of dollars from the Department of
Justice's Office of Domestic Preparedness, which could be distributed
to localities--based on risk assessments and equipment needs. Yet they
have not released or applied for the fiscal year 1999, fiscal year 2000
and fiscal year 2001 funds. We are now four months into fiscal year
2002. I am told that Maryland isn't the only state where bureaucracy is
a hurdle to emergency preparedness.
Nor have we had much better luck with the State's Office of Crime
Control and Prevention, where we were turned down earlier this year for
a $187,000 anti-terrorism law enforcement equipment grant.
Local governments need stable funding for this effort. We also need
a one-stop shop for local governments to turn for assistance in gearing
up for this war. On September 12th, I called everyone I could think of
to find out what we should be doing to protect our city. No one could
provide me with a simple checklist, much less offer direction
concerning funding or training.
A recent General Accounting Office report detailed the extent of
this problem--compiling a list more than 100 pages long of programs
that support emergency preparedness. At a minimum, the inventory of
these programs must be consolidated into a more user-friendly form,
with one agency responsible for coordination and budget formulation--
perhaps the new Office of Homeland Security.
homeland defense block grant
However, what is really needed is for this balkanized collection of
programs to be completely overhauled and largely replaced. In its
place, we need the equivalent of a Community Development Block Grant
program for homeland security. Such an initiative--what I would call a
Homeland Defense Block Grant--should be distributed based on a formula
commensurate with security needs and a threat assessment of how
vulnerable an area is.
These funds should have some strings attached--they should be
specifically targeted to emergency personnel, equipment, training and
security-related capital expenses--to ensure the accountability that
the Congress must demand in times of emergency. Their receipt should
also be conditioned on the requirement that the receiving municipality
or subdivision does not cut local investment in relevant law
enforcement, emergency first response or public health agencies to
backfill with federal dollars. There must be no shell game in local
budgeting like we have seen at the state level with federal welfare
reform dollars.
Just like the CDBG program, Homeland Defense Block Grants should be
provided directly to cities and urban counties, which are the primary
targets on the home front of our war against terrorism. It will allow
us to protect the greatest number of Americans as quickly as possible.
And it will ensure that no American is placed at risk because they have
the misfortune of living in city that is having a bad budget year.
In addition to ensuring a consistent level of security in every
American city, Homeland Defense Block Grants would allow national
experts to provide guidance to local officials. I would leave it to
people more knowledgeable than me--like the specialists at SBCCOM and
FEMA--to determine what additional technical support and spending
restrictions should be placed on this kind of funding stream.
Alternatively, the same end could be achieved by increasing the
funds appropriated for Local Law Enforcement Block Grants, and
dedicating that increase specifically for this purpose--following the
general guidelines I've already outlined.
the role of the private sector
One final point that cannot be ignored is the fact that in many
cities, some of the most sensitive targets are privately owned. In
Baltimore, we are providing private security for railyards, chemical
plants, utilities and other large facilities--at great expense to local
taxpayers. This cannot continue without bankrupting our cities. But it
would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
All of our private sector partners are cooperating in some manner.
But when it comes to, for example, providing adequate security for rail
cars that contain chemicals including chlorine and hydrochloric acid,
companies like CSX plead poverty--and city governments are left holding
the bag.
I realize that they cannot fence 20,000 miles of track. But a
relatively small fraction runs through the 20 largest cities. And those
segments must be safeguarded to protect millions of lives. Only the
federal government has the ability to require companies with operations
in many states to change their operations to reflect the world in which
we now live.
conclusion
The United States of America changed forever on September 11th. And
as you and your predecessors have been called to do in the past, it is
your responsibility to sift through competing interests and past
practices to determine what is best for our country.
Under your leadership Madam Chair, this Subcommittee changed the
way our nation provides housing for our poorest citizens--getting rid
of the disgraceful human filing cabinets that our public housing had
become and replacing them with new opportunity through HOPE VI.
Under your leadership Madam Chair, this Subcommittee changed the
way our nation responds to natural disasters--reforming FEMA into an
agency that is a model of effectiveness and compassion.
Now, we are asking this Subcommittee to, once again, change how our
nation prepares to go to war--when that war is being fought in our
cities--on our doorsteps--in the very halls of this hallowed
institution. I am honored to be here today, because I know you will do
what is right.
You, too, are fighting on the home front. And my prayers are with
the men and women, here--your colleagues--who have been touched by
terrorism. I have faith you will ensure that we have the training, the
equipment, and the resources to protect Americans.
America will emerge from this trial stronger than ever before. We
will be tested. We will face terror. But we will not be terrorized. As
our President has said, fear cannot conquer freedom. Thank you for your
leadership in proving this statement true.
Senator Mikulski. Thank you very much, Mayor, for those
excellent ideas. We are going to come back, I know, for a
robust conversation.
I would next like to turn to Senator--Mayor Jeff Griffin
from Reno.
Senator Bond. Do not get his mouth watering. He may start
running for office now.
Senator Mikulski. I know. I will not get into it with
Senators Reid and Ensign.
I know that you have been a leader in economic development,
worrying about housing, that you also chair the Criminal and
Social Justice Committee for the Conference of Mayors. I think
Senator Reid really gave us a nice snapshot of the wonderful
job you have been doing in Reno. So, why do you not just
proceed, Mayor.
STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF GRIFFIN, MAYOR, CITY OF RENO,
NEVADA
Mr. Griffin. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate it very much
and I appreciate the opportunity to be here with my fellow
mayors.
In addition to my chairmanship of one of the committees of
the conference, I also chaired, along with Mayor O'Malley and
Mayor Scott King of Gary, Indiana, one of our task forces that
has met here in the last day and a half on the issues and
challenges facing us. And over the last several days here in
Washington, we did have an emergency, security, and safety
summit with the Conference of Mayors. We think that we have the
beginnings of a blueprint that outlines the needs of
communities and cities as we face this new terrorist threat.
If I can just make a couple of observations, very briefly,
about some of, I believe, important points that would be of
interest to this subcommittee in our findings at the
conference.
One is that we are calling for the elevation of the Office
of Homeland Security to a cabinet level position. It is the
desire, I believe, of the task force that the director be given
budgetary authority in some fashion eventually over all the
Federal personnel and programs related to domestic protection,
law enforcement.
Also, we are asking for a permanent commission that would
include police chiefs, fire chiefs, local emergency managers,
public health officials, and most importantly we think, mayors;
that it be established immediately to provide the director of
Homeland Security advice on the restructuring of this Federal-
local partnership, with the long-term goal of strengthening the
domestic safety and security of our country.
Additionally, while we as mayors have been working for some
time on potential responses to terrorist attacks, the incidents
and attacks of September 11 and subsequent events really have
presented mayors with different and difficult problems.
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, ACCESS TO FEMA PROGRAMS
If I may echo some of the comments that Mayor O'Malley made
about the role of FEMA. We believe that there is a role for
FEMA, and it should be expanded to really embrace event
preparedness. Also, the successful Project Impact program we
believe has been helpful in assisting local governments to
prepare and mitigate disasters. We think it would be a good
model to use so that every community--every community--in this
country has an opportunity to take advantage of coordinated
disaster response-related technical assistance, as well as
financial assistance from the Federal Government.
If I can make an observation about the FEMA fire grants,
however. One of the things that Senator Reid, I am sure, over
the years has mentioned to you is Nevada has a lot of wide-open
spaces. But interestingly enough, the State of Nevada is the
most urban State in America. The largest percentage of our
population lives in either Las Vegas or in Reno. I was looking
yesterday at the FEMA fire grants. We have many, many, many
small communities and many, many Indian reservations. We
received approximately six FEMA fire grants in the program that
was authorized in December. The largest city that received one
in the State of Nevada had a population of 7,000 and the other
four, in fact, had populations under 1,000. I would suggest
that in the event that you reauthorize and reappropriate, that
you might take a look at how that would work, particularly in a
State like Nevada with basically two large metropolitan areas.
Our recent dealings also with the Federal Government on
disaster response--and I have a personal case in my city--has
really been mixed. I think the number one problem has been
communication gaps.
About 3 weeks ago, we have a Microsoft office in Reno, and
there was an incident where an envelope was noticed in their
mail room as being suspicious. They contacted, for some reason,
the State public health department, who in turn contacted the
FBI. The FBI came from their offices, picked up the envelope,
and brought it back to the State. They didn't tell anyone,
including the employees of Microsoft. And 2 days later, as one
can imagine, a rumor began to circulate within the Microsoft
office that there had been a suspicious envelope, and we
received a presumptively positive scientific test that it was
anthrax.
I found out about it, along with my police chief and fire
chief, from the media. Approximately 20 minutes later, we were
notified from the Governor's office of the existence of a
possible anthrax incident. We immediately, of course, got on
with the FBI. Within 45 minutes they were in our offices, and
the relationship has worked very well in coordinating the
response.
But I was very dismayed that for 48 hours no one in local
government knew of the existence of this. I think it has been
an example that I have used in the last few days with my fellow
mayors, and particularly in my interest and role in chairing
the local and Federal cooperation task force. We really have to
work through this in a terribly quick way to ensure that that
does not happen again.
I think also, if I may make another comment, it is
important that the Federal Government provide the communities--
I think Mayor O'Malley has been very eloquent in talking about
the impact that the events and tragedies have put upon local
government, as well as the Federal Government. We all have the
obligation, however, to bring in balanced budgets. We do not
have any wiggle room when we have a situation, such as
September 11. I think the proposals from the Bush
administration, as well as from Senator Byrd, to provide
additional funds for programs like the FEMA fire grant to
provide local governments with equipment and training is an
excellent start.
