Metro Advisory Council Homeland Security Subcommittee

Metro Advisory Council Homeland Security Subcommittee Final Report Submitted: October 10 th, 2006 Carl Metzger, Chairman

Table of Contents I. Subcommittee Overview and Recommendations II. Appendix a. Homeland Security Acronyms b. Subcommittee Meeting Minutes c. Planning/Training/Programming Working Group Report d. Regional Strategies Working Group Report e. Finance Working Group Report

MAC Homeland Security Subcommittee Final Report and Recommendations 1

Subcommittee Mission Statement To review local public safety preparedness as it relates to natural disasters, manmade accidents or criminal acts, to assess current homeland security capabilities, and recommend collaborative efforts and/or fiscal analysis needed to strengthen emergency preparedness, prevention, mitigation, response and recovery. 2

Official Subcommittee Members Carl Metzger (Chair), City Manager, City of Ankeny A.J. Mumm, Emergency Planning Director, Polk County Barry Halling, Emergency Planning Director, Dallas County Doug Phillips, Captain Sheriff s Office, Polk County Kevin Frederick, Deputy Sheriff, Dallas County Dave Hamlin, Police Chief, City of Urbandale David Burns, Fire Chief, City of Ankeny Doug Nichols, Police Chief, City of Johnston Ed Kuhl, Fire Chief, City of Norwalk Gary Mikulec, Police Chief, City of Ankeny Jack O Donnell, Police Chief, City of West Des Moines Jeff Mark, City Manager, City of Altoona 3

Subcommittee Members (cont.) Jeff Pomeranz, City Manager, City of West Des Moines Jerry Whetstone, Fire Chief, City of Altoona Jim Lee, Sheriff, Warren County Leonard Murray, Police Major, City of Des Moines Mahala Cox, Emergency Planning Director, Warren County Mark Bowersox, Police Chief, City of Polk City Phillip Vorlander, Fire Chief, City of Des Moines Rick Clark, City Manager, City of Des Moines Rick Roe, Fire Chief, City of Clive William Hansen, Police Chief, City of Pleasant Hill William McCarthy, Police Chief, City of Des Moines 4

Presenters State David Miller, Iowa Homeland Security Division Lt. Colonel Michael Jensen, Iowa National Guard Steve Mercer, Iowa Dept. of Public Health Arlinda McKeen, State Public Policy Group County A.J. Mumm, Polk County Emergency Management Jeremy Kaufman, Tetra Tech City Bill McCarthy, Des Moines Police Department 5

Iowa Homeland Security Division State coordinator for homeland security Communication contact with federal authorities Allocates federal homeland security funds 6 funding regions in Iowa (Polk, Dallas and Warren Counties in region 1) Goal to build regional capacities to combat multi-hazard events/emergencies Federal funds allocated to Iowa in decline As of today, Iowa has not completed an official risk assessment for the federal government Could affect future federal funding for Iowa 6

7

Iowa National Guard Multiple resources and equipment available Army National Guard forces Air National Guard forces Available upon Governor s Proclamation to support efforts of local agencies 71 st Civil Support Team Support civil authorities at a domestic CBRNE (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive) incident by: Identifying CBRNE agents/substances Assessing current and projected consequences Advising on response measures Assisting with appropriate requests for additional state and federal support 8

Iowa Department of Public Health Management/coordination of medical resources Not a primary response agency Serves as connection to: LPHA / Health Care Workers / Hospitals Other state agencies (including other states) Federal resources (medical) Public Health Response Teams (PHRT) Develops response plans for medical disasters Serves as the lead agency for: Radiological Emergencies Public Health, access to Strategic National Stockpile Medical Services (including mass fatality incidents) 9

State Public Policy Group Hired to study/plan the creation of regional tactical and bomb squad teams in Iowa. State coverage for special tactical teams who respond to communities needing help. Goal: NIMS Type 2 capability statewide Focus state funds to support/create regional tactical teams by 2009 (equipment/training) State will pay for response of regional tactical teams only to WMD/terrorist events Next: National Plan Review for Mass Evacuation and Catastrophic Event (Katrina) 10

