Dissecting Proposed Changes to Federal Assistance with Mayor Bianca Motley Broom

The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) proposed substantial changes to the Uniform Guidance, which governs federal grants and other forms of federal financial assistance. Bianca Motley Broom, Mayor of College Park, Georgia, and President of the Georgia Municipal Association, discusses the proposed changes and how they might impact municipalities, both small and large, if implemented.

For more information, visit us at nlc.org.

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:07

Welcome back to Cityspeak. I'm your host, Mike Wallace, Legislative Director for Housing, Community, and Economic Development at the National League of Cities. Cityspeak gives listeners and insiders' view of what local leadership in America means today and features conversations with government leaders and policy experts regarding the biggest issues and challenges facing America's cities, towns, and villages. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget proposed substantial changes to the Uniform Guidance, which governs federal grants and other forms of federal financial assistance. This includes all federal grants to local governments. OMB has three stated goals for these changes. They are trying to improve transparency and accountability, elevate existing guidance to formal regulations, and reduce the regulatory burden on federal grant administrators and recipients. A lot of that sounds good and very much in line with some of the things that NLC would like to see happen. But the devil's in the details, and this is a very long, substantial proposed change. To help us figure all this out, we're joined today by the mayor of College Park, Georgia, and also the Georgia Municipal Association president and member of NLC's board of directors, Mayor Bianca Motley Broom, to discuss these changes and how they might impact municipalities, both small and large, if they come to pass. Mayor Motley Broom, welcome to CitySpeak.

SPEAKER_02 1:33

Thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to be here.

SPEAKER_01 1:36

Yeah, it's so great to see you. Well, let's uh just start here, start by hearing a little bit about your city and what the fiscal environment for local governments is in Georgia.

SPEAKER_02 1:46

Well, College Park is a wonderful community situated south of Atlanta that actually houses parts of the world's busiest airport, Hartsfield Jackson, Atlanta International Airport. Um, the arrival and the departure gates, the T gates, the A gates, and the southern half of the B gates sit in our city limits.

SPEAKER_01 2:07

I'm sure I've been in all those actually.

SPEAKER_02 2:08

Exactly. I mean, if you have been to Hartsfield, chances are you have been to College Park. And it is a fantastic community filled with amazing individuals, a bustling business environment. Uh, we are less than 15,000 people, but we have the benefit of having access to all of Metro Atlanta and in the world because of uh Hartsfield Jackson. So it has been just such a delight and an honor and a privilege to be mayor of this community for the last six and a half years and see it change, see the state of Georgia change, see our country change through my involvement with GMA and NLC.

SPEAKER_01 2:56

That's great. Well, good leadership matters, you know, and I'm not surprised to hear your town is doing very well because they have a great mayor.

SPEAKER_02 3:02

Oh, you're too high. But you you asked me about the fiscal environment for local governments in Georgia. And and I didn't, I didn't talk about that because I was busy talking about my city. But it, I would say, is dynamic in that it is constantly changing because of what's happening on the state level in particular. And I know that a number of state leagues are dealing with some of these issues, especially around property taxes. Because we're hearing from residents and homeowners that property taxes are skyrocketing. And our colleagues on the state level are trying to figure out how they manage that. And so we had a really in-depth knockdown drag out discussion about property taxes in this past legislative session because everyone's trying to figure out what to do, but they're not always thinking about those impacts that will happen to our cities. In Georgia, we have 536 cities. Each one of them is doing their own thing because they've all got their charters and they all operate differently. But for most of them, property tax is a huge part of where they receive revenue and how they provide services to their citizens. So that that fiscal environment, I don't think we're done with the property tax conversation, and we'll probably see it again in the next legislative session. They they made some tweaks, but nothing as uh extreme as we saw uh towards the start of the session.