If I may--and Senator Reid is gone, but just to reiterate
some commentary I made to the assemblage earlier today, this
morning, it is my belief that the Senate did the right thing in
voting 100 to nothing on the economic stimulus package. My own
personal view is that we are not going to be able to address
the economic impact of what we face today merely with tax cuts.
We have to have a balanced approach. I look to the Senate to
provide leadership on that. I look to President Bush to do
that. I think we need a balanced approach with infrastructure
improvements at some level, as well as some tax relief, but
very clearly we need to get the economy going.
I do not know intimately this bill, but H.R. 3161 that has
been introduced in the House would provide about $1 billion for
local governments for the development of emergency response
plans. And not just response. I think all of us have planned to
a fare thee well on emergency response. I think what we are all
mostly concerned with today is being prepared, making sure we
have the communication back and forth with the Federal
Government. Mayor O'Malley used a number several times in the
last 2 days. There are 12,000 FBI agents in this country and
there are 650,000 men and women in uniform on the streets of
America's cities as police officers. We represent a tremendous
resource. We are very concerned that the communication,
particularly as it relates to intelligence information, goes up
but does not come back down.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Let me again echo what I am sure you are going to hear here
also, Madam Chair. America's mayors stand behind you, the
Congress, in any capacity we can serve to help in any way we
can. We do see the threat. We respond to it on a daily basis
right on the streets of America's cities, and we stand arm in
arm with you to address the challenges and win this war on
terrorism.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jeff Griffin
Senator Mikulski and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you to discuss this very important topic.
While it is certain that the terrorist attacks of September 11 have
caused every community in the nation to examine their emergency
preparedness and response systems, I would mention that the U.S.
Conference of Mayors has been examining potential responses to
disasters of unnatural origins for several years now. I also want to
stress that Mayors across the country are doing their part to ensure
that all the local, state, and federal organizations in our communities
will work together in the case of a terrorist attack of any kind.
In my capacity as Chairman of the U.S. Conference of Mayors
Standing Committee on Criminal and Social Justice, I have been working
over the past few years with federal officials on a variety of topics
related to terrorism and the use of weapons of mass destruction. For
instance, in cooperation with the Department of Justice and Texas A&M
University, the Conference of Mayors has developed a mayoral training
institute on weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that is designated to
prepare Mayors for the roles and responsibilities they must assume
during a WMD event.
Earlier this year, I hosted a regional conference for Mayors in
Reno where we discussed how cities can prepare for terrorist attacks
involving weapons of mass destruction. Our speakers helped us
understand how mayors can best assume their natural role as crisis
coordinator and informed spokesperson in the case of an event. I would
venture to guess if we held a similar conference today, the
participation would be much greater. It is constantly on our minds as
we try to go about our daily business. Every Mayor has watched Rudolph
Guiliani since September 11 and my view is that his conduct and
handling could serve as a primer for America's Mayors.
Just this week back home in northern Nevada, Sparks, Nevada Mayor
Tony Armstrong and I hosted an Emergency Preparedness Summit to promote
preparedness, reassure the public and create a community-wide dialogue
on what we have faced as a nation and locally.
Our summit was well attended by area representatives of the
federal, state, and local governments, public safety, health care,
transportation, and utility sectors. Our 18 member panel shared
information and discussed in detail area plans to coordinate our
preparedness and responses to incidents.
We learned at the summit that emergency management systems are in
place and more coordinated as a result of a region-wide flood we
suffered in Reno in 1997 and the elaborate plans developed in
anticipation of threats during the Millennium celebration. During that
time, we prepared for disasters on all fronts, such as terrorism,
HAZMAT spills, not just threats to our computer systems.
The three jurisdictions of Reno, Washoe County, and the City of
Sparks have thoroughly reviewed and shared plans to eliminate
redundancy in our systems and establish protocols for responding to an
event. We have established, and continue to maintain, a Local Emergency
Preparedness Committee that includes every key official and agency--
such as hospitals and utilities--with public safety personnel taking
the lead.
As you are well aware from the heroic efforts of police and fire
departments in New York City and Arlington, Virginia, local governments
are the ``first responders'' to disasters of all kinds. With the new
threat of terrorism, we will remain that first point of contact, which
makes preparing for and dealing with such disasters a very different
and difficult problem.
Unlike a ``traditional'' disaster, such as an earthquake, no
warning will occur prior to an attack by a terrorist using weapons of
mass destruction. In most natural disasters, we are usually able to
differentiate between when an event has begun and when it has ended.
Therefore, we know when we can move from the event preparedness and
event management stages to the event consequence stage. In a terrorist
or WMD event, we almost assuredly will be dealing with event management
and event consequence at the same time, in that people will be dying
while others are just becoming infected or impacted by the event.
We know that once a WMD event hits one of our cities, we will need
massive amounts of help. In the past in instances of natural disasters
such as floods, hurricanes, fire and, so on, state and local resources
were often sufficient to handle event management in larger cities and
communities. As it is currently structured, federal assistance comes
primarily from FEMA for the event consequence stage--this approach is
completely inadequate to respond to today's threats.
Many experts agree that a local public health system will be
quickly overrun by even a modest WMD event in a city of almost any
size. As a citizen, I may not know how to tell if I have been exposed
to a biological or chemical weapon. Hospitals and doctors offices will
be overrun with not only the sick, but those who fear contamination. I
see a great need for a coordinated training effort for these private
sector personnel. Doctors, nurses, and public health officials must be
trained to spot a possible attack, to identify the nature of the
attack, and to know what public health steps are necessary. Our public
safety first responders must be adequately trained to identify
potential attacks and take the appropriate actions. Our public must be
informed and educated, to help avoid panic and over-reaction.
As a result, I believe that there is a great need for event
preparedness, for which FEMA can and should play a role. The successful
Project Impact program has been very helpful in assisting localities to
prepare for and mitigate disasters and this model should be expanded so
that every community in the country has an opportunity to take
advantage of coordinated disaster response-related technical and
financial assistance from the federal government.
New Years Day 1997, when Reno and the rest of a 5-county area
experienced a major flood, FEMA assistance was needed. At the time, it
became evident that communication with FEMA was less than adequate. We
experienced frustration dealing with layers of ``red tape'' while
attempting to secure reimbursement for funds the City expended during
the recovery effort; however, as a result of these difficulties, a
number of procedures at FEMA were improved and streamlined, and the
results have been encouraging. We commend FEMA for their efforts over
the last several years to improve its customer service and we look
forward to a continued relationship with the agency as we enter this
new age of previously unthinkable disasters.
As a result of its work with response to natural disasters, FEMA
has developed relationships with local governments. The question is:
are they in the best position to coordinate response activities amongst
federal agencies and state and local governments? They can be, but only
if they are given the authority and resources necessary for such an
important and large task. Mayors are hopeful that FEMA will have a
strong role with the new Office of National Preparedness as it attempts
to corral the many federal agencies that deal with disaster response
and provide improved services to communities in need.
It is also our understanding that FEMA has been tasked with
establishing a Joint Information Center by Governor Tom Ridge of the
Office of Homeland Security. Under this plan, FEMA would be the source
of all federal government information dissemination to the public and
press. I would urge Governor Ridge to include Mayors in the process of
developing the JIC for obvious reasons.
Mayors have engaged with our regions and states, and with the
federal government, in an effort to train for response to natural
disasters. Most cities have detailed plans for dealing with floods,
tornadoes, fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and other natural disasters.
We have worked out regional and often state cooperation strategies, and
in most cases are prepared--at least as best as we can hope to be--for
these terribly destructive events. It is our hope that the JIC can
assist us in working out these strategies to respond to the new threats
that we face.
I have said many times that in the event of a disaster, natural or
otherwise, the media will seek out Mayors and pose two questions:
``What is going on?'' and ``What are you doing about it?'' It has
become clear to me that mayors have a responsibility to possess the
basic information needed to manage all of their resources in the event
of a terrorist attack of some kind, and most importantly, know what to
say, and what not to say, when the cameras reach our doors. We must be
trained to provide calm, informed answers and work to warn as well as
reassure our citizens.
Finally, as all of you already know, the costs of improving local
response capabilities is daunting to many communities across the
country, and while our citizens will demand and deserve these
safeguards, sufficient resources do not exist. We were very pleased to
see that President Bush has requested $600 million for FEMA to provide
state and local governments with equipment and training grants to
improve response capabilities and support the Office of National
Preparedness.
In addition, the Senate has suggested a significant increase for
the FIRE grants at FEMA that would give neediest fire departments
across the country the necessary tools to protect our citizens and
respond to terrorist events. I also believe that we need more
discretion at the local government level and fewer federal mandates to
allow us the flexibility to apply the resources and funding to the
need. One size does not fit all, and with all due respect, we are there
day after day, listening to the public and our public safety officials.
Give us the discretion to make decisions within federal guidelines
For example, in the past two years, the Reno area has been plagued
by two major wildfires which came very close to causing extensive
property damage. Habitat destruction and environmental degradation to
our primary water source has been extensive. Our fires tested us and
the system because they were multi-jurisdictional, crossed state lines
and required federal type-one teams in support of local fire
suppression resources. In order to battle these events, Reno relies on
a fire department that serves both rural and urban areas, and as a
result, utilizes a large number of volunteers. Also, Reno needs new
equipment to replace outdated rolling stock for our volunteer fire
departments, and equipment like night vision goggles or thermal imaging
units. This may not be the case in other communities around the
country, as each has its own needs and priorities.
