(Download Document in Adobe PDF format)
Dear Mr. McCaul, Mr. Thompson, Ms. McSally, and Mr. Payne:
2. While the proposal appears to maintain the requirement that states pass through 80 percent of the funding to locals, it does not ensure that funds would be used to meet locally identified needs and priorities. In the past many local governments have indicated they have had little opportunity for input, and sometimes little opportunity to consent to the state use of the funds in their jurisdictions.
3. The proposal appears to fold the Urban Area Security Initiative Program into the NPGP. Although the FEMA Administrator would continue to designate UASI’s and, we are told, it would have a separate funding stream, it is unclear what role the states would play in UASI funding decisions, and how we can be assured that the capabilities that have been developed through this critical program would be sustained and increased.