SPEAKER_01 4:39

Yeah, and or extreme as we're seeing in other states right now across the country. I mean, you know, I think a lot of people sometimes think cities have slush funds or, you know, some kind of funding sit around, but really every dollar in a municipal budget is counted for, it's obligated to something. And if something happens, it just brings projects to a halt or that sort of thing. And that um kind of bring home, brings home what is important about this OMB rule now because uh the more limited a city is in terms of its own ability to raise locally derived revenue, they've become more contingent on state funds and more um more dependent on federal funds to come in and fill some of those infrastructure needs, uh environmental needs, housing needs, those sorts of things. So let's talk about what the um what federal dollars your city uses, what kind of grants are coming in uh to your city, and what kinds of like direct funding, direct federal assistance is important to households uh in your community?

SPEAKER_02 5:38

For us in College Park, ARPA was a lifeline because we are so reliant upon tourism, hospitality, and travel. And during the pandemic, those numbers plummeted. We have over 35 hotels in our city, which typically are at 80 to 90 percent occupancy. During COVID, they went down to 15%. ARPA allowed our city to keep running because we weren't receiving revenue from other sources, and we used all of our allocation just for revenue replacement. Um that's the first thing I think about when I think about how important federal federal dollars have been to our city. But we've been the beneficiary of great advocacy on the federal level from our elected representatives. And we have seen congressionally directed spending come our way for important infrastructure projects like stormwater mitigation and lead pipe replacement, the things that aren't always as, gosh, I would say, they're not as flashy, but when things go wrong, they go horribly wrong. And they go wrong in ways that cost us far, far more on the back end. And we have seen over the years, even in my six and a half years as mayor, especially uh with stormwater and dealing with that surrounding the airport where we have a lot of impermeable surfaces. Uh we've got to handle how our our stormwater uh in a way that's responsible for the entire community. Because if we're not handling it up here, then they're getting it downstream. And we are seeing more incidents of big, big, big dumps of rain that we've got to handle. And if we're not doing that, we see uh at Southern Regional Hospital, further south from us, people can't access the hospital because the road is washed out.

SPEAKER_04 7:52

Wow. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 7:53

So the federal funds that we've received have allowed us to properly manage our stormwater to provide for the health and safety of our neighbors downstream.

SPEAKER_01 8:03

No, that's a that's a great point that a local project like that has those regional impacts. And you know, as much as uh anyone, you know, it's difficult to get federal dollars in the first place, and you're happy to get them, but there is a lot of compliance burden, reporting requirements. Really, um a federal grant can never leave the attention of a city until it's completely obligated and spent down. Uh and it was a major issue during ARPA and the state and local fiscal recovery fund to make sure that smaller municipalities with fewer staff, uh, those burdens were made, they're right size to what you're really able to accomplish compared to some of the biggest cities in the country.

SPEAKER_02 8:43

Absolutely. And I add to that point, like I said, we've got 536 cities in Georgia. Prior to everyone receiving ARPA funding, some folks were doing their bookkeeping by hand.

SPEAKER_04 8:58

Right.

SPEAKER_02 8:58

And so, I mean, we're we're dealing with cities that have single-digit staff members. So that doesn't mean that they aren't in need of the funding. It just means that they don't have all of the resources. And so I'm certainly I I have some some concerns about these proposals because of that. Because most of the cities that NLC represents, most of the cities that GMA represents are small cities. And it is hard enough every single day with the amazing staff members that each of these cities has to get the work done. But piling more on and piling more regulations is is it could be really problematic.

SPEAKER_01 9:47

Yeah, that's a good point. I mean, there are there's certainly cities still in the fax machine era, and uh we have to urge federal agencies just to keep a fax machine around. Right. You know, to help to help us out. Well, um, you've had a chance to look through the proposed changes, the very uh uh hundreds of pages of this uh proposed changes for this uh uniform guidance rule. Are there any that jump out at you? Good or bad?

SPEAKER_02 10:13

Well, I think there are some good things. Let's start with the good because we we can we can talk about the concerns, and I think there's plenty of time for that. But I do think that the idea that we are trying to simplify the language is key because not everyone is in the the federal government language sandbox, right? We don't always not all of us know what a no fo means. And so even starting there, not notice a funding opportunity.

SPEAKER_04 10:47

Right.