On Tuesday of this week, Rep. John Larson (D-CT) also recognized
the need for additional resources to local governments in our battles
against terrorism when he introduced the Municipal Preparation and
Strategic Response Act of 2001 (HR 3161). The measure would authorize
$1 billion for local governments and regional authorities to develop
comprehensive local emergency response plans. The bill would also
provide an additional $250 million each to the COPS program at the
Department of Justice and Firefighter Assistance Grant Program at FEMA
to establish grants specifically for counter-terrorism response,
training, and equipment. In order to make funding available to any
community in need, there would be no local match required for these
special grants.
The bill would ask FEMA to designate a representative in each state
that would assist communities on the development of response plans,
coordinate the sharing of information on federal resources, and act as
a liaison between units of local government.
While the actual text of HR 3161 was not in print as I prepared
this testimony, I believe that Rep. Larson is headed in the right
direction. Federal assistance for local disaster response coordination
activities is crucial to the swift development of local government
preparation activities during these very tense times. And as Rep.
Larson points out, the U.S. Constitution empowers Congress to provide
for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. At no
time in our recent memory has such assistance been necessary, and I
hope that the Senate will consider companion legislation to HR 3161.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before this
committee, and I hope to continue to work with Congress to ensure that
communities across the country are properly prepared and equipped to
deal with any future terrorist actions.
Senator Mikulski. Well, Mayor Griffin, I know that you need
to go, and I know Senator Bond has a very pressing schedule.
Mayor Savage, Mayor Kirk, if you could wait. Senator Bond,
do you have any questions?
Senator Bond. I would rather hear the comments of Mayor
Savage and Mayor Kirk. I have got pressing business, but this
is more pressing.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
Senator Mikulski. Mayor Griffin, before you go, what you
just told me about the Microsoft situation is really enormously
disturbing. Here is my question. This then goes to public
information and then we will come to this later.
We know that you need resources. You are coming up with
innovative ideas on the most efficient way that they come to
you rather than trickle down through bureaucracies, direct
resources to you.
Tell me about what you think you need in the way of public
information. There is information to the leadership and then
there is information to the general public. Do you have any
thoughts or recommendations? Because I am working on
bioterrorism legislation with Senators Frist and Kennedy and I
am putting in a public information component. I would really
welcome your ideas.
Mr. Griffin. Thank you, Senator. It is very appropriate. In
my role as chair of the standing Committee on Public Safety and
Crime, I have also for the last 2\1/2\ years been working on
domestic terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. And as a
former council member, you understand very intimately that
there are going to be 2 questions that are going to be posed to
the mayors of America in the event of something like this.
Mayor Giuliani I think gave us a primer on what those are.
There are going to be 2 questions. One is what is going on. The
second one is what are you doing about it.
Senator Mikulski. Third, what does this mean to me? Do I
have to rush to my school to get my child?
Mr. Griffin. Absolutely. I think to the extent that you can
assist in this, what we really need is a true working
relationship with all elements of the Federal Government.
Certainly we practice on a regular basis with our fire
departments and police departments and public health people and
the local hospitals. We do disaster preparedness. I would like
to see something like that so that there is a true exchange of
information and intelligence.
I think there were several comments--and Mayor O'Malley may
want to speak to this. At our task force meeting yesterday,
there were several comments made by police chiefs, for example,
and it depends on your locale and your relationship with the
SAC, the special agent in charge, how much information you get
back and forth. It goes up, but it does not seem to come down
very well.
We think we can provide a tremendous resource with those
650,000 people to run down--there is now something approaching
500,000 leads that the FBI has been given. They have got a work
force of 12,000 people. We think we can help. I think if we are
going to reassure the public and tell them what is going on and
what does it mean to them, we have to have complete access to
the information and we have to know about it in a very timely
fashion.
Senator Mikulski. And if you have to leave, it will not
hurt our feelings if you just get up and go. We often get up
and go on witnesses.
Mayor Savage, we really want to welcome you here today, the
Mayor of Tulsa. We know you have done an outstanding job in
terms of your city and your desire to really move that city
into the future. We really want to hear your testimony. Though
it was Oklahoma City that was hit by the terrible act of
domestic terrorism, we know that all of Oklahoma and all of
America grieved. I am sure that there are lessons learned from
even being a brother or sister mayor in a State that is hit,
particularly in the area of mutual cooperation, mutual aid, the
coordination of your Governor, Frank Keating. We knew Keating
when he was at HUD. So, why do you not just go right ahead.
STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN SAVAGE, MAYOR, CITY OF TULSA,
OKLAHOMA
Ms. Savage. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am delighted to be
here.
And, Mr. Bond, I would comment that I have a junior in
college in central Missouri and she loves your State very, very
much.
Senator Bond. We are delighted. We just hope that your
football team shows some mercy. They did not treat our friends
from Texas too well.
Ms. Savage. It is a burden we bear, Senator.
But we are happy that you have acknowledged the prowess of
the Oklahoma Sooners.
As the Mayor of Tulsa, which is a city of 385,000 people, a
little bit of history. We were founded as part of Indian
territory and sit on the banks of the Arkansas River really in
northeastern Oklahoma. It is quite a diversified city being
built upon the energy industry, now heavily diversified into
aerospace and technology and energy manufacturing.
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
We are no stranger to disaster. Most of our disasters
historically have been caused by Mother Nature. We live less
than 2 hours away from Oklahoma City and what was once the
Murrah Federal Building, Madam Chair, as you have expressed. We
also live in the heart of Tornado Alley. There was a time in
the 1970's and the 1980's when Tulsa led the Nation in
federally declared flood disasters. So, for us disaster
preparedness has become a way of life and it has forced us, in
my estimation, to learn to work smarter with the resources we
have and to become, in effect, real scrappers at trying to
develop strong working relationships at both the State and the
Federal level.
When FEMA began in 1992 the community ranking system to
rank communities for flood readiness, we have ranked at the top
of their charts for a comprehensive flood plain management
program and not sustained a federally declared flood disaster
in 15 years.
We have also led the Nation as the first major city to win
preparedness accreditation in the National Weather Service
program called Storm Ready, and in 1998 we were identified by
FEMA as a flagship Project Impact community and received a
number of awards for, once again, preparedness and mitigation
in many areas of hazard.
Now, I mention that by way of introducing a model of what
has worked for us. We have used the incident command system, a
lot of coordination, and we have been very pleased to date with
our preparedness. But as it has been stated by my colleagues,
our difficulty becomes in sustaining that level of preparedness
and readiness while trying to do the regular jobs that people
do have.
In relating this to the Nation's war and our
responsibility, our collective responsibility, for national
security, the components that become very important in that
discussion are communication, coordination, planning,
prevention, mitigation, recovery, and they are efforts that are
relentless and require constant attention.
You have heard and will continue to hear from mayors that
we are your first responders in times of disaster and in times,
as we are today. We are our Nation's first line of defense. Our
local challenges have been exacerbated by uncertain economic
times as well at this very, very difficult time.
For us a model that has worked in Tulsa--and I want to
speak not so much to the specific project, but the model
because I think it is one that represents a comprehensive
approach. We are a Project Impact city, as I have mentioned.
What that has meant for us is we have had 3 very solid years of
planning and accomplishments in multi-hazard programs where
certainly, subsequent to Oklahoma City, we began to target
terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, but also
bioterrorism, chemical incidents, and other hazards. It has
been very important, the reforms and the efforts you have made
to make FEMA more responsive to the local communities. I want
to personally thank you because it has meant----
Senator Mikulski. We did this together.
Ms. Savage. [continuing] A tremendous amount. Well, thank
you very much because it really has been very important.
LOCAL ACCESS TO FEMA PROGRAMS
I want to reemphasize that maintaining that connection
between FEMA at the national level and the local communities,
it is in our interest and in our citizens' interest to have
quick, easy access and immediate attention from State and
Federal agencies, as needs warrant.
Now we have turned to what we call in our nomenclature a
safe and secure program that really builds on these basic
principles. And since September 11, like every other city from
which you are hearing today, we focused on assessing
vulnerabilities at critical facilities and correcting
identified deficiencies to reduce our risk for multiple hazards
and to become a hard target. Obviously, we continue to have to
deal with our natural hazards such as wind, tornados, and
floods, technological hazards such as fire and chemical
releases, the loss of utilities and communication, and now
universal hazards as civil unrest and terrorism.
Our priorities have focused on critical city facilities
needed to keep Tulsa functioning during any crisis, buildings
and facilities where large numbers of people congregate, and
sites with extreme risk such as chemical stockpiles that could
produce widespread disasters.
Our safe and secure teams have mobilized virtually all city
departments and agencies to conduct a fast track pilot project
that is providing training, building assessment, corrective
action, and a very long-term capital plan for major projects.
We have roughly 50 people participating in a technical
assistance capacity. Half of those are our own city
technicians. We are using FEMA grant money through Project
Impact to provide that outside technical assistance that we
need to ensure that we have covered every potential
contingency.
LOCAL COMMUNITIES ON THE FRONT LINES
It has become clear, since September 11, that local
communities--and in our case specifically--we have to do the
vulnerability assessments and retrofits. It is not enough to
assess. You have to retrofit your critical government and
nongovernmental facilities and infrastructure to keep those
essential services people require operating.
