An Analysis of Federal, State, and Local Homeland Security Budgets

Transcription

1 CDA Center for Data Analysis An Analysis of, State, and Homeland Budgets Matt A. Mayer CDA9- March 9, 9 WA Key Jurisdictions Receiving Funds from the Department of Homeland OR MN WI MI NY MA CA NV AZ CO MO IL IN OH KY TN PA DC NC NJ MD GA TX LA FL HI Areas Receiving at Least $5 Million from DHS, FY FY Counties Cities

2 A Report of The Heritage Center for Data Analysis AN ANALYSIS OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL HOMELAND SECURITY BUDGETS MATT A. MAYER CDA9- March 9, 9 4 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC () NOTE: Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.

3 CDA4 November 9, CDA9- March 5, 9 AN ANALYSIS OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL HOMELAND SECURITY BUDGETS MATT A. MAYER Following the terrorist attacks on September,, and Hurricane Katrina in, Americans generally assumed that authorities in Washington, D.C., would shoulder the primary responsibility for securing the safety of the American homeland. This assumption is understandable given that over the past half century the federal government has amassed far more authority than was ever envisioned in the U.S. Constitution. Despite a rich history of civilian defense in which states and localities have taken responsibility for their own affairs, we are federalizing more and more of the homeland security mission. This approach is not only constitutionally incorrect, but the states themselves could actually do the job better. Washington s one-size-fits-all solutions rarely succeed. The country s needs are too diverse, federal resources are physically too far from any one location to secure rapid response, and federal decision making is notoriously inept. The Homeland and the States Project seeks to place responsibility where it should be according to the Constitution and where the most efficient, effective leadership resides. This project focuses on four areas where a state and local lead is preferable: preparedness for and resiliency against terrorist attacks and natural disasters, disaster response, interior illegal immigration enforcement, and counterterrorism. This project involves four key phases: Research and outreach to state and local associations in Washington, D.C.; local outreach using regional roundtables; Drafting, circulating for review and comment, and finalizing a suite of solutions across the four areas of focus for states and localities to enact or adopt; and Launching an adoption campaign. As part of the research process, we have gathered the homeland security budget data for specific states, cities, and counties; analyzed disaster response activities at the federal level historically; compiled initiatives and legislative actions to combat illegal immigration; and developed a counterterrorism capabilities survey for states and localities. STATE AND LOCAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO HOMELAND SECURITY Since the 9/ attacks, the understanding of homeland security has taken a predominantly federal-centric meaning. Ironically, with the failed response to Hurricane Katrina this preference for a federal approach became even more ensconced. Given the limited homeland security resources available to the federal government compared to resources at the state and local level, a federally driven approach is a mistake, especially as federal funding reaches historic deficit levels. From a personnel standpoint, the Bureau of Investigation and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the two federal agencies most involved in law enforcement activities in the states, have less than 5, agents for the entire United States. In comparison, state and local governments across America have more than million law enforcement personnel. When firefighters and emergency management personnel are included, the state and local personnel advantage is roughly,, to 5,.

4 In terms of budgets, while the total budget for all of the activities of the U.S. Department of Homeland (DHS) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) from to is greater than the states and localities highlighted in this report, it is likely smaller than total state and local government spending on homeland security activities. Specifically, the eight-year combined budget for the DHS and DOJ is roughly $33 billion. The total eight-year homeland security budget (law enforcement, the fire service, and emergency management) for just the 6 states and District of Columbia and the 85 cities and counties that comprise the top 43 jurisdictions that are eligible for federal Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) funds due to the risk of a terrorist attack is at least $ billion, or 68 percent of the combined DHS and DOJ budget. With the homeland security budgets of the remaining 4 states and thousands of cities and counties combined with the state military affairs budgets, state and local homeland security spending certainly exceeds federal spending. HOMELAND SECURITY AS A NATIONAL ENTERPRISE Fundamentally, we should view homeland security as a national enterprise, not as another opportunity for the federal government to take power and responsibility away from states and localities or to supplant state and local funds with federal funds. In regard to states and localities, much of the debate inside the Beltway revolves around the yearly federal homeland security grant allocations and the allowable categories on which recipients are permitted to spend the funds. At its post-9/ peak, federal homeland security grant funds totaled less than $4 billion per year spread over hundreds, if not thousands, of jurisdictions across the United States. While the Clinton Administration created grant programs specifically aimed at paying for the personnel costs of state and local law enforcement officers, the Bush Administration typically took the position that personnel costs were inherently state and local obligations. The aim of federal homeland security grants should be centered on building critical capabilities, which includes buying equipment, training first preventers and responders, and conducting exercises to test competency. This approach makes sense, and the Obama Administration should carefully weigh the options before making any drastic changes in that policy. Arguably, hiring a local first responder with federal funds supplants rather than supplements state or local funding. Conversely, acquiring a decontamination capability for chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents with federal funds supplements the state or local funds that were already used to hire the local first responder who will use the capability. Using finite federal funds for filling core personnel needs only ensures that states and localities will divert their own resources to other uses and that critical homeland security capabilities will not be developed as personnel costs a key driver of the cost of government absorb an increasing share of federal grant funds. Moreover, providing federal funds to high-risk jurisdictions to prevent or respond to a terrorist attack given the national impact such an attack would have on the whole country is a defensible use of taxes paid by individuals living outside of those jurisdictions. The same argument cannot be made for using the taxes paid by Iowans to hire a police office in Rochester, New York, to battle chronic crime. If Rochester needs more police officers, then its citizens should pay for those positions. Admittedly, much of the focus on federal grant funds is driven by governors, mayors, city councilmen, and county commissioners (and their federal elected representatives) who are eager for the next round of federal government largesse. These jurisdictions need political leadership less focused on the relatively insignificant federal funds that they receive just $3 billion over eight years and more focused on ensuring that their public safety secretaries, state patrol superintendents, police chiefs, sheriffs, fire chiefs, homeland security advisers, and emergency management directors receive the necessary general-fund appropriations to hire the requisite number of personnel and to build the critical capabilities necessary in this age of terror. FEDERAL HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS homeland security grants represent only a small portion of the yearly state and local spending on homeland security, ranging from a high of 7.7 percent in in North Carolina to a low of. percent in in Arizona. Even given its unenviable designation as the terrorists top target, New York City s portion of federal homeland security funds never exceeded 5 percent from to. The eight-year average for the federal portion of homeland security in eight of the states including