11

12

Iowa s Fusion Center Regions Lyon Osceola Dickinson Emmet Kossuth Winnebago Worth Mitchell Howard Winneshiek Allamakee Sioux O'Brien Clay Palo Alto Hancock Cerro Gordo 2 Floyd Chickasaw Fayette Clayton Plymouth Cherokee Buena Vista Pocahontas Humboldt Wright Franklin Butler Bremer 1 Woodbury Ida Sac Calhoun Webster Hamilton Hardin Grundy Black Hawk 3 Buchanan Delaware Dubuque Tama Benton Linn Jones Jackson Monona Crawford Carroll Greene Boone Story Marshall Clinton Harrison Shelby Audubon Guthrie Dallas 5 Polk Jasper STATE HUB Poweshiek Iowa Johnson Cedar Scott Muscatine 4 Pottawattamie Cass Adair Madison Warren Marion Mahaska Keokuk Washington Louisa Mills Fremont Montgomery Page Adams Union Clarke Lucas Monroe Wapello Jefferson Taylor Ringgold Decatur Wayne Appanoose Davis Van Buren Henry Lee 6 Des Des Moines Moines 2 Iowa Department of Public Safety Fusion Center Designations 13

Polk County Emergency Mgmt Mission Statement - In partnership with private sector and nonprofit organizations, coordinate and promote a comprehensive, risk-based program of local emergency management activities in order to establish a disaster resilient community in Polk County. Develop plans and coordinate training and response during major emergency events. Implement plans and maintain a county-wide emergency operations center. Applies for and manages federal grant program Overseen by Polk County EMA Commission Revenue from Federal Grants ( 03-05) = $3,200,000 Revenue from Local Sources ( 03-05) = $250,000 The EMA has completed regional and local needs assessments Dallas & Warren Counties also have their own EMA 14

Tetra Tech EMI Complete Polk Co. WMD Assessment (2005) Iowa Region 1 WMD Assessment (2006), a 16 county central Iowa region Determine personnel, training, and equipment required to successfully mitigate WMD or terrorism incidents Evaluate current response capabilities against recommended capabilities to establish needs gap Establish and define response capabilities Prioritize funding allocation in a balanced approach to systematically increase capability Organize recommendations within the concept of Regionalization Primary objective of study was to specify the purchase and distribution of needed WMD equipment. Equipment target accomplished as of September 2006 15

Des Moines Police Department Divisions within the Homeland Security Bureau include: Metro S.T.A.R Tactical Unit Airport Security Unit Bomb Squad Fusion Center (Intelligence) Recommendations for Upgrading Bureau: Metro support for adding CBRNE (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive) layer of capabilities within the Bureau Adding 4 DMPD officers to Metro S.T.A.R. (Polk County will dedicate 2 deputies, total of 6 new staff) 2 Senior Clerks for CBRNE Response Team Upgrade in intelligence software for Fusion Center Adding bomb dogs and two police officer handlers Add 1 Fulltime police officer dedicated to bomb robot Add Major to DMPD as a liaison to State Homeland Security 16

Des Moines Police Dept (cont.) City of Des Moines Costs Personnel $569,930 Vehicles $92,000 Vehicle Equipment $147,180 Computer Software $200,000 Total DSM Costs of $1,009,110 MAC Costs Personnel 4 Officers (Salary & Benefits) $370,328 Overtime (Projected) $23,000 Vehicle Operating Costs $4,640 Total MAC Costs of $397,968 Homeland Security Initiative Total: $1,407,078 17

Subcommittee Working Groups Planning/Training/Programming Group A.J. Mumm, Polk County EMA, Chair Mahala Cox, Warren County EMA, Vice-Chair Other Members: Halling, Nichols, Phillips, Kuhl, Whetstone Regional Strategies Group Rick Roe, City of Clive, Chair Phil Vorlander, City of Des Moines, Vice-Chair Other Members: Burns, Lee, Frederick, Mark, Murray Finance Group Jack O Donnell, City of West Des Moines, Chair Dave Hamlin, City of Urbandale, Vice-Chair Other Members: Clark, McCarthy, Mikulec, Hanson, Bowersox 18

Planning/Training/Programming Need to add to existing service structures and not create new, overlapping service units. Must create service sustainability (personnel) Barriers to consolidated Homeland Security Social/society expectations Technical and administrative capability Political desirability Legal authority Economic feasibility Need to develop a hybrid between a strategic and equal distribution approach. 19

Regional Strategies A common misconception between first responders and local responders. Local jurisdictions will remain in control for duration of incident. Regional, state, and federal assets do not assume control at any time. Key issue is finding a regional funding source for metro-wide homeland security initiatives: Dedicated sales tax (Project Destiny) Regional property tax levy (RTA) Minimum service level for local governments: Emergency planning for significant events Adequately staffed public safety and public works Regional CBRNE protection (but extremely costly for locals) 20

