There are communities that have not been as proactive as say, San Francisco and Oakland in having a mutual plan in how to respond or how to prevent certain attacks.
What we're really practicing is risk mitigation. You will not be able to say everywhere every city is safe at all times. What you want to say is, are we continually getting safer?
Since Sept. 11th, we've provided more than ten billion dollars in funding to states and urban areas for these types of measures.
No one is guaranteed to be on the list one year to the next.
It is hard for us to know right now whether or not the localities have over-invested or under-invested. Once we have this document and a national plan, we can see how they've been spending their money.
We do not have any reason to believe there are inaccuracies but we've agreed to make sure our data matches their data.
We are reaching out to those congressional offices to make sure they are aware that those (military) installations are factored into the equation.
This year, we identified 66 ports that we view as the greatest risk, and only those were eligible to apply for the funds. Not all 66 were funded.
Each exercise has gotten larger. So it's fair to say this drill will include more participants and likely more cost, as well.
There's nothing that would restrict a city from allocating funds to a church or synagogue that faces a grave danger or risk. We have always said we have felt this was redundant and unnecessary.
Despite the scoring, the results are absolutely in accord with our risk assessment.
The administration has not supported the funding for physical fitness equipment as part of the fire grant program. Physical fitness is an individual responsibility.