5 the key states of California, Florida, and Illinois was 5 percent or less. California, the largest recipient of federal homeland security funds, received almost $.5 billion, which averaged only 3.3 percent of its total homeland security funds. Hawaii, the smallest recipient of federal homeland security funds, received just under $5 million. In many cases, the federal funds are needed to acquire critical capabilities, but in no case should the federal funding tail wag the state and local dog, as it does today given the plethora of federal mandates and requirements that accompany federal funds. From to, the combined budgets for law enforcement and the fire service increased by an average of 3 percent to 6 percent per year. Texas (8.3 percent), Arizona (8 percent), California (8 percent), and Florida (8 percent) led the way with the largest average increases. In Georgia, Illinois, and New York, the budgets grew by less than percent. In Louisiana, the average state and local budget actually decreased by.8 percent. While in many cases the budgets for emergency management agencies increased by sizable percentages, the amount appropriated from general fund dollars in real dollars was low, especially when compared to police, sheriff, and fire appropriations. Specifically, in the 3 jurisdictions where specific appropriations for only emergency management agencies could be determined, (68 percent) appropriated less than $,, in most years. In the other jurisdictions, the appropriations typically were less than $,5, per year. Most jurisdictions did not substantially increase emergency management appropriations after 9/ and Hurricane Katrina. Given the increase in Agency (FEMA) declarations over the past 6 years for routine natural disasters, which historically have been handled almost entirely by state and local governments, emergency management budgets at the state and local level should have similarly increased to deal with these disasters. As many experts have commented, FEMA s increased activity, including its 75 percent or more cost-share, has displaced state and local general fund investments in emergency management personnel and capabilities. It is time for state and local elected officials to take back the mantle of leadership that should come with their enormous investments in first preventers and responders. Because DHS has failed to determine which critical capabilities have been acquired with the $3 billion in federal homeland security grant funds allocated to states and localities thus far, state and local leaders should determine which capability gaps remain and spend their future federal funds to close those gaps. As the state, city, and county profiles contained in this report demonstrate, the instruments of national power do not reside on the banks of the Potomac River. Rather, the instruments of national power reside in the 5 state capitals and in the countless city halls and county commissions that appropriate billions of dollars annually for the men and women who patrol our streets, investigate potential terrorist plots, extinguish our structural and wild land fires, and respond in times of crises. The 43 UASI jurisdictions featured in this report contain approximately 45 million Americans, which is 47 percent of the total population of the United States. To serve these people, an enormous amount of America s critical infrastructure is also located in these jurisdictions. With so many people and so much critical infrastructure, these 43 urban areas possess large vulnerabilities, and an attack on one of them could have catastrophic national consequences. Given the propensity of terrorist groups to attack sites in large cities, we must ensure that these localities have the resources to keep us safe. Rather than continue to spread federal funds using an inch thick and a mile wide mentality, Congress should reform the federal grant programs to target the maximum amount of federal funds at the highest-risk states, cities, and counties where the funds could meaningfully increase the security of Americans. After seven years of forcing states to distribute 8 percent of funds in the Homeland Grant to cities and counties with. James Jay Carafano and Matt A. Mayer, FEMA and ism: Washington Is Moving in the Wrong Direction, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3, May 8,, at Matt A. Mayer and James Jay Carafano, After the 9/ Act: Homeland Grants Still Moving in the Wrong Direction, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 59, August 3,, at bg59.cfm. 3

6 little to no risk, Congress should allow them to keep percent so that they can build critical capabilities as quickly as possible. At the same time, Congress needs to reduce the number of urban areas eligible for the UASI program so that funds are not unnecessarily diluted by having too many mouths to feed, which is what happened in fiscal year (FY) 8 when the number of eligible jurisdictions was increased to 6. In FY 8, 4 urban areas (not including New York City, Houston, the Bay Area, and Jersey City Newark) received exactly 3 percent less than they received in FY. 3 This means that DHS simply cut 3 percent from each urban area s homeland security allocation to feed the 4 new urban areas added to the list for FY 8, instead of using a competitive process to allocate funding according to risk and capability needs. This also means that urban areas wasted considerable time and money putting together investment justifications that had no impact on their federal allocations. States and localities deserve more respect and seriousness from the federal government. As this report shows, a substantial amount of activity occurs to secure our homeland outside the Beltway. It is high time to acknowledge the commitments made by our states and localities and to give them the opportunity to lead our domestic homeland security efforts. STARTING A NATIONAL DEBATE Lost in the din and roar in America over the current financial crisis, a timely opportunity has presented itself for America s governors. Rather than extend open palms to Washington, D.C., for bailout funds or increased homeland security grants, these constitutionally empowered executives should force a national debate on the proper role of the federal government and the amount of tax dollars it uses. This debate is not about whether government should be bigger or smaller. This debate is about making government at all levels work more efficiently. It makes little sense to send tax dollars to Washington to pay the federal bureaucracy to return a smaller amount back to the states. Governors should demand that the federal government substantially lower its taxes so that states can raise their taxes to keep a greater share of the overall tax burden. With increased funds, states can properly take care of their residents without the federal mandates, strings, and interference that always accompany federal funds. It is time for a brave band of governors to reassert their federalist voices, not just in securing our homeland from terrorists, but also in securing the vibrancy of Justice Louis Brandeis s laboratories of democracy that have kept America strong for years. Matt A. Mayer is a Visiting Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, President and Chief Executive Officer of Provisum Strategies LLC, and an Adjunct Professor at Ohio State University. He has served as Counselor to the Deputy Secretary and Acting Executive Director for the Office of Grants and Training in the U.S. Department of Homeland. He is author of Homeland and ism: Protecting America from Outside the Beltway, which will be published in June 9. The author especially thanks all of the state and local government employees who provided budget data that was not publicly available on the Internet. Without their aid, this report would have contained far less data. 3. Matt A. Mayer, Congress Should Reassess the Allocation of Homeland Grants, Heritage Foundation WebMemo No., August 6, 8, at 4