Finance Discussed DMPD Homeland Security Proposal Recommend MAC should assist in limited, interim funding of WMD capabilities provided by Des Moines. Funding Alternatives Possible MAC funding approaches which could include: Property tax levy Special Assessment Sales tax State appropriation for funding homeland security specialty teams throughout the state. Future homeland security discussions should include: Communication interoperability County wide emergency operations center (Polk, Dallas, Warren) Other regional approaches to homeland security 21

Subcommittee Recommendations #1 - Development of a metro-wide standard for minimum public safety service levels for metro communities to prioritize public safety funding - Standards identified by a collaboration between the three county Emergency Management Commissions (Polk, Dallas, Warren). The standards could include: Adequate staffing for public safety Minimum equipment requirements Community emergency/disaster planning 22

Recommendations (cont.) #2 Promote Sustainability by: Ensuring a dedicated, permanent funding source for MAC homeland security plans/programs. Creating a process for decision making and development for MAC homeland security initiatives. #3 - Promote National Incident Management System (NIMS) Coordinating metro wide training exercises among agencies and include elected officials in exercises to show their role during an emergency event. Encourage every MAC community to become NIMS compliant. 23

Recommendations (cont.) #4 All MAC member governments support the City of Des Moines Homeland Security Initiative ($400,000), including both immediate and intermediate/long-term options for funding: Immediate Action Local support from MAC communities, including a 3-year agreement not to exceed $400,000/year. MAC to refer to member managers/administrators/designee for implementation of shared funding approach among MAC communities, as suggested by the Finance Group funding formula (see Appendix). Further, it is recommended an implementation agreement be prepared and submitted to the MAC in November 2006 for consideration and recommendation to MAC member governments for approval and inclusion of funding beginning with FY 2008 budgets. Intermediate/Long-term Action MAC area sales tax or property tax levy dedicated to homeland security services including, but not limited, to the City of Des Moines proposal. State legislation appropriating funds for Des Moines proposal and other MAC homeland security initiatives. 24

Appendix

Homeland Security Acronyms APHIS: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service ATSA: Aviation and Transportation Security Act ATTF: Anti-Terrorism Task Force CAD: Computer Assisted Dispatch CBRNE: Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive CDC: Center for Disease Control CIA: Central Intelligence Agency CIAO: Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office CTC: Counter-Terrorism Center DCI: Director of Central Intelligence DHS: Department of Homeland Security DoD: Department of Defense DoE: Department of Energy EIS: Epidemic Intelligence Service EOC: Emergency Operations Center EOD: Explosive Ordnance Disposal EPA: Environmental Protection Agency FAA: Federal Aviation Administration FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation FDA: Food and Drug Administration FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency FRAC: First Responders Advisory Council FTTTF: Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force HAN: Health Alert Network HHS: Health and Human Services HSTF: Homeland Security Task Force HSGP: Homeland Security Grant Program IDLH: Immediate Danger to Life or Health IED: Improvised Explosive Device IIPO: Information Integration Program Office IMS: Incident Management System INS: Immigration and Naturalization Service ITDS: International Trade Data System JTTF: Joint Terrorism Task Force MINE: Mid Iowa Narcotics Enforcement

MRC: Medical Reserve Corps MLAT: Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty NCIC: National Crime Information Center NCS: National Communication System NDMS: National Disaster Medical System NEDSS: National Electronic Disease Surveillance System NIH: National Institutes of Health NIMS: National Incident Management System NLETS: National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System NRC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission NSA: National Security Agency NSC: National Security Council NSDI: National Spatial Data Infrastructure NWP: Neighborhood Watch Program OHS: Office of Homeland Security OMB: Office of Management and Budget PPE: Personal Protective Equipment PSAP: Public Safety Answering Point SCBA: Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus SHSGP: State Homeland Security Grant Program SNS: Strategic National Stockpile (medicine) SWAT: Special Weapons and Tactics Team TIPS: Terrorism Information and Preventive Systems TSA: Transportation Security Administration TSWG: Technical Support Working Group VIPS: Volunteers in Police Service WMD: Weapons of Mass Destruction WTC: World Trade Center OGT: Office of Grants and Training

