Put blame for audit’s findings on lawmakers

To the editor:

As chairman of the Nevada Commission on Homeland Security, I was very distressed to read your newspaper's accounts of a report on the Division of Emergency Management to the Legislature's Audit Subcommittee and the reported responses of its members. The Review-Journal apparently based its Sept. 28 editorial, "A budgetary black hole," upon this incomplete information.

In my opinion, the auditors clearly did not do their homework regarding this subject. If anyone had bothered to read the minutes of the Nevada Commission on Homeland Security, it would be apparent there were discussions concerning the emergency response plans as early as 2003. At the last meetings of the commission and its finance committee, there were fiscal reports on all programs that had received government funds and were requesting additional funds from the most recent grant monies.

Legislation was passed to mandate that all facilities have an emergency response plan and to have them on file. The law wasn't specific and had no enforcement provisions. There was immediate resistance from the major resorts and other public facilities because of the vagueness of the legislation in defining exactly what was required and how structures and resources were to be protected.

There were extensive discussions by the commission, but having a mandate with no provisions to ensure compliance left our hands tied, along with those of the Division of Emergency Management. In November 2003, Nevada Deputy Attorney General Glade Myler briefed the commission on problems with the security and storage of emergency plans. In April 2004, the state's utilities expressed concerns regarding the security of their highly sensitive emergency operations plans.

There were discussions about future legislation to change the ineffective statute -- what a "plan" was to consist of was never defined by the Legislature. Any hotel's fire evacuation plan could have been submitted and met the requirements. The commission did not believe this was the intent of the Legislature, but had no authority to define or mandate the type of plan.

An attempt was made in the last legislative session to give the Division of Emergency Management some authority regarding these plans, but the draft never made it to the floor. It was the understanding of the Commission on Homeland Security, that, on the advice of counsel, the Division of Emergency Management was simply to file the plans submitted. Because there was no security, extensive plans would become public record and provide any terrorist with a road map in planning attacks against these facilities. Previous attempts to find a way to keep the plans confidential was met with objections from the ACLU and created further problems as to how the Division of Emergency Management could secure the plans. Again, there was no action by the Legislature.

For the past three years, the commission has implored the state to fund additional positions in the Division of Emergency Management. The amount of work generated by the Homeland Security grants was enormous, yet all requests for additional personnel had been denied. The division has done an excellent job in monitoring the expenditures of the federal Homeland Security grant monies. Homeland Security routinely conducts audits on how Nevada administers the funds. Included with these audits are detailed requirements on how, and on what, these funds can be spent. To imply that $148 million in grant monies is unaccounted for is simply not true.

The Division of Emergency Management, led by Frank Siracusa and Kamala Carmazzi, has been a huge resource to the Commission on Homeland Security. They have been responsive, forthcoming and are clearly monitoring, in detail, all expenditures from the Homeland Security grant dollars. The division's response to floods, snow emergencies and fires has been outstanding. They have done their work with a small, dedicated staff, and have been commended for their work. When the federal government audited the division, its report noted that the agency was inadequately staffed per federal guidelines.

If there has been a failure in this state, it has been the Legislature's failure to address the concerns of the Division of Emergency Management and the Commission on Homeland Security. Apparently, the recommendations and concerns of division and the commission have fallen upon deaf ears.

Perhaps if Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie had allowed Ms. Carmazzi to provide this information instead of refusing to listen to her explanations, she might have gained a more accurate evaluation of the situation.

In addition, there was significant conflict in the audit process that necessitated an opinion from the Nevada attorney general's office. The opinion ultimately disagreed with the Legislative Counsel Bureau auditor's opinion. I wonder if there could have been a political or personal motivation in this audit's findings?

The Review-Journal's editorial stated, "It's time to put this dog down." In my opinion, it is the dog catcher that needs to be evaluated. I am disappointed that such a harsh editorial was written without determining the other side of the story.

Dale M. Carrison

LAS VEGAS

THE WRITER IS CHAIRMAN OF THE NEVADA COMMISSION ON HOMELAND SECURITY.