7 APPENDIX A METHODOLOGY THE HERITAGE CENTER FOR DATA ANALYSIS The data gathered includes all relevant budget data for jurisdictions for FY through FY. Because the focus of this project is homeland security, the budget data include primary law enforcement agencies, fire departments, homeland security offices, and emergency management agencies. In some cases, the emergency management agency budget data were embedded in the fire department budget data and could not be separately noted in its own category. Of the,836 data cells plotted, budget data for,66 cells (9 percent) were obtained. Because the comparison federal data consist of homeland security grants that are part of the general-fund appropriations for the Department of Homeland, the budget data represent the general-fund appropriation only. In a few cases the budget data include non-general-fund revenue such as fees or special taxes. In many cases, the total appropriation for agencies and departments is greater than the general fund appropriation. A secondary, but equally important, reason for using only general fund appropriation budget data is that those appropriations represent the difficult decisions made by legislative bodies to allocate finite general-fund dollars among competing demands, such as transportation, health care, and education. Hence, state legislatures, city councils, and county commissions evaluated the various needs of their jurisdictions, assessed the homeland security risks, and allocated general funds accordingly. In selecting the states, cities, and counties to include in this report, the state had to possess a designated UASI jurisdiction and the city and county had to belong to a designated UASI jurisdiction that had received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the DHS. Twenty-six states, the District of Columbia, and 43 UASI jurisdictions satisfied this requirement. In total, these 43 UASI jurisdictions include 5 primary cities and 35 primary counties for which data were collected. Those jurisdictions are: Anaheim Santa Ana Atlanta Baltimore Baton Rouge Bay Area Boston Buffalo Charlotte Chicago Cincinnati Cleveland Columbus Dallas Area Denver Detroit District of Columbia Fort Lauderdale Honolulu Houston Indianapolis Jacksonville Jersey City Newark Kansas City Las Vegas Los Angeles Long Beach Louisville Memphis Miami Milwaukee Minneapolis Saint Paul New Orleans New York City Orlando Philadelphia Phoenix Pittsburgh Portland Sacramento San Antonio San Diego Seattle St. Louis Tampa 5

8 APPENDIX B CHARTS AND TABLES Key Jurisdictions Receiving Funds from the Department of Homeland Twenty-six states, the District of Columbia and 43 designated Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions received at least $5 million from the DHS from fiscal year to fiscal year. See the following pages for state-by-state data. WA OR MN WI MI NY MA NV IL CA CO MO AZ PA IN OH NJ MD DC KY NC TN GA TX LA HI Areas Receiving at Least $5 Million from DHS, FY FY Counties Cities FL Source: The Heritage Foundation. Map CDA 9-6

9 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Arizona 6th-largest state Population: 6,338,755 $. billion $9 million $6 million $3 million $746,793,83 $,6,, $,56,5,45 $,94,76,85 $,8,69,87 $,366,489,394 $,59,88,975 $,86,494,5 $,97,44,69 $,39, $,39, $5,77, $5,76,638 $5,793,4 $4,54,74 $,6,77 $37,93,6 $4,57, % 99.9% 99.5% 95.8% 96.% 97.% 98.6% 98.% 97.9% Proportions.%.%.5% 4.% 4.%.9%.4%.%.% $ million $.9 billion $4.4 million Homeland Spending State Budgets $5 million $ million $5 million / Military Affairs Key Jurisdictions Maricopa County Phoenix Population Maricopa County 3,7,49 Phoenix,55,59 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $,39, $,39, $5,77, $38,67, $3,34, $,,73 $8,66, $9,, $6,5,73 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $9,89, $7,8,63 $6,9, $6,5, $9,379,63 Urban Areas Initiative $,33,467 $,,4 $9,996,463 $3,9,,9, $37,5,34 Performance Grant $3,76,7 $3,4,45 $3,346,77 $4,549,966 $4,3,864 Interoperable Communication $7,73,5 $7,73,5 Source: Arizona State Legislature, Joint Legislative Budget Committee, Fiscal History, updated February 3, 9, at (February 4, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Appendix Chart Chart B- B- CDA CDA 9-7

10 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES California st-largest state Population: 36,553,5 $. billion $.5 billion $. billion $.5 billion $,698,554,968 $3,955,49,56 $5,57,7,7 $5,563,93,474 $6,73,948,39 $6,536,48, $7,37,65,89 $8,9,7,465 $45,3,4,5 State Homeland $7,67, $7,666, $4,83, $64,79, $33,74, $84,63,85 $47,58, $55,85, $55,6,85 $7,67, $7,666, $4,83, $6,3,4 $3,33,95 $7,33,33 $4,476,75 $349,83,446 $,465,936, % 99.8% 99.5% 95.5% 95.3% 96.% 96.8% 95.8% 96.7% Proportions $3 million $.76 billion $64 million Homeland Spending Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $39,57, $3,768,66 $4,37, $39,88, $5,535,66 State Budgets $5 million $5 million $75 million Homeland Grants Urban Areas Initiative $84,937,49 $8,63,95 $43,57,737 $36,9, $4,7, $633,77,3 / Military Affairs Performance Grant $3,94,65 $3,79, $4,36,75 $9,356,936 $6,477,77.3%.%.5% 4.5% 4.7% 4.% 3.% 4.% 3.3% Interoperable Communication $94,34,5 $94,34,5 Key Jurisdictions San Francisco/ San Francisco County Long Beach Oakland/ Alameda County San Diego/ San Diego County Population Los Angeles County,363,85 Los Angeles 3,849,378 San Diego County 3,46,74 Orange County 3,,5 Santa Clara County,837,75 Alameda County,443,74 San Diego,366,865 Sacramento County,3,499 San Jose 939,899 San Francisco 799,83 Long Beach 466,5 Sacramento 46,4 Oakland 397,67 Santa Ana 353,84 Anaheim 346,83 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number 7 Sacramento/ Sacramento County San Jose/ Santa Clara County Los Angeles/ Los Angeles County Anaheim, Santa Ana/ Orange County Number 3 93 Source: State of California, Department of Finance, California Budget Historical Documents, 8 9, at (February 4, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Appendix Chart B- B- CDA 9-8

