Cities See Biological, Cyber-Terror as Top Threats One Year After 9-11; NLC Calls for Better Federal Partnership to Address Threats 9/4/2002
From: Michael Reinemer, 202-626-3003 or 703-966-9574 (cell) or John Pionke, 202-626-3051, both of the National League of Cities WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 -- Nearly a year after September 11, cities put biological, chemical and cyber-terrorism at the top of their list of concerns about terrorist threats, says a new survey of 725 cities by the National League of Cities (NLC). But some top concerns, like cyber-terrorism, are addressed by only a small number of cities in their anti-terrorism planning. The fiscal and economic aftermath of September 11 left about half of U.S. cities less able to meet their financial needs (42 percent of all cities and 52 percent of large cities -- 100,000-plus in population. About two-thirds mentioned a need for funding to pay for equipment (70 percent of respondents) and training (62 percent) to support local homeland security efforts in the future. On the positive side, cities reported greater cooperation with other levels of government, the private sector, and nonprofits since September 11. "Cities are the natural targets of this evolving terrorist threat, and we have risen to the challenge of protecting citizens over the past year," said National League of Cities President Karen Anderson, mayor of Minnetonka, Minn. "But even though cities are at the very center of homeland security, they seem to be an afterthought when it comes to federal and state priorities for providing funding and communicating key information." "We have immediate needs such as fixing radio interoperability problems, repayment of local police for guarding airports, firefighter grants, and other homeland security needs that the Congress and President need to act on," Anderson said. "Funds for these urgent priorities were cut in the 2002 supplemental spending bill." Biological, Chemical, and Cyber-Terrorism Are Top Concerns The survey of cities found that biological terrorism topped the list of current concerns (mentioned by 82 percent of all cities and 95 percent of large cities), followed by chemical threats (81 and 92 percent), and cyber-terrorism (80 and 91 percent). Other top concerns were car bombs (70 percent of all cities and 91 percent of large cities), "dirty" bombs that release nuclear material (67 and 85 percent), radiological attacks (62 and 78 percent), suicide bombs (62 and 82 percent), and airplanes used as weapons (60 and 76 percent). City leaders in larger cities were more likely to express concern about all types of terrorism. For some threats, there are large gaps between concern and planning. Cyber-terrorism is a concern of 80 percent of all cities but only 26 percent said their plans address cyber-terrorism. Among large cities, 91 percent are concerned about cyber-terrorism but only 43 percent have developed strategies that address that threat in their anti-terrorism plans. Sixty-seven percent of all cities are concerned about dirty bombs but only 29 percent address that threat in their plans. Among large cities, 86 percent are concerned about dirty bombs and 54 percent have addressed the threat in their plans. The survey also found that only one in five cities (20 percent) had integrated the color-coded Homeland Security Advisory System into local planning efforts. Thirty-six percent said they had not integrated the federal alert system with their plans and 32 percent said they were working on it. Slightly more of large cities said they had integrated the alert system into their plans (27 percent) and 44 percent said they were working on it. Placing the threat of terrorism in perspective, cities cited traditional, ongoing issues more often than terrorism as one of their top concerns. Ranking first was the need for traditional public safety and crime prevention (cited by 62 percent of all cities and 69 percent of large cities), followed by the economic conditions (55 percent of all cities and 53 percent of large cities), and infrastructure investment (44 percent of all cities). Among all cities, terrorism readiness ranked fourth with 34 percent mentioning it among top priorities. However, among large cities, terrorism tied with economic conditions as the second most often cited concern (53 percent). The survey was conducted by the National League of Cities in July and August of 2002. Out of the 725 respondents, 142 were cities with populations of 100,000 or more. The National League of Cities is the oldest and largest national organization representing municipal governments throughout the United States. With a membership of 1,800 cities and towns, as well as 49 state associations, NLC serves as a resource and advocate for 18,000 U.S. cities that serve 225 million people. For details about the survey and information about how cities are commemorating September 11, see http://www.nlc.org. ---- National League of Cities / Homeland Security Survey Summary September 2002 Top Terrorism Concerns for Cities ............................Percent of......Percent of Cities ............................All Cities......100,000-plus Pop. Biological ........................82 pct........95 pct. Chemical...........................81............92 Cyber-terrorism....................80............91 Car bomb...........................70............91 "Dirty" nuclear/conventional bomb..67............86 Radiological.......................62............78 Suicide bomber.....................62............82 Airplane used as weapon............60............76 -- Types of Terrorist Attacks Addressed in Plans ...............................All Cities.......Cities ...........................................100,000-plus Pop. Biological.........................70 pct........89 pct. Chemical...........................69............88 Airplane use as weapon.............50............73 Car bomb...........................44............73 Radiological.......................44............74 Nuclear............................42............67 Suicide bomber.....................31............49 "Dirty" nuclear/conventional bomb..29............54 Cyber-terrorism....................26............43 -- Cities Using Color-Coded Homeland Security Advisory System ...............................All Cities....Cities ..........................................100,000-plus Pop. Yes, using it...................20 pct........27 pct. Working on it...................32............44 Not using it....................36............20 Don't know......................12........... 9 -- Cities' Increased Cooperation Since 9-11 ..............................All Cities.......Cities ............................................100,000-plus Pop. With county....................81 pct..........83 pct. State..........................79..............92 Other cities...................76..............92 Federal........................67..............90 Media .........................60..............81 Neighborhoods..................56..............75 Private sector.................52..............68 Civic groups...................51..............68 Nonprofits.....................38..............63 Councils of government, MPOs...33..............46 -- Fiscal Fallout after 9-11 in Cities ................................All Cities.......Cites ............................................100,000-plus Pop Better able to meet city financial needs.....................1 pct.........1 pct. Little or no change.................57............47 Less able to meet city financial needs....................42............52 Public safety spending increased....47............67 Public safety spending showed little or no change................50............30 Public safety spending decreased.....3............ 3 -- Priorities for Federal or State Homeland Security Funds ............................All Cities........Cities .......................................100,000-plus Pop. Equipment.....................70 pct........78 pct. Training......................62............59 Threat prevention.............51............52 Personnel.....................48............58 Protecting infrastructure.....42............43 Regional cooperation..........31............27 -- Priorities for Other (non-financial) Federal or State Homeland Security Assistance ............................All Cities........Cities .......................................100,000-plus Pop. Technical assistance............49 pct........58 pct. Regional coordination...........47............58 Threat prevention...............44............51 Protecting infrastructure.......39............36 Training........................35............43 Personnel.......................26............18 -- Facilities that Need to Be Secured in City ........ ................................All Cities......Cities .........................................100,000-plus Pop. Water supply........................82 pct.........92 pct. Government buildings (local, state, federal)............77.............92 Schools.............................66.............77 Transportation infrastructure.......66.............82 Hospitals and medical facilities....62.............88 Communications and technology infrastructure.....................61.............88 Stadiums, arenas, convention centers.................31.............67 Ports of entry (airports, harbors)..29.............55 Other large buildings (e.g. high-rises), landmarks.......28.............54 Power plants........................26.............50 Other federal facilities (buildings, research labs).........21.............51 Military facilities.................17.............37 International borders.............. 5.............10 -- Top Needs of Cities ..............................All Cities........Cities .........................................100,000-plus Pop. Traditional public safety and crime prevention ...............62 pct.........69 pct. Better economic conditions.......55.............53 Investment in infrastructure (roads, sewers, etc.)...........44.............26 Investment in terrorism prevention, readiness...........34.............53 Support for local, regional development.....................26.............15 Revitalized neighborhoods........24.............27 Investment in public education, youth, families.................23.............27 |