Planning/Programming/Training Work Group Proposal 2006-07-22 MAC Homeland Security Subcommittee Planning/Programming/Training Working Group Members: A.J. Mumm, Chair Mahala Cox, Co-Chair Barry Halling Jerry Whetstone Ed Kuhl Doug Phillips Doug Nichols Matt McQuillen, Administrative Support Questions: 1) What is the definition of homeland security? Federal Department of Homeland Security Mission: prevent terrorist attacks within the United States; reduce the vulnerability of the United States to terrorism; and minimize the damage, and assist in the recovery, from terrorist attacks that do occur within the United States. Responsibilities in carrying out this mission include: information analysis and infrastructure protection; chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and related countermeasures; border and transportation security; emergency preparedness and response; and coordination (including the provision of training and equipment) with other executive agencies, with State and local government personnel, agencies, and authorities, with the private sector, and with other entities. Homeland Security Act of 2002 Preparedness: the existence of plans, procedures, policies, training, and equipment necessary at the Federal, State and local level to maximize the ability to prevent, response to, and recover from major events. HSPD-8 The county emergency management commissions have the existing statutory responsibility for countywide preparedness activities that include: hazard analysis and risk assessment, resource management, planning, communication and warning, operations and procedures, training, exercising, and public education. It is the recommendation of this workgroup that these functions not be duplicated by an existing or future organization; rather, these emergency management agency functions should be acknowledged and supported by member jurisdictions. Major events: all hazard preparedness to include domestic terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. HSPD-8 Central Iowa has experience in major events both planned and unplanned. Community-wide collaboration on events such as the National Governor s Association annual meeting; multiple suspicious substance incidents where the BCTA protocol has been utilized; severe storms including tornadoes, high winds, and flooding; and several multihazard exercises that involve multi-jurisdictional collaboration. Page 1 of 6

Planning/Programming/Training Work Group Proposal 2006-07-22 2) What are the barriers to homeland security collaboration? A) Social/society expectations The average citizen is concerned about being safe and secure in an expedient manner, not necessarily about who or what city/county name is on their shirt Citizens expect that local governments work collaboratively to meet the safety and security needs so that duplication does not waste valuable resources Citizens expect that the plans are coordinated across jurisdictional lines, that training is appropriate and uniform, and that we exercise jointly B) Technical capability A capability is measured by the existence of a truly comprehensive approach of plans, skills, evaluated exercises, and appropriate equipment that the personnel are trained to implement as part of the plan Not every jurisdiction has the capacity to accomplish specialized technical capabilities and we must rely on mutual-aid and other service sharing arrangements C) Administrative capacity Staffing, budgeting, and maintenance commitments are critical to the sustainability of a capability Administrative capabilities need to exist beyond the term of the performance period of any particular grant D) Political desirability Critical thought needs to be given to any strategy based on the merits of the strategy and not based on who is paying for it or where the resource is deployed from The decision to invest in a capability should be made on the need for the resource and its applicability, not simply because a grant is available to pay for it in the short-term We must recognize the difference in understanding between the social or public expectations, the expectations of the elected leadership, and the capabilities or desires of the practitioners and subject matter experts Public looks to elected leaders to lead during a crisis. This leadership starts through their involvement in the preparedness phase as well. E) Legal authority The existence of government and public-sector resources is founded in the need to enhance health, safety, and general welfare of the citizenry Given this broad authority, how do we share this authority so that we are not in competition for this authority The responsibility side of the equation must be equaled by the authority available to carry out the responsibility Not everyone can be all things to all people. Do the missions of our organizations match what we are doing or propose to do? F) Economic feasibility Bottom line is that resources are limited and we should expect them to become more scarce Needs and expectations will grow and we should be prepared to meet those needs financially Financial support must be sustainable with a long-term approach and should be part of the responsibility/authority equation Feasibility should not be based solely on available grants and there needs to be much thought put in to local investment and sustainability. Page 2 of 6