11 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Colorado nd-largest state Population: 4,864,55 $8 million $6 million $4 million $73,7,8 $79,493,564 $85,63,49 $86,38,89 $9,839,63 $38,875,973 $39,5,66 $348,95,64 $,44,44,39 $73.3 million Homeland Spending $,9, $,57, $5,, $5,95,57 $47,98,36 $35,89,95 $3,57,53 $37,9,43 $4,53,8 99.6% 99.6% 98.% 84.4% 85.9% 89.6% 93.5% 9.3% 9.% State Budgets $5 million $ million Proportions / Affairs.4%.4%.8% 5.6% 4.%.4% 6.5% 9.7% 7.8% $7.7 million Key Jurisdictions Denver/ Denver County Population Denver/Denver County 588,349 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number $ million $5 million Homeland Grants State Homeland $,9, $,57, $5,, $34,59, $8,4, $7,796,658 $8,8, $6,43, $,46,658 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $8,3, $6,47,5 $7,6, $4,6, $6,99,5 Urban Areas Initiative $5,568,474 $8,646,36 $8,78,395 $4,38, $7,85, $45,63,3 Performance Grant $,756,43 $,9, $,93,63 $,997,53 $4,75,775 $5,63,98 Interoperable Communication $4,336,638 $4,336,638 Source: Colorado General Assembly, Joint Budget Committee, Web site, at jbchome.htm (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart CO ArticleName Appendix Chart B-3 CDA 9-9

12 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES District of Columbia Population: 588, 9 $5 million $4 million $3 million $ million $ million District $49,6, $46,44, $439,4, $447,74, $536,467, $5,577, $539,5, $63,6, $3,944,488, Homeland Spending $ $366, $,747, $79,83,4 $48,35,5 $9,57,55 $55,4,473 $85,88,885 $363,839,45 District % 99.9% 99.4% 84.7% 9.8% 85.% 9.% 87.7% 9.6% District Budgets Proportions $6 million $437. million $6.7 million $5 million $4 million $ million.%.%.6% 5.3% 8.% 4.9% 9.9%.3% 8.4% Key Jurisdictions District of Columbia FEMA Declarations Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $366, $,747, $7,96, $4,54, $9,84,53 $4,7, $5,96, $54,967,53 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $4,3, $3,339,656 $3,, $4,5, $5,9,656 Urban Areas Initiative $6,49,85 $9,3,5 $77,5, $46,47, $6,65, $75,4,353 Performance Grant $,45,9 $,53,84 $,55,473 $,,93 $6,59,47 Interoperable Communication $,857,97 $,857,97 Source: District of Columbia, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Annual Operating Budget/Capital Plan, at cfonav, 33.asp (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart DC ArticleName Appendix Chart B-4 CDA 9-

13 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Florida 4th-largest state Population: 8,5,43 $ million $ million $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million $86,4,67 $944,73, $,,895,55 $,49,85,44 $,56,94,535 $,688,977,538 $,98,,7 $,9,855,88 $,58,44,975 State Homeland $3,49, $3,63, $,967, $86,39, $69,967, $44,78,449 $5,59, $5,46, $7,6,449 $3,49, $3,63, $,967, $,38,558 $9,5, $98,7,66 $5,49,4 $35,367,543 $59,534,766 $9 million Homeland Spending Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $,76, $6,64,89 $8,6, $8,8, $73,86, % 99.6% 98.7% 9.7% 9.9% 94.5% 95.% 94.% 95.% State Budgets $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million Homeland Grants Urban Areas Initiative $8,959,558 $8,4, $3,483,66 $53,47, $38,67, $7,5,65 Proportions / Military Affairs Performance Grant $6,87, $7,44,74 $7,479,4 $,69,77 $3,76,995 $73. million.4%.4%.3% 7.3% 7.% 5.5% 5.% 6.% 4.9% Interoperable Communication $4,888,66 $4,888,66 Orlando Orange County Tampa Hillsborough County Key Jurisdictions Fort Lauderdale Broward County Miami-Dade County Population Miami-Dade County,387,7 Broward County,759,59 Hillsborough County,77,6 Orange County,6,3 Jacksonville/Duval County 794,555 Miami 49,79 Tampa 38,6 Orlando 7,97 Fort Lauderdale 83,66 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Jacksonville Duval County Miami Number Source: State of Florida, Office of the Governor, Final Budget Report, at (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart FL ArticleName Appendix Chart B-5 CDA 9-