We have increased detection capability and crisis capacity
for public health, hospital, and emergency medical services,
and that is one area where we have some infrastructure in place
where there is actually some communication occurring among
those medical providers. Emergency equipment, security systems,
and backup capacity for communications and emergency management
operations. While we have some backup, we are reevaluating that
to look now at what we believe are some new risks and to
provide additional backup, technical assistance, training and
public education. You mentioned the need for education. We
believe the public has to know not only what we are doing to
try to protect them, but what to do in the event of any
occurrence.
Specialized infrastructure programs for buildings that
house vulnerable populations such as schools, day care, and
nursing centers, and public housing.
Targeted demonstration programs to prepare businesses and
neighborhoods. That includes a variety of contingency planning
and emergency preparedness and first aid training as several
examples.
Incentives for public and private shelter in place in
evacuation programs which could include MASH shelters for
multiple hazard, in our case storms, tornados, but terror and
air quality emergencies.
We believe our Project Impact model has given us not only
the physical resources but the time and the planning and the
capability to pull in over 400 partners throughout our
community and they are comprised of other governmental
agencies, schools, business, the faith community,
neighborhoods, and people who simply have an interest in
community service.
So, our essential operations and infrastructure are now
being evaluated against really a sterner standard, and
corrective actions, if necessary, are being taken and will
continue to be taken in order to maintain our local and
national first line of defense.
There are costs, and you have heard those costs itemized--
and in the interest of your time, because I know we want to get
to questions--I will not go through specific costs for Tulsa.
But I believe there is an opportunity to not only address
specific emergency and immediate needs but also the long range
model of which I have spoken for disaster planning,
preparedness, and mitigation under Project Impact. And I would
encourage the committee to consider these safe and secure model
communities, perhaps some kind of 2-year pilot program, to
bring together the best of the resources at the Federal, State,
and local level to enable us to continue this planning, to
continue this effort to be more prepared and to respond when
emergencies do face us.
Just in closing--it has been stated, as you get further
down the row, you hear most of your ideas because there is not
a lot you will hear among us that is too different. But we have
the capacity, as I believe you understand, to integrate
programs and resources at the local level that cannot be
replicated at the State or the Federal level. We want to be
partners with the Federal Government and with the State
government in this war. We need the resources. We need the
support.
And I thank you very much for what you have provided us to
date because we believe we are in the best position to continue
to respond as we have responded and to do so in an organized,
comprehensive, and very collaborative manner. Thank you.
Senator Mikulski. Well, thank you very much. We heard both
new ideas and how to use existing programs.
I would like to turn to Mayor Kirk, the Mayor of Dallas. He
won his last election with 74 percent of the vote. That is
terrific. He passed six budgets, which means he knows how to
beat the bottom line, and in addition to the economic
development and revitalization of Dallas, he has had a chance
to serve on the advisory board related to the census for mayors
and also on the empowerment issues about how big cities can
have a bigger turnout in elections. Mayor Kirk, we welcome you
and look forward to your remarks.
STATEMENT OF HON. RONALD KIRK, MAYOR, CITY OF DALLAS,
TEXAS
Mr. Kirk. Thank you, Madam Chair, for your graciousness and
for the time of you and Senator Bond and for being so patient
with us. I know you have other issues before the Senate.
I would like to believe I have got three bits for you,
first of all.
First is I have submitted my remarks in writing, and so
there is no need for me to read them in full.
Second, you may either be pleased or just terrified to know
that I am a former Senate staffer myself, having worked for
U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen. So, I am intimately aware of how
much members in your position like for witnesses to abbreviate
their remarks when they have submitted written testimony.
Senator Mikulski. We like the witnesses to be short.
Mr. Kirk. So, I will not do that.
And then third, I want to begin by thanking you and Senator
Bond. I am aware that we are before an appropriations
subcommittee, but I cannot tell you how much and how well it
was received at our conference that the Senate has addressed
one of the major issues of concern for the Nation's mayors, and
particularly for those from large cities like myself that have
major airports like Dallas and Baltimore and others, that the
Senate unanimously adopted the aviation security legislation
that our Senator Hutchison has been urging. We think that is
one of the critical steps to moving forward.
Senator Mikulski. She has been the leader in that.
Mr. Kirk. But the fact that the Senate voted 100 to nothing
sends a very strong bipartisan note of reassurance to the
American public that you will put our Nation's security first.
I want you to know, on behalf of the Conference of Mayors, we
thank you for that.
Inasmuch as you have my remarks, you can imagine that I
concur strongly with the comments of my colleagues. And I want
to thank Mayor O'Malley, in particular, for his leadership on
this, his very forceful advocacy of this at the Conference of
Mayors and in presenting I think a very good overview of the
nature of the issues and how we want to partner with this
committee and your colleagues. And I would concur in everything
he said.
I would like to make two points, particularly to reinforce
those. Our experience in Dallas has not been dissimilar from
any other city. To some degree, we are thankful and grateful
that, unfortunately, as a result of the tragic events in
Oklahoma City, Dallas was fortunate to be one of the first
cities chosen for the Department of Justice programs to put in
place domestic terrorism training in 1998, and we did have a
protocol, in fact, for that.
But the whole issue of bioterrorism, I think because of the
very nature of it, was one that was predominantly an issue of
hypothesis for us. And on September 11, as we all know, that
changed dramatically. And the reality is, I think you know and
we know, that none of us are prepared at the local level to do
that.
We are proud of the fact that what we have at the local
level are hundreds of thousands of police and firemen who have
the courage and heart that many of us admire so much now to be
the first to respond. But we need help.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND HOMELAND SECURITY
What we do best is put out fires and chase bad guys and
work with the FBI occasionally to do something more exotic. But
if we are going to be an effective partner in this homeland
security issue, as you have articulated, Madam Chair, and
others, we need help.
The best antidote to something as frightening to the
American people as this whole notion of bioterrorism is what we
have talked about: education and preparedness. And what we
would urge more than anything is that we work as a partner with
you to work on that preparation and making sure our local
police and fire agencies have as much preparation as we
possibly can and that the lines of communication, as you have
said time and time again, Madam Chair, have to be open because
what we cannot have is our Nation retreating into a climate of
fear because of lack of information, or worse, misinformation.
FEMA FIRE GRANTS
And finally, what I would ask and I would especially
encourage that with respect to the FEMA fire grants, in
particular--and Mayor Griffin addressed that. The good news is
that is a very effective program, but it is for the most part
been limited to very small communities. I think that is
important. They cannot be left out of this equation. But our
major metropolitan areas, as we go forward--a part of those
funds have to be reserved for helping our larger metropolitan
areas prepare for that. Dallas, Texas is the eighth largest
city in the country now. The State of Texas has 3 of the 10
largest cities in the United States. We have the largest
airport in the United States. It is the fourth busiest, and we
need your help and your assistance in meeting that.
Then finally, I would only ask as we have had this horrible
event have the impact of making very, very obvious to us how
important the role of cities are, particularly as first
responders and whether it's an issue of domestic terrorism, as
we witnessed in Oklahoma, or one that has come from a foreign
nature, as we have seen in Washington and Pennsylvania, that
cities do matter, and our ability to be a partner is critically
important to you. I would hope that we would use this as an
opportunity to address not only partnership and particularly
resource sharing not just on issues of domestic security but
that for years cities have raised the specter of unfunded
Federal mandates and the impacts it has on our local budgets. I
hope that not only as we address this, that the Senate and
Congress would be acutely aware of how much we need your help
in dealing with those other issues as well.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I know the pressures that are on the committee, and I
really, on behalf of the mayors, want to thank you and Senator
Bond for your patience in taking the time to hear our
testimony.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ronald Kirk
introduction
Thank you Chairman Mikulski, Ranking Member Bond, and Members of
the Committee for inviting me here today to address issues relating to
homeland security and FEMA. As mayor of the eighth largest city in the
Nation, I am glad to have the opportunity to share with you my thoughts
on the impacts of the recent tragic events and the needs of cities.
The events of September 11 changed our lives. We are in a new era,
and it is important for us to recognize the new role we must play
against the threat of terrorism. No one imagined just a few weeks ago
that we would be dealing with disasters of this magnitude. It is
absolutely essential that we have an ongoing dialogue and strong
intergovernmental cooperation to improve our ability to handle weapons
of mass destruction and other potential threats, some that we cannot
even imagine.
As you know, and as evidenced by the recent tragedies in New York,
Washington and Pennsylvania, local fire and police departments are the
first to arrive at scenes of disaster. Our challenge is to ensure that
we are equipped to respond as efficiently and effectively as possible.
Unfortunately, our cities are simply not prepared to handle the new
threats that have emerged over recent weeks. However, just as improved
coordination and well spent Federal funds have increased our capacity
to respond to natural disasters and mitigated the damage they cause, I
am confident that we can meet this new threat.
the city's use of department of justice domestic preparedness program
funding (nunn-lugar-domenici)
In early 1998, the City of Dallas began its participation in the
Domestic Preparedness Program, which provides funding for training and
equipment to public safety personnel responding to incidents caused by
weapons of mass destruction. These funds are administered by the U.S.
Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Defense.
The program has served well to enhance Dallas' ability to respond
to weapons of mass destruction incidents involving chemical and nuclear
threats. To date, the City has received over $1.3 million dollars,
which has been used for training and equipment.
the fema fire grant program
Last year, FEMA awarded the first grants under a newly authorized
program to provide equipment and training to local fire departments.
