She said that the funding formula was based 2/3 on risk and 1/3 on the effectiveness of the proposed programs. She said New York City was ranked in the bottom 25% of effectiveness, which seems hard to believe. She also said that the Brooklyn Bridge and the Empire State Building were considered critical infrastructure, but were put under the categories of “bridge” and “tall commercial building” respectively, rather than that of “national icon.” She said it wasn’t DHS that was making the determination on effectiveness, but a panel of homeland-security experts drawn from around the country.

Finally, she didn’t know why New York City had such a huge drop in funding in 2004, a drop that makes this one look tiny by comparison (from roughly $150 million in 2003, to $50 million in 2004, back to $200 million in 2005).