By Jordan Sandler, USCM Intern
August 8, 2005

Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley in a major speech at the National Press Club on August 2nd, discussed the need for greater homeland security funding and specific actions that local governments should take.

O’Malley, who serves as co-chair of the Conference of Mayors Task Force on Homeland Security, said that there are three basic questions that citizens want answered with respect to homeland security. “These basic questions are: What are we trying to accomplish? Who is responsible for accomplishing it? And what opportunities could we create for our nation, our neighborhoods, and our world if we were to get this job done?” O’Malley asked.

“Washington, New York City, Madrid, and London. The ability to take human lives is part of the terrorist equation, but with 80 percent of our gross national product produced by metropolitan economies, disruption and economic costs are also what make the cities of major metropolitan areas prime targets. So, how do we make our metropolitan areas safer?” O’Malley questioned. He described eight points that he said would improve homeland security for major metropolitan areas if implemented. He listed them as vulnerability assessments, personal protective equipment for all first responders, interoperable communications, bio-surveillance systems, more highly developed intelligence sharing capacity, increased training and preparedness exercises, closed circuit television systems to secure infrastructure, and improved port security.

“Not every major metropolitan area is home to a port, but shipping containers unloaded at America’s ports pass through every population center in the country,” said O’Malley. He described the current state of port security in America as having “gaping vulnerabilities” and said that they need to be secured before something happens. Stressing the need for clearly defined roles for cities, states, and the federal government with respect to homeland security, O’Malley said, “we absolutely must strengthen, and not weaken, the public safety capacity of our metropolitan cores.”. He also stressed the need for “maintenance, recruitment, training and coordination” by local governments of first responders.

As for states, O’Malley said that they also have many important functions including: evaluating preparedness within the state’s borders and establishing standards, enforcing updates of vulnerability assessments, maintaining National Guard units for contingencies, and ensuring that all available funds are invested in a timely, efficient, and effective manner.

With respect to the federal government’s role, O’Malley said, “Mayors and county executives are not asking for their fire and police departments to be federally funded. They are simply asking for federal help in covering the additional costs brought about by this foreign threat to America’s national security.”

O’Malley said that great opportunities that could spring from investment in homeland security technologies including “watch centers” that could not only monitor possible terrorist threats, but also improve public safety with respect to other criminals and types of hazards, closed circuit television systems that could free poor neighborhoods from drug dealers, unified intelligence systems that could combat terrorism as well as items such as money laundering and document forging and improved border security that would cut supplies of illegal drugs.

The mayor said that investment in homeland security could lead to economic benefits. “States like California and Massachusetts built their economies on the defense investments of the Cold War; states like Maryland have the opportunity to grow their economies by making needed contributions in a war where technology, science, and medicine are the keys to victory,” he said.

Following his speech, O’Malley responded to written questions submitted from the sold-out audience. Several questions focused on issues of homeland security funding and how funds should be disbursed. O’Malley said that the real problem with homeland security funding is the “revenue neutral” policy of the current Administration, for example, the policy that no new funds, such as COPS and local block grants, be allocated but rather the already available funds be realigned to meet the needs of the current security situation. Also, O’Malley indicated that funds should be given out to different areas based on threat levels. When asked for advice on how other cities should spend homeland security funds, O’Malley responded that they should invest in interoperable communications, cameras to monitor public places, and much more drilling and training for homeland security personnel.