Dallas did not receive a first round grant because FEMA focused on
providing grants to small and medium sized communities that were the
most lacking in modern equipment. Local government leaders are pleased
that Congress recognized that there is a legitimate Federal role in
providing assistance to local governments for fire and emergency
response personnel and equipment.
the need for additional resources
Although these programs have proven valuable, our current resources
are simply insufficient given the new threat we are facing. In the
first 30 days following the attacks of September 11th, the City of
Dallas spent over $1.2 million just to provide increased security.
Clearly, more resources are needed. Additionally, the rash of suspected
biological agent calls since September 11, 2001 has pointed to the need
to provide assistance to public health agencies and private sector
medical care providers.
At present, Dallas has one Hazardous Materials Team (part of its
Fire-Rescue Department) that responds to incidents--real and
potential--over a 368-square-mile area. This does not begin to approach
the resources needed to handle a major biological or other weapon of
mass destruction attack.
Dallas' HazMat Team also responds regionally, as one of four HazMat
Teams in Dallas County. Given the geographical size of Dallas, and the
size of the regional population this team currently serves (more than 2
million people), additional monies to train, equip, and maintain more
teams are integral to a comprehensive homeland security program in
North Texas. Additionally, future Federal assistance should be geared
to strengthening regional cooperation in planning and response.
While the current FEMA Fire Grant Program is a great start and I
again commend Congress for initiating this important program, the
volume of applications submitted last year clearly indicates that
demand outstripped the resources Congress made available for this
program. In the wake of the September 11 attacks, demand is certain to
increase. I urge you to provide sufficient resources for this important
program and to consider turning at least part of it into a formula
grant program that benefits the Nation's largest cities. I also urge
you to keep this program as flexible as possible since it is clear that
many potential threats are unknown and because local governments have
vastly different needs in this area.
The City of Dallas was the first in the Nation to address the
problem of non-emergency calls to 9-1-1 centers. We spearheaded the use
of 3-1-1 to handle police and fire non-emergency and general local
government assistance calls. In establishing its 3-1-1 center, the City
has successfully channeled non-emergency calls away from 9-1-1
operators. Too often, 9-1-1 operators were tied up with citizens
complaining about potholes or trash removal. Now, these calls are
answered through our 3-1-1 call center, which is staffed by employees
who are trained to handle both 9-1-1 and 3-1-1 calls. (As a result of
this training when there is an emergency, we have staff on hand to
immediately handle a larger volume of 911 calls.) No Federal money was
used in the design and construction of this prototypical program, which
other cities have used as a model for implementing similar systems.
Large cities are often focal points for public information on
disaster related issues, and requests for non-emergency information are
increasing. Expansion of this function is being fueled by public
demand, and additional funds to respond to the demand are critical to
the development of an informed and vigilant citizenry.
the city's relationship with fema
The city of Dallas has been extremely fortunate not to have had a
major disaster within the last decade, although there is a constant
risk of catastrophic flooding from the Trinity River, which runs
adjacent to downtown Dallas and through area neighborhoods.
FEMA can be a very valuable resource in responding to tragic
events. However, most of the focus is disaster assistance after the
event has occurred. In order to best equip local governments, more
resources need to be directed to FEMA for predisaster planning. Such
assistance can also be incorporated into a homeland security block
grant that would support local and regional planning and risk
assessment.
Our relationship with the FEMA's Region VI office during disaster
events has been very cooperative and has proven extremely valuable.
FEMA teams conducted their inspections of the damage in Dallas County
following severe tornadoes in 1994 using the City's Emergency Operation
Center as their on-scene base of operations.
That spirit of cooperation and teamwork between the City and the
Region VI office continues today, and serves as a solid framework on
which emergency assistance is planned and delivered to residents of
North Texas and should serve as a model of cooperation between the
Federal and local governments in preventing and responding to the new
threats we face.
conclusion
Our Nation now faces threats that were unimaginable two months ago.
As we have seen, local governments provide the first line of defense
against these new threats. In order to protect our citizens, we will
need strong cooperation and communication between Federal and local
authorities and a strong Federal commitment to providing local
governments with the resources they need to respond to these new
threats in a manner that offers flexibility to address local conditions
and to respond to unanticipated needs. Thank you again for the
opportunity to testify on this important issue. I look forward to
answering your questions and to working with you to ensure that our
Nation's local governments are prepared to meet the new challenges we
are facing.
Senator Mikulski. Well, thank you very much, Mayor Kirk. We
always welcome back former Senate staffers.
Ordinarily I kick off the round of questions, but Senator
Bond has been very gracious in participating in this hearing. I
know he is also working on some special projects related to his
own State. So, do you want to lead off with your questions?
Then I will do the wrap up.
Senator Bond. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Let me first make the comment that it is very helpful to
hear from you all who are on the front line. Now that the
Nation's rock star is a mayor from New York, it is nice to see
how much work and how much good leadership mayors across the
country are providing. As a former Governor, I used to have a
little friction with mayors because mayors never think
Governors are doing enough; Governors always think that mayors
should be taking a little more responsibility. But we do share
the common thread of being right there on the ground serving
our people and you all reflect that.
I did read your testimony, Mayor Kirk. I note that you have
suggested, as I think Mayor O'Malley did and several others the
creation of a homeland grant program. I hope that you will have
the opportunity or some of your colleagues will have the
opportunity to present these concerns to our Homeland Security
Director, Tom Ridge. There are all kinds of plans for him. Some
want to institutionalize him. Some what to make a Department
out of him. I hope he just listens and communicates it directly
to the President and the other agencies and assigns
responsibility for developing the doctrine and the approach
that we are going to need.
This to me is something that you all have to deal with.
When an emergency hits in your communities, you have it set up
who is supposed to do what, but when it is beyond the capacity
of any one community, we need to have a plan for the State
government to come in, the National Guard is called out, FEMA
comes in, any other resources. I would just say I hope that you
all can have input on that.
IMPROVING FEDERAL COORDINATION
Is there any specific thing that any of the three of you
would suggest that we could do now to assure better
coordination? I was distressed to hear about the State
emergency management agency kind of stiffing you I guess in
Maryland because we had thought in Missouri our SEMA worked
pretty well. But is there one thing we can do from the Federal
level right now to improve that coordination?
Mr. Kirk. First of all, Senator, thank you for your
comments. I do want you to know and we should have let you
know, I think we felt very fortunate that we heard from
Attorney General Ashcroft immediately before we came here. But
Governor Ridge did spend the morning with us, made a forceful
presentation. We did present him a list of ideas on behalf of
the Congress and pledged our full support.
And many of the issues we pressed with him are those that
we made today, that we do want this position elevated to as
strong role as possible, but really wanted to make sure we have
the communication between his office and ourselves. We asked
him, more than anything, to be an advocate for the needs of
local governments in terms of our first response initiatives.
Senator Bond. Ms. Savage?
DIRECT ACCESS TO FEMA
Ms. Savage. I would be very specific and say to the extent,
as you evaluate how to expand or look at opportunities for
expanding resources coming to the local level, that you provide
some mechanism for cities certainly of our size to work
directly with FEMA, if that is to be the agency. You do end up
at times having to wade through the layers of bureaucracy, and
Senator, I see you smiling, being a former Governor. You have
heard this before.
But in a State such as Oklahoma, where you have two major
metropolitan areas and the rest of the State is very rural, the
standards and the technical capabilities are quite different.
And to be treated in a similar manner slows down our ability to
respond. Oftentimes we are in a situation in Tulsa of providing
technical assistance and mutual aid to the smaller communities
around us in the northeastern part of Oklahoma, certainly when
it is hazardous materials responses. And Missouri shares the
distinction, along with Oklahoma, of being in the top three for
methamphetamine labs.
Senator Bond. We are number two.
Ms. Savage. We are first or second or third. We are right
up there with you as well.
Senator Mikulski. And he is number two in heroin.
Ms. Savage. So, we have a heightened awareness of hazardous
materials response as a result of that problem.
Senator Mikulski. You are not number one in heroin.
Mr. O'Malley. Yes. I was going to say we are down from
number one.
Ms. Savage. An immediate need that I know communities
looking at responding to letters for anthrax calls and
heightened security needs is to potentially have some resources
that come directly to those communities to address those very
specific needs and potentially for different kinds of equipment
that we may need, whether it be new bomb equipment--bomb
detection equipment, not new bombing equipment--hazardous
cleanup materials, a variety of things that those of us who
operate large metropolitan and highly sophisticated departments
need to have available and are being called upon by State
agencies as well to respond.
FIRST RESPONDERS AS RESERVISTS
Mr. Kirk. I am sorry. I did have one thought that I had
wanted to put on the table that had not been previously
mentioned. Forgive me because it was not brought up at the
conference.
But one issue that we are facing at the local just in a
real way--and Mayor O'Malley I think spoke to the fact that we
do not mind the overtime that we have got to put in for police
and fire for enhanced security. But one of the realities of
most of our municipal law enforcement and fire enforcement
forces around the country is these are the same people that
also tend to be your reservists.
So, the practical matter is that we are already stretched
to the limit. We are now operating at the highest alert, and
whether it is 30 or 40 in a city like Dallas or Baltimore or
Tulsa, if we lose 100 police and firemen who are then going to
be called up to go serve the war, which they will, then under
the law, we are now required to hold those positions open as
long as they come back. And we should. But we just do not have
the capability to go to high alert and absorb the loss of 100
people for 6 months or 12 months or 18 months.
If there was anything Congress might be able to do in a
stop gap way it is to help provide some funding for us to bring
personnel in to cover that gap because the very people that are
going to go fight the gopher are the ones that used to be
patrolling our neighborhoods.