14 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Georgia 9th-largest state Population: 9,544,75 Homeland Spending Key Jurisdictions Atlanta Fulton County $375,465,96 $39,378,593 $36,9,68 $369,66,37 $375,935,8 $47,439,4 $8,893,799 $395,938,656 $,957,568,879 $,868, $,993, $7,797, $55,89,49 $65,6,48 $53,97,6 $47,935,848 $7,48,89 $35,3, % 99.5% 97.9% 86.9% 85.% 88.3% 85.4% 84.9% 9.7% Proportions.5%.5%.% 3.% 4.8%.7% 4.6% 5.% 9.3% Population Fulton County 99,37 Atlanta 59,45 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. $5 million $ million $5 million State Budgets $3.6 million $.5 million $. million $. million $.5 million $. million $.5 million FEMA Declarations Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $,868, $,993, $7,797, $5,767, $4,964, $6,76,87 $3,36, $4,4, $59,75,87 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $,45, $9,78,63 $,43, $,7, $43,77,63 Urban Areas Initiative $,744,48 $3,7,499 $8,66, $4,66, $57,8,747 Performance Grant $4,3,49 $4,345,33 $4,485,848 $6,99,455 $9,54,45 Interoperable Communication $5,3,354 $5,3,354 Source: State of Georgia, Governor s Office of Planning and Budget, Budget in Briefs, budget-publications/budget-in-briefs.aspx (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart GA ArticleName Appendix Chart B-6 CDA 9-

15 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Hawaii 4nd-largest state Population:,83,388 $5 million $ million $5 million $ million $5 million $78,867, $33,3,893 $35,,49 $37,69,366 $377,593,79 $44,99,335 $46,667,666 $479,374,64 $,9,6,48 Homeland Spending $53, $55, $3,7, $9,3,88 $,836, $,767,9 $4,3,37 $,7,543 $4,63, % 99.8% 99.% 9.7% 94.5% 94.8% 96.6% 95.6% 96.% State Budgets Proportions $. million $3.7 million $9.9 million $7.5 million $5. million $.5 million / Military Affairs.3%.%.9% 7.3% 5.5% 5.% 3.4% 4.4% 3.8% Key Jurisdictions Honolulu Honolulu County Population Honolulu/Honolulu County 37,657 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $53, $55, $3,7, $,77, $6,839, $,683,58 $4,49, $3,8, $6,794,58 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $4,997, $3,884,939 $3,6, $,73, $4,87,939 Urban Areas Initiative $6,87,89 $ $6,454,763 $4,76, $5,6, $3,45,654 Performance Grant $,658,937 $,743,745 $,8,37 $,447,664 $7,65,483 Interoperable Communication $8,69,879 $8,69,879 Source: Hawaii State Legislature, Archives, at archives.asp (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart HI ArticleName Appendix Chart B-7 CDA 9-3

16 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Illinois 5th-largest state Population:,85,548 Homeland Spending Key Jurisdictions Chicago Cook County $347,6,4 $39,49,3 $49,956,6 $,946,543,65 $,97,66,563 $,897,98,738 $,46,39,53 $,,357,54 $,333,75,83 $,8, $,964, $,64, $5,39,464 $6,553, $98,96,996 $95,59,4 $3,4,567 $56,68,39 99.% 99.3% 97.5% 94.4% 94.9% 95.% 95.7% 94.5% 95.3% Proportions.8%.7%.5% 5.6% 5.% 5.% 4.3% 5.5% 4.7% $4 million State Budgets $366.5 million $6 million $5. million Population Cook County 5,85,7 Chicago,836,658 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. $3 million $ million $ million State Homeland $,8, $,964, $,64, $68,884, $55,84, $35,98,886 $9,8, $,3, $7,77,886 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $6,57, $,835,959 $8,, $5,93, $63,535,959 $5 million $4 million $3 million $ million $ million Homeland Grants Urban Areas Initiative $4,87,733 $34,4, $45,, $5,6, $47,8, $9,553, Performance Grant $5,483,73 $5,78,5 $5,969,4 $8,6,34 $5,35,38 Interoperable Communication $36,44,63 $36,44,63 FEMA Declarations Source: Illinois State Comptroller, Comptroller s Reports, at (February, 9). Number 3 Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart IL ArticleName Appendix Chart B-8 CDA 9-4

17 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Indiana 5th-largest state Population: 6,345,89 Key Jurisdictions $83,7,67 $85,64,66 $84,36,56 $94,3,579 $936,,73 $967,77,754 $974,5,39 $973,34,958 $7,46,395,857 Homeland Spending $,499, $,58, $6,4, $44,96,688 $53,873,88 $38,69,495 $3,884,54 $45,78,476 $6,95, % 99.8% 99.% 95.3% 94.6% 96.% 97.6% 95.5% 97.% Proportions.%.%.8% 4.7% 5.4% 3.8%.4% 4.5%.9% Marion County Indianapolis $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million State Budgets $7.5 million $.5 million $.3 million $. million $.5 million $. million $.5 million Homeland Grants Population Indianapolis/Marion County 795,458 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number 4 4 State Homeland $,499, $,58, $6,4, $4,593, $33,77, $,349,773 $,8, $8,68, $5,638,773 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $,5, $7,763,554 $5,9, $6,, $9,58,554 Urban Areas Initiative $ $,5,88 $5,664,8 $4,37, $7,7, $7,896,7 Performance Grant $3,33,688 $3,49,346 $3,64,54 $4,9,74 $5,3,9 Interoperable Communication $8,9,735 $8,9,735 Source: Indiana State Budget Agency, Budget Data, at (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart IN ArticleName Appendix Chart B-9 CDA 9-5

18 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Kentucky 6th-largest state Population: 4,4,474 $ million $8 million $88,95, $36,9,59 $54,8,59 $48,8,8 $63,4, $56,655,6 $74,976,6 $84,5,66 $,97,75,47 Homeland Spending $,84, $,36, $5,48, $35,455,7 $43,57,66 $3,749,73 $6,95,654 $3,75,89 $73,45,8 98.8% 99.5% 98.% 87.5% 85.8% 89.3% 9.3% 9.4% 9.7% State Budgets Proportions.%.5%.9%.5% 4.%.7% 8.7% 9.6% 8.3% $69.6 million $5 million $.6 million $ million / Military Affairs Key Jurisdictions Louisville Jefferson County Population Louisville/Jefferson County 73,46 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number $6 million $4 million $ million $9 million $6 million $3 million Homeland Grants State Homeland $,84, $,36, $5,48, $3,839, $6,6, $6,86,675 $,5, $6,4, $,59,675 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $7,899, $6,3,58 $4,3, $4,59, $,94,58 Urban Areas Initiative $ $8,987,66 $5,, $8,5, $ $,57,66 Performance Grant $,66,7 $,756,5 $,845,654 $3,86,65 $,78,7 Interoperable Communication $5,45,65 $5,45,65 Source: Commonwealth of Kentucky, Office of State Budget Director, Archives, at (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart KY ArticleName Appendix Chart B- CDA 9-6

