Speaking for Nevada - March 2004

"Not Safe, But Safer"

Nevada’s Homeland Security Making Progress

by Jerry Bussell

NBJ: You’ve been in your current position a little over a year. What have you accomplished during your tenure?

Bussell: I’m strictly an advisor to the governor, but I’m happy to report that the many people working on security in Nevada have made great strides since November 2002. We have improved communications among all stakeholders and have significantly helped first responders. DP03 (Determined Promise 2003) was an emergency preparedness drill held last summer in Clark County. It tested every level of security, from first responders to the president of the United States, and results showed an effective and efficient system. We have accomplished tremendous goals. We are much more secure and better off. Are we absolutely safe? No, but we’re safer.

What can you report about Nevada’s state of readiness?

I have made repeat visits to several key industries, including utilities and large hotel/casinos. Utilities, including power companies, water facilities and fuel pipelines, are significantly better than last year because they took steps internally to enact security measures and absorbed the cost themselves. There have also been major inroads against cyberterrorism. At the largest hotel/casinos, there’s been a real change. Everyone notices it – when you drive onto the property, your car may have its trunk searched. That may not mean a lot, but it’s evidence of a heightened sense of alertness. It’s also a lot harder now to hide money, due to provisions of the Patriot Act. The methods for funding terrorists through U.S. financial institutions have been severely constrained. And, despite what you might read, our borders are not wide open. ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has shown improvements. It’s never going to be a perfect system. We can’t put up a Berlin Wall, nor should we.

It seems like there are always tradeoffs when you talk about being secure.

Sure. Perfect security would be to lock you up in a guarded cell somewhere where you’d be safe. We call that prison, not security. At the other end of the spectrum, you have a lawless society where people are free to do whatever they please, regardless of decency or even common sense. So we have to walk a fine line. There’s also the question of cost. At what point do we say, "That’s too much money to spend for being a little bit more secure?" We need to spend money wisely to get the value of every dollar. If we’re spending money – and a lot of money is being allocated nationwide for homeland security – it should be going for identified and justified requirements. It should be designated for things we know will make us all safer, not just a laundry list of items that may or may not be effective.

What’s your take on how our homeland security system is set up?

I’ve given it a lot of thought, and I think we need to take a regional approach to homeland security, which is currently a centralized approach in Washington, D.C. Homeland security should not be divided by political boundaries like state or county lines or city limits. It should be centered in anchor cities that serve as the natural focal points for the surrounding regions. For example, Las Vegas would be an anchor city for the eastern California desert towns, for southwest Utah and for northwest Arizona. Reno would take in the California counties east of the mountains, and Salt Lake City may be the natural hub for Ely and Wendover. We need to redraw the boundaries based on commonality and infrastructure.

Have you received support from our Congressional delegation?

The entire Congressional delegation has been supportive. Thanks in part to them, a bill is currently being considered to change the formula for calculating funding so tourism is considered in addition to the local population numbers. This will give Nevada more funding so we can provide better protection for everyone here, whether residents or visitors.

Did you get what you requested from the 2003 Legislature?

Yes. We received tremendous support from lawmakers. AB441 contained provisions that changed portions of the open meeting law so items sensitive to security could be discussed privately when necessary. It also established the Homeland Security Commission. AB250 enacted the requirement that hotel properties over a certain size must submit emergency plans to their local authorities. So far, we’ve had over a 70 percent compliance rate with that requirement, and I think the only reason it isn’t higher is because some properties may not realize they fit the detailed criteria to put them on the list. It’s strictly an informational issue.

What do you do with the information on their security plans once you get it?

This information has tremendous potential. However, you must remember that AB250 is a non-funded mandate. We don’t have staff to review these plans and make recommendations or provide feedback. In addition, there are no sanctions for companies that don’t send in the forms. We can write them a letter and request that they comply, but we don’t have any enforcement power. If we wanted to have a real impact, we would need to have the power to create and enforce regulations. I’m basically a small-government kind of guy, and I would be the last person to want to create another regulatory commission. At this point, if we found out that a particular property was ignoring safety issues for Nevada citizens and visitors, we could point it out to local authorities, but that’s all. So far, we haven’t had that big of a problem. It’s a decision that may need to be made sometime in the future, but the time hasn’t come yet.

When it was first established, the Nevada Homeland Security Commission was tasked with developing a vulnerability assessment for the state. Has that been completed?

Yes, and it’s constantly being updated. The state’s Department of Emergency Management assisted all 17 counties and several cities in conducting assessments of their strengths and weaknesses. The results they reported became an integral part of our strategic plan. We couldn’t make plans to improve without establishing a benchmark showing our starting point. We just sent off our strategic plan on January 31 – one of the first states to get it completed. This enables us to apply for fiscal year 2004 funding. Nevada is eligible for $26.4 million in funding, in addition to $10.5 million earmarked for urban Clark County.

How much has the commission disbursed since it was formed?

We passed on $6.7 million in 2003 funds. Prior to the formation of our commission, $24 million in 2003 funds had already been disbursed.

Is homeland security the best-kept secret in Nevada?

I don’t think we need to be well known. We prefer to do our work behind the scenes, but as a spokesperson, I need to be visible in times of crisis to show people we’re at the helm. For example, when there were concerns about the New Year’s Eve festivities on the Las Vegas Strip, I appeared frequently on television and was quoted in the press to reassure people that we had not received any credible threats. The general public probably doesn’t have a working knowledge of what we do, but they may have a general sense that the people in charge of their safety are responsible and hard-working, and that’s the reality. We can’t guarantee your safety, but we can tell you we’re doing everything we can.