Ms. Savage. In my police department, we have 60 reservists
out of a uniform service of 800. We have in the fire department
25 out of 740 fire fighters.
Mr. O'Malley. We have experienced roughly the same thing.
In addition to that, we just took action yesterday at our Board
of Estimates to come up with new admin rules to cover the gap
so that when people are called up, not so much--there are the
Federal reserves and then there's the State-based--one of the
two--and forgive me for not being able to distinguish this for
you. But one of the two in some situations would create this
situation where the person is called up to serve, and then they
are making less money than they would have, and then the family
falls behind in the mortgage.
Senator Mikulski. Substantially less money.
Mr. O'Malley. Yes. So, we are coming up with something,
again out of local dollars, to cover that gap because we think
it is just the right thing to do.
INTERAGENCY COORDINATION ON HOMELAND SECURITY
One of the really compelling things that came out of all of
us coming together--and none of us have wanted to be more than
a half hour away from our cities for these last 40 days. But
one of the really compelling things that came out was it was
just sort of the unanimity of themes. One of them was the one
that you mentioned, Senator, in your letter of today's date
about making sure that the model that we have for the Homeland
Security Chief is one that is much more akin to the Defense
Secretary than it is to the----
Senator Mikulski. Drug Czar.
Mr. O'Malley.--Drug Czar, the Drug Czar that does not have
any power to coordinate anything.
I will give you one example, and I will leave his name out.
You go up to one person responsible for Federal law enforcement
at a high rank, and you say, you know what? A number of those
guys who slammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon
had open INS warrants out for them. Are there other people out
there possibly living in Baltimore that our metropolitan
fugitive task force, consisting of 70 officers, could help you
with to prioritize those other folks and serve those warrants?
And the person's response to me was, well, that is INS. That is
not my department. I cannot make them do anything. That is
scary. That is really scary.
And you are going to get some great information from the
Conference of Mayors, and it is pulled from a bunch of
different mayors from all over the country, but the experiences
are all the same. We need to end this dangerous disconnect. We
talk a lot about fixing things after a tornado or a hurricane
or, God forbid, a bomb has wrecked the city, but there is a lot
more we can do on the prevention end of things. But it begins
with better sharing of intelligence.
There is an act now before you, I think, in conference, the
USA 2001 Act, that makes it easier to break down the barriers
so INS can share information with the FBI.
Senator Mikulski. That comes under the Counterterrorism Act
that we just passed.
Go ahead, Kit. I am sorry.
Senator Bond. I, along with Senator Conrad and Senator
Snowe, authored some INS reforms which mandates that that
information be shared, first law enforcement agencies sharing
it with the INS and the State Department. We let Sheikh
Karakman who did the first World Trade Center bombing come back
and forth into this country five times. He was on a criminal
watch list, but nobody told the State Department or the INS.
That is stupid, and we are mandating that that information be
shared so we keep those people out.
Number two, I traveled around with the INS and they really
have no way of tracking these people. So, we mandate a better
tracking system so that we know when they come in and we know
when they leave. The guts of the system--we called it a visa
bill--is to have a biometric card that is issued by our
overseas consular office to anybody wanting to come into this
country. If you want to come in on a tourist visa, a student
visa, work visa, you get something that positively identifies
you so we can check you out before you come in. If you come in
and you disappear, we can share that with the law enforcement
agencies so that the law enforcement agencies, if they get a
hit for anything from a DWI to suspicious activities, can track
that person.
It is still not going to be good enough, and we do not have
enough INS agents to track down everybody because the visitors
come in and they say we are going to go Missouri. We are going
to see Fabulous Branson. We want to see the Wonders of Wildlife
Museum in Springfield, Missouri, and then we are going to go up
to the St. Louis Arch. If they have not left when their visa
expires, there is no way, even in a little State like Missouri,
with those three wonderful tourist attractions, that they can
find them. But if they have a hit with a law enforcement
agency, that law enforcement agency will see they are out of
status or they are doing something they are not supposed to,
and then we can get them out.
Mr. O'Malley. But we cannot access that now, Senator.
Unless it was amended in conference, it did not include local
law enforcement in that intelligence sharing.
Senator Mikulski. That has not gone to conference.
Senator Bond. No. We just passed the bill and we direct the
Director of Homeland Security to set up a system for sharing
that information.
Mr. O'Malley. Great.
OPEN RECORDS REQUIREMENTS
Senator Bond. I have got to get out of here and let the
chair finish up the questions.
Mayor Savage, something you said just rang a bell. We are
talking about better communication. We need to share
information. I have done a lot of work with local officials and
law enforcement agencies in Missouri on methamphetamine. One of
the greatest headaches they have is the requirement that
Congress enacted saying that you have to tell where you are
storing anhydrous ammonia because every farmer who has
anhydrous ammonia, a great source of nitrogen--it is also a key
element in the homemade manufacture of methamphetamine. There
is now a complimentary web site put up by the meth dealers
association and it shows in each county the response time for a
deputy sheriff to each anhydrous ammonia. And we have created
this web of information that is a road map.
One of the things that I found when I went back and visited
municipal water systems, one of my major cities is scared to
death because they have to disclose where they keep certain
chemicals that are needed for keeping the water supply safe,
and there is enough information available in the public to
provide a road map so somebody coming in from abroad does not
even have to visit the city to know where the powerful
disinfectant, potentially dangerous chemical is stored.
That information must be available to law enforcement, fire
department, but are we giving too much information to the
public?
Ms. Savage. Senator, I might respond in two ways.
First of all, just recently our city council--and I do not
serve as a member of the city council. I go on occasion and
visit with them, but I do not have to sit through the
meetings--recently passed what they called a public safety
ordinance, and it was prior to September 11. I argued the fact
that the level of disclosure in prewar time--we did not know
the war was coming--potentially defeated the very purpose of
what we were trying to accomplish, and that was to have a plan
of action and a variety of things that they thought were
important. They are now predisposed to amend that ordinance,
and we are going to do that because, in fact, it has very
onerous disclosure requirements about very specific elements,
such as you have just articulated.
While we are under some pretty rigorous open records
requirements under State law, there are things that can be kept
discrete. What we do not want to do with our municipal water
systems, what we do not want to do with our telecommunications
systems is, by virtue of creating a security plan, to make
ourselves more vulnerable by providing access in a very public
way to these specifics. I think it is important for people to
know we have a plan, we have contingencies. It is well
coordinated. It is well funded, but the specifics and the
details and who does what and where the lock boxes are and all
those other things I think need to be kept both privileged and
guarded very cautiously.
We also share some concerns on the methamphetamine front
because, as you well know, you have access through the Internet
to that kind of information that allows you to cook that stuff
in your home.
Senator Bond. All the recipes are right there.
Ms. Savage. All the recipes are there, and you can go to
your local retail store and your grocery store and buy most of
the ingredients that you need.
So, we have access to information, but how that information
gets used is probably the key.
Mr. O'Malley. If there were one thing you could do to help
us, it would be to provide--I think all the mayors would jump
up and shout hallelujah on this. If there were just one thing
you could do right now on the funding front, it is to come up
with a way to reimburse us for at least some of the overtime
expense that we are suffering with our police department.
Senator Bond. Do you have any problem with that information
problem?
Mr. O'Malley. Yes, sir.
Senator Bond. Are you concerned about giving people too
much of a road map? They do not even have to visit Baltimore to
find out where----
Senator Mikulski. Senator, we have more than three tourist
attractions.
Senator Bond. These are just the three biggest ones. The
Gateway Arch--never mind. Never mind.
Mr. O'Malley. Senator, if you notice on your way up 95 as
you pass the home of the Super Bowl champion Ravens, PSI Net,
and also Camden Yards, and also off there is the B&O Railroad
Museum--this is where the railroad started, Baltimore--and also
the home of the Constellation, if you look off to the right,
you will see a bunch of chemical plants. They actually had made
the mistake at one point, just a couple months ago, of posting
sort of the radius around there, the response times, doing
exactly what you talked about. In the interest of notifying the
public of what was there, we created a road map for somebody
that wanted to mess with it. But that has been taken off the
web site.
Senator Bond. We were happy to lend you briefly the
Lombardi Trophy, but it is coming back to St. Louis.
Senator Mikulski. Your time has expired. Your time has
expired.
Senator Bond. Thank you all very much.
Mr. Kirk. Senator Bond, the only thing I would echo, to
make your point real, is obviously any help you can give us on
that. In our city, of the $1.2 million that we have spent in
extra security since the bombing, over half of that has been
securing our water facility and plants for many of the reasons
you articulated. I know the numbers are even more astounding in
Baltimore because of the harbor. Obviously any help you could
give us on that would be appreciated.
I was desperate, having worked here, not to mention
anything about football, but since you all kept bringing it up,
but I guess all we can say these days is thank God for the
Washington Redskins.
Senator Bond. Listen, Kansas Chiefs appreciate them too.
That is the only team we have been able to beat.
Mr. Kirk. Senator, thank you.
Ms. Savage. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. I want to make some remarks and then go
to a few questions. I know that your conference has adjourned,
and we thank you for making the time for this excellent
conversation today.
First of all, more Senators wanted to be here. There are 50
of us in the Hart Building. The Hart Building is where the
anthrax letter first appeared, and so there were all kinds of
security briefings. So, I know many of my colleagues wanted to
be here. The briefing had to be for the Senator and their chief
of staff by themselves. I do not know. They could still be
getting the briefing. So, that is one thing.