19 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Louisiana 5th-largest state Population: 4,93,4 Homeland Spending Key Jurisdictions East Baton Rouge County $ million $ million $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million $5,33,774 $88,93,96 $9,56,596 $3,4,7 $86,,99 $3,886,98 $6,66,8 $6,89,6 $,5,47,635 $,75, $,8, $5,33, $43,5,9 $46,98,754 $36,38,487 $8,438,865 $44,336,78 $6,638,35 $ % 98.6% 94.6% 7.3% 86.% 89.6% 9.% 85.5% 88.% State Budgets $5 million $ million $5 million $ million $5 million Proportions / Military Affairs.%.4% 5.4% 9.7% 3.9%.4% 9.8% 4.5%.% $. million Population New Orleans/ Orleans Parish 33,388 Baton Rouge/ East Baton Rouge Parish 9,66 Baton Rouge New Orleans For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Orleans County Number 5 6 Homeland Grants State Homeland $,75, $,8, $5,33, $34,488, $7,959, $7,679,53 $,, $9,46, $9,34,53 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $8,96, $6,48,89 $8,74, $6,76, $3,4,89 Urban Areas Initiative $6,8,66 $7,5,87 $9,35,8 $4,69, $4,38, $3,8,668 Performance Grant $,75,6 $,89,97 $,895,35 $,988,865 $4,63,99 $5,59,78 Interoperable Communication $9,67,87 $9,67,87 Source: Louisiana House of Representatives, Budget Documents, at Budgetdocs/budgetdocs.htm (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart LA ArticleName Appendix Chart B- CDA 9-7

20 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Maryland 9th-largest state Population: 5,68,344 $5 million $ million $5 million $ million $5 million $39,849, $37,76, $47,538,344 $87,9,4 $8,49,388 $84,737, $87,69,45 $99,6,944 $5,99,64,53 Homeland Spending $,337, $,47, $5,88, $5,599,58 $56,59,745 $4,637,979 $7,46,89 $59,65,394 $46,54,59 $43. 7 million 99.6% 99.6% 98.6% 94.% 93.6% 95.% 97.% 93.9% 95.6% State Budgets $ million $5 million $ million $5 million Proportions / Military Affairs.4%.4%.4% 6.% 6.4% 4.9% 3.% 6.% 4.4% $5.3 million Key Jurisdictions Baltimore County Baltimore Population Baltimore County 786,3 Baltimore 637,455 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $,337, $,47, $5,88, $38,6, $3,3, $9,866,43 $8,, $,8, $8,343,43 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $9,9, $7,4,54 $5,9, $8,43, $3,855,54 Urban Areas Initiative $,9,944 $5,98,745 $,35,357 $9,67, $,9, $59,75,46 Performance Grant $3,76,637 $3,4,45 $3,346,89 $4,55,8 $4,6,374 Interoperable Communication $,934,593 $,934,593 Source: Maryland Department of Budget and, State Budget Information, at server.pt?open=54&objid=894& parentname=communitypage&parentid=5& mode= (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart MD ArticleName Appendix Chart B- CDA 9-8

21 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Massachusetts 4th-largest state Population: 6,449,755 Key Jurisdictions Boston Suffolk County Homeland Spending $. billion $ billion $966,67,9 $,3,49,5 $,67,77,765 $,56,756,883 $,,99,885 $,77,885,5 $,45,676,833 $,58,879,3 $9,566,397,35 $,55, $,63, $6,579, $6,865,96 $64,5,73 $59,4,74 $43,863,3 $6,667,36 $3,6,49 $. billion 99.8% 99.8% 99.4% 94.4% 94.9% 95.6% 97.% 96.% 97.% State Budgets $3. million $.5 million Proportions.%.%.6% 5.6% 5.% 4.4%.9% 3.8% 3.% $.55 million Population Boston/Suffolk County 68,35 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number 4 $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million $. million $.5 million $. million $.5 million Homeland Grants State Homeland $,55, $,63, $6,579, $4,73, $34,64, $,863,377 $,7, $,8, $3,57,377 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $,79, $7,95,39 $,4, $8,43, $36,899,39 Urban Areas Initiative $6,77,5 $9,3,73 $6,, $8,, $4,, $94,78,848 Performance Grant $3,47,78 $3,587,8 $3,73,3 $5,35,48 $5,73,887 Interoperable Communication $,9,988 $,9,988 Source: Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Executive Office for Administration and Finance, State Budget, at 3&L=Home&L=Budget%c+Taxes+%6+ Procurement&L=State+Budget&sid=Eoaf (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart MA ArticleName Appendix Chart B-3 CDA 9-9

