Your city might be underprepared in an emergency

As with everything else, people and institutions (such as govts) are more prepared to deal with regular events and less with irregular / less likely events. Thus, govts in India that have the mechanisms to deal with yearly floods and droughts were found inadequate in dealing with the tsunami. Pre-Katrina, most reports that warned of a disaster in the making were dismissed as fanciful (i.e., low probability).

Once an event happens, people (and institutions) place a very high probability on a repeat.
Though a tsunami is very unlikely, funds-starved state govts in India discussed a reallocation of funds from basic anti-poverty programmes to plans to build a (ridiculous) wall between the sea and the land. Similarly, every US city is preparing to meet a 911 type of attack though the risk of "regular" terrorism (such as bombs in crowded places) seems much higher - simply because these cowardly acts are easier to execute than the cowardly act of ramming a plane into a building.

Shouldn't emergency planning be more rigorous and practical than this?