INTERACTION WITH THE OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY
The second thing is a recommendation, not to pass the buck,
because I want to come back to what we are doing or should do
with you. I would hope that the mayors, both the Conference and
the League--and I would recommend NACO, the National
Association of Counties, because in our State we have Mayor
O'Malley, but we have communities, for example, in the capital
region with County Executive Duncan and County Executive Curry
that are essentially big city mayors with a different type of
title. But I would recommend that the leadership, through an
executive committee or whatever, really ask for a meeting with
Governor Ridge. These face-to-face conversations--the
practicality of the issues you have to deal with, plus the
integration of the issues and the lack of resources and right
now a structure that is trickle-down money. You have got
trickle-down information and you have got trickle-down money.
So, I really would recommend that you reach out to him and ask
for such a meeting.
Mayor Savage, did you want to comment on that?
Ms. Savage. I was just going to comment, Madam Chair, that
the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors,
the National Association of Counties, the National Association
of State Legislators, the Governors Association--there are two
or three others--are working together to come up with a well
coordinated statement and an opportunity to meet with Governor
Ridge.
Mr. O'Malley. And there was a recommendation today at the
Conference that we create a permanent board of advisors that
includes--and I think the police chiefs are with us on this.
Senator Mikulski. That would be perfect because we could
have ongoing conversation. Our staffs could be working with
yours because we are a work in progress.
Ms. Savage. You bet.
I brought my police chief who is the Vice Chairman of the
Major City Chiefs. They are meeting just next week and will be
meeting with Governor Ridge as well. So, that is beginning to
happen.
Senator Mikulski. First of all, I think the National
Governors Association will have their own way. This is not to
separate you two, because in some ways your fortunes are
currently tied to the Governors. And we respect the Governors.
Obviously, President Bush has picked some of the top people for
his own cabinet.
But cities, municipalities are in a totally different
category because of exactly the way Federal funds come to you
not only for homeland security but community development block
money, the Cops on the Beat program. We could do maybe new
cops, but we have to think about it. The excellent issues that
you brought up that many of your public safety personnel also
are providing the national security forces to serve abroad and
that there is a big gap in terms of their income, which before
we had the anthrax attack on us at the capital, was an issue I
was working on with our defense committee.
This is why these issues need to come to the fore because
for as hard-working as Governor Ridge is, I am not sure he is
going to hear the whole story. Just like we do not believe in
trickle-down information, we cannot have trickle-up.
LEAD FEDERAL AGENCY
So, anyway, having said that, let me go to another issue,
and then I am going to go to existing programs, new programs.
If in fact you as mayors either hear the threat of an
attack or an actual attack has occurred in your community where
it would have consequences for your community, who do you think
is in charge and who would you call and who would you expect a
call from? Who do you think is in charge?
Mr. Kirk. I do not know who we think is in charge, but I
can tell you the citizens are going to call 911.
Senator Mikulski. I know, but I am asking you that. No, I
really need a practical answer here.
Mr. Kirk. I would say, at least right now, Senator, we have
one joint terrorism task force that is coordinated with our
local FBI and our police chief.
Senator Mikulski. But who would be in charge in working
with you from the Federal Government? Are you going to call the
FBI for anthrax? Do you believe that the FBI is in charge?
Mr. Kirk. No, no. In that case, in anthrax, I would presume
that it would be FEMA.
Senator Mikulski. This is not a confrontational question.
Mr. Kirk. No, no.
Senator Mikulski. It goes to, quite frankly, what I am
apprehensive about. I believe that we do not know who is in
charge. Do you know who is in charge?
Mr. Kirk. I am only just saying FEMA because that is the
only model we have right now. We do not know.
Ms. Savage. If it is a front end--we had a plane hovering
over our reservoir lake. Some fisherman thought he saw
something come out of the airplane. The FBI was notified. They
responded. It was nothing.
If it is an after-the-fact, we respond initially and then
subsequently turn it over either to the FBI, or if there really
is an incident, then call in FEMA. So, it depends a little bit
on what the circumstances are.
Mr. O'Malley. Insofar as threats are concerned, it is the
FBI. Insofar as mitigating it, it depends on the type of thing.
Most likely it would be FEMA, depending on the size of the
casualties.
Senator Mikulski. So, you think then that FEMA would be the
coordinator of the technical assistance and advice to help you.
Let us take what happened to Mayor Williams, and then let
us take what happened to you, Mayor, last week. And then we did
the lessons learned from it. Mayor Williams is the Mayor of the
capital of the United States of America. It is also the home of
a lot of very hard-working people who work for the Federal
Government, who are often underpaid, undervalued, and under-
respected like postal employees. Brentwood happens. I wish
Mayor Williams were here, but that poor guy is running up and
down right now. Who do you think should be in charge to have
responded to Mayor Williams? Some people were, but suppose that
had happened to you.
Ms. Savage. If that had happened in Tulsa, the initial call
would have gone to the local police, subsequently to the FBI,
and then in terms of coming in to try to mitigate or test, I am
not sure if it is FEMA or the CDC or who comes in to actually
do----
Senator Mikulski. Who would you have gone to, to help you
manage the fear?
Ms. Savage. I think you have to do that--we all lived
through that. Anytime you have a Federal declaration of an
emergency, whether the Governor is by your side and State
officials are by your side or Federal officials are by your
side, you are still talking about it locally.
Senator Mikulski. Mayor Savage, who would you have wanted
to have turned to if you had to talk to the people of Tulsa
about a possible anthrax attack at their local postal
distribution center?
Ms. Savage. I would be holding press conferences. I would
be talking through the media.
Senator Mikulski. I know you would, but what Federal
officials would you want with you and who would you have
contacted to get those Federal officials?
Ms. Savage. I would have asked my police chief to call the
FBI Director and I would have called FEMA directly or called
them through the State agency, one or the other. If I did not
get a response one way, I would go a different direction with
it.
Senator Mikulski. Well, I know you would.
Mr. O'Malley. Can I change my answer?
Senator Mikulski. Yes.
Mr. O'Malley. In the event that there were an actual attack
like Brentwood, definitely the police department would be
notifying the FBI. At the same time, the health commissioner
would be there responding with the Cipro packs and trying to
secure the perimeter and all of that stuff, notifying the local
hospitals and probably bringing in Secretary Thompson and his
folks with regard to containing the situation and making sure
that we set up the treatment and triage and all of that stuff
and make sure it is contained. In fact, we are doing something
like that today because our Governor wanted to go to the extra
precautionary precaution of reaching out.
Senator Mikulski. I know.
Ms. Savage. It is also a crime scene. You have that
element.
Senator Mikulski. Again, I know the clock is ticking on
this hearing.
Here is what happened to us. The FBI came in and it was
both a crime scene and a public health incident. This means
that people are coming in for two different reasons. What we
have to be clear about--and this is, again, a work in
progress--is that this has to be simultaneous. It cannot be let
us go in and gather the evidence, and then let us go in and--
because the evidence has to be quickly distributed to public
health people to find out what was in, say, an envelope. It
could be somebody's ghoulish joke of putting Sweet N Low in an
envelope, or it could be anthrax or something else along very
grim lines.
So, I think we need better coordination. You are right. FBI
is crisis management. FEMA is consequence management. That is
the way it looks on paper and on table-top. But I believe that
mayors and Governors need a one-stop shop to essentially
activate whatever is needed, once the situation is described or
when you would get an alarm, as did Mayor O'Malley, from the
FBI and he had to take action, that along with the notice,
there would already be the mobilization of Federal resources
had that notice of a possible attack on Baltimore taken place,
so that not everybody just sits around and says, well, we told
O'Malley it might happen. In other words, the resources should
already be mobilized as his health commissioner is taking
action.
But some things like what happened to our Mayor Giuliani
just overwhelms, just sheerly overwhelms the local responders,
and the local responders, the all-hazards responders are the
first to go down either in your public health area or like with
your police and your fire.
Ms. Savage. I go back in my mind to Oklahoma City and to
the last tornado declaration that we had requiring Federal aid.
Of course, Oklahoma City was a crime scene, so you had FBI and
ATF and other folks coming in. But normally you have the
Governor who triggers the declaration of a natural disaster
that brings in the Federal assistance and they take over a
certain aspect of it.
But it is fragmented, Madam Chair, and in many cases you
have to rely upon relationships that you have established over
a period of time in the law enforcement community and in the
health and human services community, et cetera.
Senator Mikulski. I know the press is leaving.
One of the things you should know is that, as I work with
Senators Kennedy and Frist on bioterrorism legislation, it will
be very complementary in terms of assistance to State and local
health departments both for biosurveillance and other very
important tools. But one of the things I am putting in
legislation is that there needs to be a designated Federal
source for public information and that there be a designated
single voice who would coordinate it. So, it could be the head
of CDC bringing in other experts and so on. Then also, as my
conversation with Mayor O'Malley and what he went through, you
need one voice and multimedia and one voice that can call upon
experts.
I think the Giuliani model and the Williams model, who
actually lived through it--Mayor O'Malley lived through the
threat--has been an excellent one. Giuliani ran the press
conferences. What Giuliani did, though, was call upon the
experts, Federal and State, to do that. He did two things. He
inspired confidence that the incident, as horrific as it was,
was being dealt with. Therefore, in the way he did it, he
managed the fear.
Mayor Williams has done the same thing as he has done his
press conferences, calling up his public health officer, his
police chief, et cetera.
But you need to have the resources of the Federal
Government because in these kinds of battles, they could
overwhelm you. Plus, because we are what we are, the Federal
Government, with the Centers for Disease Control, the National
Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, access
also to Department of Defense technology, we can be an
incredible resource to you both in terms of information and
then because of the treatment.