22 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Michigan 8th-largest state Population:,7,8 Key Jurisdictions Homeland Spending $35 million $3 million $5 million $ million $5 million $ million $5 million $3,734,5 $74,47,5 $749,799,75 $83,99,5 $868,36, $689,553,9 $746,93,83 $798,96,584 $5,78,933, $,39, $,457, $8,958, $74,983,5 $74,88,597 $6,498,5 $5,73,9 $69,943,36 $346,68, % 99.7% 98.8% 9.7% 9.% 9.7% 93.6% 9.% 94.3% Proportions.8%.3%.% 8.3% 7.9% 8.3% 6.4% 8.% 5.7% $49.3 million $.5 million $. million State Budgets $. million $.5 million $. million $.5 million Population Wayne County,6,6 Detroit 96,95 Wayne County For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Detroit Number 6 Homeland Grants State Homeland $,39, $,457, $8,958, $58,8, $47,83, $9,739,98 $5,65, $3,67, $77,966,98 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $3,97, $,84,538 $,39, $9,76, $45,935,538 Urban Areas Initiative $,7,55 $3,754,597 $7,68,58 $8,63, $4,63, $76,355,77 Performance Grant $4,63,575 $4,875,4 $5,33,9 $6,843,545 $,38,63 Interoperable Communication $5,39,78 $5,39,78 Source: State of Michigan, Office of the State Budget, Prior Budgets, at _856---,.html (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart MI ArticleName Appendix Chart B-4 CDA 9-

23 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Minnesota st-largest state Population: 5,97,6 Key Jurisdictions Homeland Spending $5 million $ million $5 million $ million $5 million $437,773,74 $8,67,787 $494,674,975 $3,67,75 $468,598,685 $35,64,73 $56,8,79 $349,97,588 $3,45,4,777 $,5, $,38, $5,63, $39,695,8 $58,756,47 $34,66,38 $5,775,94 $38,34,7 $95,367, % 99.5% 98.9% 88.4% 88.9% 89.8% 97.% 9.% 94.% State Budgets (Biennial) $7 million Homeland Grants Proportions / Military Affairs No Data Available.3%.5%.%.6%.%.% 3.% 9.9% 5.8% Hennepin County Population Hennepin County,6, Minneapolis 37,833 Saint Paul 87,5 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. Ramsey County St. Paul Minneapolis FEMA Declarations Number State Homeland $,5, $,38, $5,63, $36,766, $9,84, $8,895,46 $4,79, $6,58, $5,35,46 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $8,844, $6,87,64 $3,49, $4,69, $3,895,64 Urban Areas Initiative $ $,8,47 $5,763,4 $4,3, $8,46, $38,64,658 Performance Grant $,99,8 $3,86,37 $3,85,94 $4,33,956 $3,533,5 Interoperable Communication $4,6,7 $4,6,7 Source: Minnesota and Budget, Governor s Operating Budget, at budgets-op-arch (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart MN ArticleName Appendix Chart B-5 CDA 9-

24 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Missouri 8th-largest state Population: 5,878,45 $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million $437,3,6 $455,747, $483,3,54 $497,997,5 $498,488,53 $5,383,48 $558,686,86 $579,83,65 $4,3,47,563 Homeland Spending $,4, $,474, $6,79, $6,3,7 $65,635,699 $46,38,888 $45,455,73 $5,573,539 $8,89,9 99.7% 99.7% 98.8% 88.9% 88.4% 9.7% 9.5% 9.7% 93.5% State Budgets Proportions.3%.3%.%.%.6% 8.3% 7.5% 8.3% 6.5% $64. million $.5 million $.6 million $. million $.5 million $. million $.5 million Kansas City Key Jurisdictions Jackson County St. Louis County Population St. Louis County,,5 Jackson County 666,89 Kansas City 447,36 St. Louis 353,837 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations St. Louis Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $,4, $,474, $6,79, $39,53, $3,46, $,88,866 $7,98, $7,49, $6,9,866 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $9,59, $7,377,769 $5,6, $5,35, $7,846,769 Urban Areas Initiative $9,548,63 $4,8,699 $5,53,865 $8,44, $7,6, $94,933,67 Performance Grant $3,5,469 $3,38,388 $3,45,73 $4,657,963 $4,553,53 Interoperable Communication $7,465,576 $7,465,576 Source: Missouri Office of Administration, Division of Budget and Planning, Executive Budgets, at (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart MO ArticleName Appendix Chart B-6 CDA 9-

25 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES North Carolina th-largest state Population: 9,6,3 $6 million $5 million $4 million $3,69,969 $55,48,455 $7,994,55 $78,649,8 $8,54,693 $3,9,95 $37,5,688 $363,46,7 $,93,35,9 Homeland Spending $,848, $,96, $7,76, $54,793,543 $6,75,955 $45,366,783 $33,77,775 $5,9,898 $58,366, % 99.% 97.% 83.6% 8.3% 87.3% 9.7% 87.4% 89.9% State Budgets Proportions $8 million $5.5 million $7.8 million $6 million.9%.8%.8% 6.4% 7.7%.7% 9.3%.6%.% Charlotte Key Jurisdictions Mecklenberg County Population Mecklenburg County 9,83 Charlotte 67,588 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number 3 9 $3 million $ million $ million $4 million $ million Homeland Grants State Homeland $,848, $,96, $7,76, $5,748, $4,4, $6,6,856 $,78, $,7, $5,48,856 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $,8, $9,5,675 $9,56, $7,98, $39,48,675 Urban Areas Initiative $ $7,44,955 $5,479,43 $8,97, $4,97, $6,84,98 Performance Grant $4,45,543 $4,6,9 $4,397,775 $5,979,699 $8,683,6 Interoperable Communication $,3,99 $,3,99 Source: State of North Carolina, Office of State Budget and, Budget: Post Legislative Summary, at osbmweb_libtopicgroups.show?p_arg_names= context&p_arg_values=budget&p_arg_ names=topic_group&p_arg_values=post% legislative%summary (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart NC ArticleName Appendix Chart B-7 CDA 9-3

