State and Local Responses to Terrorism.


Series: NIJ Update
Published: June 1995
3 pages
5,193 bytes

State and Local Responses to Terrorism

Horrendous acts of terrorism, such as the recent
bombings of Oklahoma City's Murrah Federal Building
and New York City's World Trade Center, have
focused attention on Federal, State, and local law
enforcement preventive and preparedness measures
and, in particular, on the reevaluation of domestic
security policies and procedures nationwide. To
assess how States and municipalities have perceived
the threat of terrorism and to identify potentially
promising anti- and counter-terrorism programs used
by these jurisdictions, the National Institute of
Justice (NIJ) sponsored a 2-year research effort.
The results of this study indicated that State and
local law enforcement agencies viewed the threat of
terrorism as very real, that they defined it more
broadly than their Federal counterparts, and that a
jurisdiction's approach to preparedness and
prevention varied according to its size, resources,
and the nature of the terrorist threats it
confronted.

Perceptions of terrorism

The research project's national survey of State and
local law organizations showed that their more
expansive definitions of what constitutes terrorist
activity led a sizable majority of jurisdictions to
believe terrorism to be more widespread than
indicated by the official terrorist statistics
published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI). In these broader definitions, States and
municipalities considered threatening acts by
organizations such as the Skinheads to be
terrorist, and they identified right-wing
(Neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic, anti-federalist) and
issue-specific (anti-abortion, animal rights,
environmentalist) organizations as the most
threatening actual and potential terrorist sources.

Approaches to the problem

After a survey to assess the perception of the
terrorist threat in this country, researchers
selected 10 locations (i.e., Whitehall,
Pennsylvania; New York, New York; Birmingham,
Alabama; Miami, Florida; San Juan, Puerto Rico;
Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Coffey County/Burlington,
Kansas; Coeur d'Alene, Idaho; Seattle, Washington;
and Los Angeles, California) as case studies. They
looked at how different jurisdictions have adapted
to the threat of terrorism and developed their
preventive and preparedness programs.  The case
studies confirmed in detail what the survey
revealed in general terms, i.e., that communities
have been aware of potential terrorism problems and
were interested in confronting terrorism before it
erupted.  A variety of successful terrorism
preparedness formulas existed in communities both
large and small.

Major cities. Large municipalities, such as New
York City and Miami, have developed significant
counter-terrorism programs in close cooperation
with the FBI and its regional joint terrorism task
forces. These cities adhere to similar, or the
same, guidelines and restrictions on intelligence
gathering and collection as are imposed on Federal
law enforcement agencies.  They communicate
regularly with the FBI and benefit from the
Bureau's training and guidance.

Smaller jurisdictions. Less populated communities,
such as Kootenai County/Coeur d'Alene in Idaho,
have worked to stay ahead of nascent terrorism
threats by forging close regional alliances and
capitalizing on available FBI resources. Smaller
jurisdictions that house sensitive facilities--such
as military installations, nuclear power plants,
telecommunications nodes, and fuel supplies--are
more likely to have developed and reviewed
terrorism contingency plans than communities with
no such vital infrastructure targets.  For example,
Coffey County, Kansas, Home of Wolf Creek Nuclear
Station, contracted with a private agency to
provide its four-member strategic response team
with counter-terrorism training.

Resource constraints

More generally, the case study findings suggest
that, along with the nature of the possible
terrorism and the number of people who live within
the jurisdiction, budgetary constraints influence
both strategic and tactical law enforcement
responses. Communities value the intelligence and
support the FBI provides and their communication
with Federal authorities. Localities are interested
in adopting a broad strategic approach, in which
intelligence, planning, and advance preparation are
used to combat terrorism, but frequently lack the
resources to maintain such an expensive approach.

------------------------------
The full report, Domestic Terrorism: A National
Assessment of State and Local Law Enforcement
Preparedness, was written by Kevin Jack Riley and
Bruce Hoffman, analysts at the RAND Corporation. A
limited number of copies of the report are
available from NCJRS (NCJ-154-149). The study was
prepared for the National Institute of Justice
under grant number 91-IJ-CX-0019. Copies of the
full report (505-NIJ, RAND), published in 1995, can
be obtained from RAND by telephoning 310-451-7002
or sending an e-mail request to order@rand.org.
------------------------------