I am glad that Mayor Williams and Mayor O'Malley had
medication ready. But in the event of a horrific incident, had
this threat been true, O'Malley would have had the national
stockpile.
So, those are the kinds of things that I am thinking about.
Am I on the right track here?
Mr. Kirk. Absolutely.
Senator Mikulski. In other words, that you have the
resources.
Mr. O'Malley. Whatever the answers, we have to have a
protocol in place. Again, the one good thing that came out of
Oklahoma City was we got the domestic preparedness grants
through the Justice Department and Defense, and right or wrong,
at least we have a protocol now, and we know if anything
happens, where that response team is going to be, who has what
role, and at least we have that. What we do not have is
anything in a model in this other sense.
But I think what Mayor O'Malley says is important, and the
same thing you have said. We have to ensure that Governor Ridge
has the authority to do more than the Drug Czar.
Senator Mikulski. Governor Ridge is to be the leader.
Now, let me just say a couple of things about us, meaning
the Feds, and let us go to FEMA. First of all, we will be
moving our appropriations. And you are exactly right. The FEMA
fire grants, which was to protect the protector, have the
ability to apply for that, as well as new gear, initially I
think is focused on small communities who have volunteer fire
departments who are trying to do this on their own time and
their own dime. And you can agree, you cannot do this on fish
fries, bingo, and tip jars.
At the same time, you are the resource not only for major
population areas, but then you become the resource for other
smaller entities. So, we need to look at that.
Now, OMB wants to create some type of HAZMAT block grants
to go beyond the fire department. Once we get information from
OMB, we would like to get it to the Conference of Mayors for
quick feedback so that we could share this with OMB. They are
kind of inventing things. They have not consulted with
Congress, and I am not so sure they have consulted with you.
But as soon as they consult with Congress, we will consult with
you, as well as the Governors, because Governors and mayors are
kind of where it is at. So, that is that.
The other thing, in terms of the existing programs, I think
we also have to look at training. From what I can understand,
there are 20 different Federal agencies doing any terrorism
training. There are 120 Federal anti-terrorism training
courses. This looks like this needs to be streamlined. You
know, I sound like I am in one of our churches.
Mr. Kirk. No. You are on a roll. Do not stop.
Senator Mikulski. Am I witnessing here?
Ms. Savage. Hallelujah.
Mr. Kirk. We will say amen.
Senator Mikulski. Should this be an area of an initiative
to streamline? See, I think streamlining could be done by
really an executive order, which would go directly to President
Bush through Mr. Ridge.
But right now, I think we need to fund existing programs
and then look at what you are saying for the new ones, whether
it is this homeland block grant.
But what I would like from you, Mayor O'Malley, and from
the mayors is if we would say, do a new homeland security block
grant, what would be its elements, in other words what it would
fund? And I say this with enormous collegiality. As we are
moving on homeland security, everybody is trying to hitchhike
on this for all the other things that we do not give you enough
money for.
Mr. O'Malley. Right.
Ms. Savage. Absolutely.
HOMELAND SECURITY BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
Senator Mikulski. So, they are trying to hitchhike, and
therefore, it looks like everybody is trying to have--some of
the requests are excessive or whatever.
But really, what would be funded under a homeland security
block grant? I like your Project Impact idea, the Nunn-Lugar,
whatever. But let us look at existing programs where you would
need more money. Let us look at new ways for existing programs
and then some of these new ideas, which I think are
tremendously interesting.
Ms. Savage. Madam Chair, I would add to that, because I
think you are absolutely on the right track, standards of
performance that you think are important.
Senator Mikulski. For the training?
Ms. Savage. That you think are important for communities to
produce. If you are going to appropriate block grants for
training, for equipment, for a variety of things, what
standards are we meeting, what performance expectations do you
have? Because I think, especially on the training side, I was
unaware there were so many agencies providing training, but the
training may vary and it may not be as good one place as the
other.
Senator Mikulski. What was the block grant that we had once
for crime?
Ms. Savage. Local law enforcement block grants right now,
LLEBG. Oh, LEAA. That is way back when.
Senator Mikulski. My mind is like the CNN screen. I have
got you on my main screen. I have got something on the side and
something running. You know how this goes. You can see why he
and I get along.
Senator Mikulski. Do you remember that? Gosh, when they
first came out, it was a disaster. Everybody was in buying a
lot of gear from a lot of consultants that ultimately did not
add to the security of communities and hit you with a lot of
maintenance costs for essentially junk.
And we do not want this here. In other words, if you need
telecommunications equipment, terrific. If you need to have the
flexibility for training, but also then resources, that after
people have been trained, that they do have what they need,
fine. And I am not saying we should go the block grant route,
but we need to be able to propose these ideas, and what we are
looking for for the block grant would be exactly what you are
saying.
But here, right now, we are going to, in this year's
appropriations, have $150 million for the fire grant program. I
wanted to take it to $300 million. So did my dear colleague.
And we thought we were going to get this in the emergency money
that is coming through for New York and other communities. That
is when OMB began to invent this HAZMAT thing. You see what I
am saying?
Now, the nice thing about the fire department help was that
we know what it is for. It is to protect the protector,
particularly through protective gear, knowing that our
responders are now all hazard responders. And then the other is
for the equipment that you, you meaning your fire departments,
would need. That is so specific, it has not gone off.
You are exactly right. I do not know which one of you said
it. We had a $100 million program. We got $3 billion worth of
requests. I read a lot of requests out of my own State, which
was for $38 million. Every one of them was worthwhile. I mean,
I could have written you a check for every single one because
they all were in those two categories.
So, I am not for creating a whole big, new program just to
create it. Let us use what we have existing and then really
listen to the mayors and the Governors and then come up with
what should be the new.
PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE SECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES
Mr. O'Malley. If I could add one other consideration to
your plate, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. Yes, and then Mayor Savage and then Mayor
Kirk, and then we are going to wrap up.
Mr. O'Malley. Whose responsibility is it to protect the
public against the ubiquitous chemicals that all industry and
private people transport and that go through our population
centers? I would rather not have to surveil, have security
people watching CSX lines, and have to build a fence around the
open rail yards that store chlorine tanks.
Senator Mikulski. I do not think that is your
responsibility.
Mr. O'Malley. I do not think it should be local governments
either. I think that should be something these private
companies do. But right now we are guarding them.
Senator Mikulski. Well, I think you have two things. One,
public rail facilities. In other words, public infrastructure
should be protected, yes, like the railroad tunnels. Private
entities. I really think that there either has to be private
responsibility or some type of partnership.
I know what Mayor Griffin said and he loved Bush's recovery
plan. But I would much rather be giving tax breaks to do a
couple of different things. One, for the private sector to
upgrade their infrastructure and let us have a public/private
partnership, exactly what you are talking about. Some of the
cargo tunnels would be an example in our corridor.
Then there is this whole other world we have to be thinking
of. We are focused on homeland security, but we still have to
educate our children, keep our libraries open, do the regular,
usual, and customary of municipal government. Trash has to be
collected. Things have to be recycled. You have got to comply
with the mandate to educate special needs children, and which
we only pay 10 percent of the cost when we promised you 40
percent of the cost, meet the needs of those children, but not
short-change you in responsibility sharing. So, this is where I
think we should be spending our money.
I make $150,000 a year. I do not need another tax break. I
really do not need another tax break. But what I do think is--
except in my property tax.
Senator Mikulski. But I really think what I am worried
about is that as you meet these costs, the money has got to
come from somewhere, and you have got schools, libraries,
special education. Literally all children are special. Some
have unique needs.
Am I on the right track here, that this is one of the
things that puts you on kind of Mylanta that you are going to
wonder how to do both?
Ms. Savage. Well, Madam Chair, we are breaking ground on
our HOPE VI on Tuesday. Thank you very much. And we are very
excited about it. So, I think that is the point you would hear
from all of us, that life in a community has to continue. You
have to educate children. You have to rebuild your
neighborhoods. You have to have good quality housing and good
health care.
I would make, in addition to what Mayor O'Malley said about
the private sector and their responsibility for hazardous
materials, a general statement that I believe at the local
level we have a responsibility to provide basic public safety
services, police and fire. What I have been trying to
emphasize--and I think my colleagues--we have some
extraordinary costs and functions now that exceed that basic
level of service, and that is where I would draw the line. I
would say local communities provide your basic service, but the
overtime, the hazardous materials, et cetera ought to be
addressed.
Thank you.
Senator Mikulski. Well, Mayor O'Malley, thank you also for
bringing to our attention the fact that MEMA has not released
any money for fiscal year 1999, fiscal year 2000, and fiscal
year 2001.
Mr. Carliner, I need you to write a letter to Governor
Glendening. Let us ask where this money is because it should
not be just sitting there. We worked very hard to put that in
the appropriations, and it has got to get out and it has got to
get out fast. So, we thank you.
Mr. O'Malley. Thank you for all you do for America's
cities, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. Well, this was really informative. So, I
want to just thank you on behalf of the Senate. For those who
are not here, we have a permanent record.
Really, you are going to have some type of task force or
group, and we would like to have an ongoing relationship with
you in two areas: homeland security and what you think we
really need to be looking at, particularly in our issues like
HUD and EPA.
CONCLUSION OF HEARING
So, God bless you. God bless America. This subcommittee is
recessed until further call of the Chair.
[Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m., Thursday, October 25, the hearing
was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
-