By Amber Dutton
The Department of Homeland Security recently cut Utah”s federal terrorism funds by $12 million, ranking it 45th of the 50 states and the District of Columbia for the amount of money received.
Utah will receive $8.27 million this year, which is down from $20 million last year and $27 million two years ago.
“It is a pretty significant drop compared to past years, and obviously we are disappointed, but we did anticipate that we would receive a lower amount than in previous years,” said Derek Jensen, spokesman for the Utah Department of Safety Division of Homeland Security.
Jensen attributed the lower monetary expectation of grants to a cut in the overall amount the federal government allocated for the Homeland Security grant and the restructured grant distribution formula implemented this year.
“What it will basically mean for Utah is that we will not be able to fund all the projects we had anticipated funding in previous years, so those things will have to be put off another year or two or three,” Jensen said.
The federal department granted awards based on a new formula that favors states considered to be more prone to terrorist attacks. A place that has a perceived high risk for attack, such as New York or Los Angeles, tends to receive a greater percentage of the funds than those that are perceived to have a lower threat. These high-risk states were defined as those having critical facilities or large metropolitan areas.
“Our goal is to greatly enhance the collective preparedness of the nation while making certain that finite resources are directed to areas most at risk and to solutions that are innovative and regionally driven,” said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in a press release.
This approach was also an effort to align federal resources with national priorities, the press release stated.
Peter Carr, spokesman for Senator Orrin Hatch, said, “The senator opposed the changes in legislation because he thought that the changes would shortchange Utah. This recent announcement confirms this.”
While Jensen said the state would love to have more resources to provide more safety for the citizens of the state, the cut in funding is no reason for people to panic or be overly alarmed.
“We actually benefited quite a bit when we were receiving $20 million,” he said. “We were able to purchase a lot of equipment, especially in the form of communications, so we were able to get a lot done. … We have a lot of the equipment. Now what we will have to do with this $8.2 million for the fiscal year of 2006 is look at our priorities–planning, training and exercises.”
Utah officials anticipate receiving the grant by the end of June. The state plans to give 80 percent of the federal funds to local governments and 20 percent will go toward state efforts.
“We are never 100 percent there when it comes to being prepared – it is always evolving,” Jensen said. “Technology and tactics are constantly changing, but we have a solid foundation.”
