WEED & SEED FUNDING NEEDS RESTORATION HERE

Money might not be the best way to underwrite the war against crime,
but it certainly beats out whatever is second-best.

We're talking about Pensacola's loss of $225,000 annually in federal
Weed & Seed money -- funds appropriated by Congress that helped keep a
lid on lawbreakers in a core area of the city once prone to a high
incidence of crime -- particularly at the hand of young offenders.

Congress needs to restore that funding.

Pensacola's Weed & Seed program, which had received a total of
$840,000 since the five-year program's inception in 2001, went dormant
in the fall of 2004 when Hurricane Ivan destroyed the building from
which the funds were distributed. Its small administrative staff took
new jobs elsewhere. Now program administrators have applied for
federal money to underwrite a new five-year initiative.

Weed & Seed's restoration would be good for the Pensacola community.
Why? The five-year program that began in 2001 directly benefitted a
66- square-block area -- between Cervantes and Gregory streets from
Spring Street on the east to G Street on the west. Under the city's
application to renew Weed & Seed, the target area would extend well
north of Cervantes.

What's behind the name? The "weed" part relates to weeding out an
area's criminal elements -- paying for overtime to city police
officers to keep the area adequately patrolled, strictly enforcing
building codes, underwriting neighborhood crime-prevention programs

The other half of the program -- the "seed" part -- embodies all the
initiatives and services extended to the target community to seed
socio-economic advancement. That includes day care so young mothers
can have paying jobs, city recreational opportunities to ward off the
temptation of illegal drugs, after-school tutoring to bolster student
performance and free computer labs to enhance information-age skills.

City planners intent on revitalizing and improving the Weed & Seed
area's landscape liked the program. So did other collaborating
partners seeking to improve housing, public services and private
investment in the area. Weed & Seed had the support of just about
everyone -- except, perhaps, the neighborhood drug dealers. Most
importantly, the program had the support of the residents within the
66-square-block area.

But federal funding could be in jeopardy. Weed & Seed programs
overall, covered under the congressional appropriation, are
prioritized. So, if there's enough money to underwrite 100 Weed & Seed
programs nationwide, and if Congress and the federal Justice
Department determine there are 100 programs in cities with greater
needs than Pensacola, the new five-year initiative here might not get
off the ground.

"Pensacola is a safe place to live," admits Ed Spears, former director
of Pensacola's Neighborhood Economic Development Agency, which
administered Weed & Seed launched in 2001.

And all of us want to keep it that way.

The last thing Pensacola's residents need is to fall into the
nationwide trend just reported in USA Today, showing the nation's
violent crime rate is on the upswing, with a good share of it linked
to juveniles in gangs wielding guns. Part of the reason behind the
trend, officials said, is reduced funding for police and community
programs.

Gov. Jeb Bush last week noted healthy progress in reducing crime
statewide when he unveiled a Florida Department of Law Enforcement
report for 2005, showing Florida's overall crime rate had dropped for
the 14th straight year. The report further showed that drug arrests
had increased nearly 7 percent, following a 10 percent increase the
previous year.

Bush mostly credited tougher laws and increased financial support.
"This report shows that staying tough on crime works."

The tougher laws are now in place. But it's hard to remain tough
without the bucks for backup.

And that's why Congress must provide enough of an appropriation for
the Justice Department to cover Weed & Seed programs even in
communities with crime figures as relatively benign as
Pensacola's.

Seldom has there been a better argument for funding an ounce of
prevention that, in the long run, will be worth a pound of cure.