Cities Not Ready for Catastrophes

New Orleans is still woefully unprepared for catastrophes 10 months after Hurricane Katrina, and the two cities attacked on Sept. 11 don’t meet all guidelines for responding to major disasters, a federal security analysis concluded Friday.

Ten states were rated in a Homeland Security Department scorecard as having sufficient disaster response plans. But the analysis found the vast majority of America’s states, cities and territories are far from ready for terrorist attacks, natural disasters or other major emergencies.

“Frankly, we just have not in this country put the premium on our level of catastrophe planning that is necessary to be ready for those wide-scale events,” Homeland Security Undersecretary George Foresman told reporters.

City and state plans for emergencies such as localized fires, floods and tornadoes “are good, they’re robust,” Foresman said. But plans for catastrophes “are not going to support us as they should.”

President Bush ordered the review of emergency response plans in a visit to New Orleans on Sept. 15, after Katrina ravaged the city Aug. 29. It is based on a scorecard for each state, 75 major cities and six U.S. territories that rates plans for evacuations, medical care, sheltering of victims, public alerts and other emergency priorities.

California scored relatively well among the states, but its disaster preparations were still ranked as less than adequate in more than half the categories analyzed by the Homeland Security Department.

The state earned a score of “sufficient” in 40% of the categories and “partially sufficient” in 60%. In no category was California ranked “not sufficient.” It generally ranked higher in measurements of its ability to keep its citizens informed but lower in its ability to treat the injured and evacuate the uninjured.

Only 13 states achieved a score of sufficient in more categories than California, with 36 scoring worse and one other getting 40%.

Among California’s major cities, Los Angeles ranked highest, with the same score as the state as a whole: 40% sufficient and 60% partially sufficient. In Southern California, Anaheim scored 33% sufficient, followed by Long Beach with 31%, Riverside with 29%, Santa Ana with 27% and San Diego with 22%.

Elsewhere in the state, Sacramento and San Jose both got marks of 36%, followed by San Francisco with 33%, Oakland with 27% and Fresno with 20%.

The tepid ratings gave fodder to state and local officials who have hammered Homeland Security for cutting emergency response funding. And the ratings may oversimplify security gaps that can’t be measured in a one-size-fits-all formula.

Bright spots in the analysis were 10 states with response plans that Homeland Security deemed “sufficient” -- the highest rating. Those states were Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Vermont. It also found that 18 hurricane-prone states, from Maine to Texas, appeared to be better prepared for disasters than the rest of the country.

In New York City and Washington, Al Qaeda’s targets on Sept. 11, 2001, the analysis found results lacking.

The majority of the preparations for both cities were described as partially sufficient by the department. Those ratings came two weeks after top New York and Washington officials complained because Homeland Security cut their federal aid for emergency responders this year.

“If we ever needed proof of the hypocrisy of the Department of Homeland Security, we just got it,” said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). “Today they say that New York, despite the efforts of the mayor and the city, is still not adequately prepared for disasters including terrorism, and yet they dramatically shortchanged our funding. They are not even reading their own reports.”