26 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Nevada 35th-largest state Population:,565,38 Key Jurisdictions Homeland Spending $6 million $5 million $4 million $3 million $ million $ million $34,9,34 $34,956,37 $35,694,447 $39,567,88 $9,59,546 $39,83, $36,57,874 $4,79,39 $,366,638,38 $6, $655, $3,693, $6,674,78 $36,5,5 $7,996,35 $,8,955 $33,873,495 $5,95,39 98.% 98.% 9.6% 59.7% 78.% 9.% 94.% 9.% 9.% Proportions $59.3 million $8, $76, State Budgets $6, $4, $, Homeland Grants.8%.8% 9.4% 4.3%.% 7.8% 5.8% 7.8%.% Population Clark County,375,765 Las Vegas 558,88 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. Clark County Las Vegas FEMA Declarations Number State Homeland $6, $655, $3,693, $4,76, $,8, $,88,48 $8,, $5,6, $76,3,48 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $5,943, $4,657,47 $4,8, $4,, $8,78,47 Urban Areas Initiative $ $,53,5 $8,456,78 $7,75, $9,3, $36,47,753 Performance Grant $,968,78 $,73,887 $,4,955 $,9,78 $9,94,7 Interoperable Communication $,4,47 $,4,47 Source: Nevada Department of Administration, Division of Budget and Planning, State of Nevada Executive Budget, at 9 (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart NV ArticleName Appendix Chart B-8 CDA 9-4

27 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES New Jersey th-largest state Population: 8,685,9 Homeland Spending Key Jurisdictions Essex County Hudson County Newark Jersey City $379,45,89 $6,73,85 $68,73,64 $6,6,6 $649,673,355 $667,36,8 $7,957,977 $74,34,5 $4,955,598,377 $,968, $,7, $7,948, $67,95,6 $86,76,4 $59,836,653 $55,537,4 $97,5,38 $379,54, % 99.7% 98.7% 9.% 88.% 9.8% 9.8% 88.% 9.9% Proportions.5%.3%.3%.%.8% 8.% 7.%.% 7.% $35 million $3 million $5 million $ million $5 million $ million $5 million State Homeland $,968, $,7, $7,948, $5,893, $4,67, $6,66,37 $9,7, $4,, $55,844,37 $36.8 million Homeland Grants Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $,483, $9,68,3 $7,54, $,6, $39,765,3 State Budgets Urban Areas Initiative $,89,94 $3,66,4 $9,7, $34,33, $36,7, $33,63,474 / Military Affairs No Data Available Performance Grant $4,39,84 $4,356,64 $4,497,4 $6,4,67 $9,6,96 Interoperable Communication $3,86,646 $3,86,646 Population Essex County 793,633 Hudson County Newark 8,4 Jersey City 4,389 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. FEMA Declarations Number 3 Source: New Jersey Legisature, Budget and Finance, at finance.asp (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart NJ ArticleName Appendix Chart B-9 CDA 9-5

28 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES New York 3rd-largest state Population: 9,97,79 Homeland Spending Buffalo Key Jurisdictions $93,, $,78,63,95 $5,97,796,84 $5,9,357,699 $5,34,37,7 $5,46,965,5 $5,63,85,894 $6,9,7,636 $35,7,,35 $4,99, $4,3, $4,953, $64,4,67 $58,77,9 $9,73,6 $9,6,735 $78,4,76 $,4,978, % 99.6% 99.7% 95.% 97.% 95.% 96.7% 95.7% 96.7% Proportions.4%.4%.3% 4.8%.9% 5.% 3.3% 4.3% 3.3% Erie County New York City, New York County Population New York City 8,74,57 Erie County 95,65 Buffalo 9,648 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. $. billion $. billion $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million State Budgets $.6 billion $ million $83 million $5 million $ million $5 million / Military Affairs FEMA Declarations Number Homeland Grants State Homeland $4,99, $4,3, $4,953, $96,664, $78,36, $49,47,97 $7,46, $38,8, $34,86,97 Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $3,53, $7,97,55 $6,, $7,7, $94,943,55 Urban Areas Initiative $6,34,67 $57,,9 $4,77,6 $8,6, $39,56, $699,68,733 Performance Grant $7,73,46 $8,4,33 $8,376,735 $,389,933 $35,584,45 Interoperable Communication $6,734,783 $6,734,783 Source: New York State Office of the State Comptroller, New York s Finances, at (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart NY ArticleName Appendix Chart B- CDA 9-6

29 HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE STATES Ohio 7th-largest state Population:,466,97 Key Jurisdictions Cuyahoga County Cleveland Homeland Spending $8 million $6 million $4 million $ million $484,738,979 $58,4,945 $985,53,746 $95,73,64 $955,73,757 $99,37,675 $,38,56,55 $,96,96,43 $7,86,498,494 State Homeland $,64, $,769, $9,897, $63,888, $5,79, $3,668,546 $,63, $6,83, $93,97,546 $,64, $,769, $9,897, $8,84,763 $99,78,79 $7,735,355 $4,56,456 $8,35,33 $39,38,66 $6.8 million Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention $5,368, $,879,47 $9,8, $,, $48,447, % 99.5% 99.% 9.% 9.6% 93.3% 96.% 93.% 94.8% State Budgets $5 million $4 million $3 million $ million $ million Homeland Grants Urban Areas Initiative $3,859,46 $3,99,79 $,84,39 $3,7, $5,48, $95,793,4 Proportions Performance Grant $5,95,337 $5,363,9 $5,536,456 $7,57,976 $3,5,788.5%.5%.% 8.% 9.4% 6.7% 3.8% 6.9% 5.% $4. million Interoperable Communication $9,377,337 $9,377,337 Population Cuyahoga County,393,978 Franklin County,68,978 Hamilton County 845,33 Columbus 747,755 Cleveland 478,43 Cincinnati 33,85 For jurisdiction budgets, see Appendix A. Franklin County Cincinnati Hamilton County Columbus FEMA Declarations Number Source: Ohio Office of Budget and, Operating Budget, at OperatingBudget.aspx (February, 9). Note: Key jurisdictions are defined as Urban Areas Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions that received at least $5 million from FY to FY from the Department of Homeland. Chart OH ArticleName Appendix Chart B- CDA 9-7