Planning/Programming/Training Work Group Proposal 2006-07-22 There appear to be two philosophical approaches that are driving the difference and inability for true collaboration on homeland security issues in the Metro Area. The first approach is what we termed the strategic approach. This approach suggests that investments are made based on risk where risk is defined by several factors including: 1) the historical need for application or the potential for application in the future, 2) criticality of what is to be protected, 3) vulnerability what is to be protected, and 4) the threats upon what is to be protected. The strategic investment approach makes logical sense, but it also means that some will receive more of a resource that others in a demographically diverse area. The second approach is what we termed the equal distribution approach. This approach suggests that investments are made based on everyone getting an equal amount of something or at least an amount equally distributed based on some factor such as population. The equal distribution approach makes sense from the standpoint that everyone can claim to have received a piece of the whole, but it also means that no one will have the whole package. This was expressed in an analogy by Tetra Tech as the three-wheeled ambulance approach. The workgroup expressed a concern about the equal distribution approach by itself because even if the pieces were assembled collectively, they may still not add up to the whole because of the differences in planning, training, equipment deployment protocols, compatibility, etc. from one jurisdiction to the next. The workgroup agreed that the best approach is actually a hybrid between the two philosophies. The workgroup recommends that investments be made strategically for specialized capabilities where equally distributed investments would dilute the final capability to the point of ineffectiveness. While the strategic capability may be nested within a specific jurisdiction or department, the capability could be deployed to the larger region for metro-wide application. This approach would be blended with the equal distribution model for more common capabilities that would be designed to raise the level of all stakeholders. Surrounding this hybrid approach with universal investments in integrated planning, joint training and exercises, interoperable communications, and centralized command and control through a countywide emergency operations center will reinforce collaboration. This hybrid approach addresses the considerations given to barriers in collaboration in items A-F above. Social - It better provides for the safety and security of all citizens in the Metro Area whether it be a specialized capability or a common need regardless of anyone s address or location of the incident Technical - It matches the training, skills, and other credentials of personnel with the ability to achieve and maintain those skills Administrative It places capabilities in the control of those that are able to staff, budget for, and maintain the capability for the long-term Political Everyone brings something to the table and everyone brings something home for their citizens by providing access to specialized capabilities and increased ownership of commonly needed or specialized resources. This results in a social benefit, political gain, and an increase in the tools practitioners have access to. Legal builds on existing responsibilities within the mission of each jurisdiction or department while at the same time taking advantage of existing authorities to carry them out Economic accepts the fact that needs/demands will increase while at the same time resources to meet them will diminish Page 3 of 6

Planning/Programming/Training Work Group Proposal 2006-07-22 3) What are the minimum service levels of local governments for homeland security? Minimum service levels at the local level must include the priorities set out in HSPD-8 commonly known as the National Preparedness Goals. Overarching priorities are to: Implement the National Incident Management System (NIMS) Expand Regional Collaboration Implement the Interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) Priorities for specific capabilities are to strengthen: Information sharing and collaboration capabilities Interoperable communications capabilities CBRNE weapons detection, response and decontamination capabilities Medical surge and mass prophylaxis capabilities The National Preparedness Goals are built around 13 scenarios that highlight the scope, magnitude, and complexity of plausible catastrophic terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. The Universal Task List (UTL) provides a menu of tasks from all sources that may be performed in major events such as those illustrated by the National Planning Scenarios. In order to accomplish those tasks, there are 36 targeted capabilities listed (TCL) that are expected to be developed and maintained by the various levels of government. The National Preparedness Goals and the UTL are further explained by graphics in Attachments #1 and #2. These tasks and capabilities are developed, maintained, and supported through local application of the 12 program areas of the County Emergency Management Agency. 1. Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment 2. Resource Management 3. Planning 4. Control and Coordination 5. Damage Assessment 6. Communication and Warning 7. Operations and Procedures 8. Training 9. Exercises 10. Public Education 11. Homeland Security 12. Administration 4) What is the financial responsibility of local governments for homeland security? Local government has the primary responsibility to prepare for and protect the public s health, safety, and welfare. Protecting the safety and security of the public doesn t start when the incident begins; it is an ongoing process of planning, training, and exercising these efforts. These efforts require highly trained and motivated people to coordinate them. Federal and state grant programs do not cover personnel costs to administer, coordinate, and facilitate the collaboration. Financial responsibility for personnel costs should receive high consideration from the MAC. Without qualified individuals, any homeland security program, planning, or training would not exist. Summary and Solution Areas: Strategies must build on existing structures There is a competitive advantage that can be gained by working collaboratively Leaders at the highest level must have awareness and actively promote Clear agenda of collaboration (one team, one strategy) Funding must match priorities Objectives must be specific, measurable, attainable, reasonable, and time-based Page 4 of 6

Planning/Programming/Training Work Group Proposal 2006-07-22 Attachment #1: National Preparedness Goal The National Priorities: Overarching Priorities Implement the National Incident Management System and National Response Plan Expand Regional Collaboration Implement the Interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan Capability-Specific Priorities Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration capabilities Strengthen Interoperable Communications capabilities Scenarios The National Planning Scenarios highlight the scope, magnitude, and complexity of plausible catastrophic terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies Tasks The Universal Task List (UTL) provides a menu of tasks from all sources that may be performed in major events such as those illustrated by the Capabilities The Target Capabilities List (TCL) provides guidance on specific capabilities and levels of capability that Federal, State, Local and Tribal entities NATIONAL PLANNNING SCENARIOS Scenario 1: Nuclear Detonation 10-Kiloton Improvised Nuclear Scenario 2: Biological Attack Aerosol Anthrax Scenario 3: Biological Disease Outbreak Pandemic Influenza Scenario 4: Biological Attack Plague Scenario 5: Chemical Attack Blister Agent Scenario 6: Chemical Attack Toxic Industrial Chemicals Scenario 7: Chemical Attack Nerve Agent Scenario 8: Chemical Attack Chlorine Tank Explosion Scenario 9: Natural Disaster Major Earthquake Scenario 10: Natural Disaster Major Hurricane Scenario 11: Radiological Attack Radiological Dispersal Devices Scenario 12: Explosives Attack Bombing Using Improvised Explosive Device Scenario 13: Biological Attack Food Contamination Entities select only the tasks that apply to their assigned roles and responsibilities Prevention Protection Response Recovery The intent of the UTL is to guide design, development, conduct and evaluation of training and exercise events Page 5 of 6 1. Animal Health Emergency 2. CBRNE Detection 3. Citizen Preparedness and Participation 4. Citizen Protection, Evacuation and or In-place Protection 5. Critical Infrastructure Protection 6. Critical Resource Logistics and Distribution 7. Economic and Community Recovery 8. Emergency Operations Center Management 9. Emergency Public Information and Warning 10. Environmental Health and Vector Control 11. Explosive Device Response Operations 12. Fatality Management 13. Firefighting Operations Support 14. Food and Agriculture Safety and Defense 15. Information Collection and Threat Recognition 16. Information Sharing and Collaboration 17. Intelligence Fusion and Analysis 18. Interoperable Communications 19. Isolation and Quarantine 20. Mass Care (Sheltering, Feeding, and Related Services 21. Mass Prophylaxis 22. Medical Supplies Management and Distribution 23. Medical Surge 24. On-Site Incident Management 25. Planning 26. Public Health Epidemiological Investigation and Laboratory Testing 27. Public Safety and Security Response 28. Restoration of Lifelines 29. Risk Analysis 30. Search and Rescue 31. Structural Damage Assessment and Mitigation 32. Terrorism Investigation and Intervention 33. Triage and Pre-Hospital Treatment 34. Volunteer Management and Donations 35. WMD/Hazardous Materials Response and Decontamination 36. Worker Health and Safety

Planning/Programming/Training Work Group Proposal 2006-07-22 Attachment #2: UTL Taxonomy Page 6 of 6

Report - Regional Strategies Subcommittee (of the MAC Subcommittee on Homeland Security) Tuesday, June 13, 1:00-3:00p.m. Clive Police/Fire Facility - 8505 Harbach Blvd Call to Order Present: Rick Roe, Chair Phil Vorlander, Vice-Chair Jim Lee Jeff Mark Len Murray Discuss Homeland Security Questions 1. What is the definition of homeland security? High risk, low frequency events of a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive (CBRNE) nature, with regional impact that can happen anywhere. These events require a response capability with a specific skill set from a small group of assets and are best protected regionally. 2. What are the barriers to homeland security collaboration? Requires a dedicated/cohesive team. i. Point of reference DSM PD requires a five-year commitment on their tactical team. Cost of personal equipment. i. Point of reference Tactical side requires nearly $40,000 in equipment per person. Lack of basic services in many communities. i. Example: Many communities cannot provide a first out ambulance or fire truck response on a 24/7 basis. Financial Political

3. What are the minimum service levels of local governments for homeland security? Emergency planning for significant events. Adequately staffed public safety and public works. Umbrella CBRNE protection that requires regional efforts; unaffordable locally 4. What is the financial responsibility of local governments for homeland security? Funding the level of protection up to the point that the risk is considered acceptable. This is difficult to quantify because of rotating elected officials. There is a significant educational curve with elected officials. Notes to Alleviate some Common Misconceptions Local jurisdictions will remain in control for the duration of an incident. Regional, state, and federal assets do not assume control of incidents. Events must be deemed terrorism for state assets to be dispatched at a state expense. A non-terrorism event may not receive state assets, or may have significant expenses passed on to the local community. Confirm Next Meeting Adjourn After review of the minutes, the Committee felt no further meetings were necessary. Meeting adjourned at 2:15