SPEAKER_02 10:48

Let's start at the basics. Because if you say there's a no fo out and it's a hundred and and fifty pages for that city with a you know, with three people on staff, they're gonna say, we don't have time for that. This is not anything that that we're gonna be able to accomplish with the tools that we have in our toolbox right now. But with executive summaries in plain language, that helps access these funds and these opportunities for smaller cities. So I think that is a great thing.

SPEAKER_01 11:25

Yeah, and and it's one we've been asking for for a long time, advocating for. And we've seen some progress with the Streamlined Grants Act. And so I'm glad to see that that effort mirrored here, you know, in this particular proposal. It means it's on the administration's radar, which is a good thing. You know, a lot of times, I mean, just thinking about cities that they may not need a huge grant to solve what's what's a really important problem in their community. You know, it could be environmental remediation or something like that. But, you know, by the time you pay a professional grant writer who does, you know, speak federal, um does speak federal language, um, you know, you've invested a tremendous amount of dollars into getting that grant that could have gone toward, you know, solving the issue at hand, right?

SPEAKER_04 12:10

Right.

SPEAKER_01 12:11

Absolutely. And it does, uh I think it does scare a lot of smaller places off from trying to do that because that's a significant investment of resource and funds.

SPEAKER_02 12:19

That uh my my friend and our first vice president of the Georgia Municipal Association, uh, the mayor of Young Harris, uh, Andrea Gibby, was was talking about her city's issues with this very, very problem uh a couple of weeks ago when we were seeing everybody on your great team at DLC when we were on Capitol Hill. But Young Harris has a sidewalk that's less than 2,000 linear feet. And they've gotten a $1.4 million grant with a 20% match for them uh to get this work done. And they're being told that it's gonna be five years till they can put out a bid for for this work. And because of all the federal uh hoops that they have to jump through, they're considering giving back the money. That's not what we want. Right. That's not at any point. I mean, we want this money to be able to service the people who A are funding it, right? We want everybody's paying taxes. So just because you live in a small city doesn't mean that they sh that those tax dollars shouldn't come back to you. But if it's if it's so onerous to get the work done, cities like Young Harris with a population of 1200 are just gonna think this is outside our reach. That's the last thing we want. We want everyone to have access to these funds. They're putting it in the pot. They deserve it.

SPEAKER_01 13:51

Yeah. Well, you know, um, considering whether you're able to even use the grant you've gotten is one thing. Uh finding out uh you've gotten the grant, you've spent, you've obligated your dollars, you spent down half your funds, and then an agency telling you, no, we've sound something that's a little bit outside the priorities we wanted to put these dollars to, uh, you have to pay those dollars back. That's kind of the worst case scenario, I think, for City, right? Um. And that's you know, a possibility under this uh new proposed rule. The proposal would allow agencies to terminate a grant mid-award if it's judged to be out of step with current executive branch priorities. So not a violation of statutes or a violation of the regulation overseeing the uh specific grant, um, but if it is uh found to be out of alignment with an executive order, for instance, which uh uh the executive branch can issue anytime, you know, with no forewarning. Um, you know, the proposal will give uh every federal agency, essentially direct every federal agency uh to review that grant, put it to a stop, and try to recapture um those funds. Uh I don't like that. I don't like that either. Um but that's one of my concerns. Let's talk about what's what we don't like about it. What would that kind of uncertainty, how would that kind of uncertainty affect your community?

SPEAKER_02 15:14

Mike. Mike, Mike, like we all need certainty. Right. Except maybe with, you know, if I'm talking to my husband about what we're gonna have for dinner, right? But if we are trying to make our cities what they can be for the next five, ten, twenty years, that level of planning and that level of coordination can't turn on a dime. And I was just in a meeting this morning with uh the other mayors in the South Fulton region, which is sort of the south side of Metro Atlanta, and we were talking about uh transit planning, transportation planning, planning, planning, planning, planning, planning. It was an hour and a half meeting about planning. How do we move the region forward with good planning and good coordination? The lack of certainty about federal priorities makes us all just so antsy. And it also makes it a lot harder for us to serve our residents. We were the recipient, the region was a recipient of a nearly $65 million reconnecting communities grant that ended up not happening.

SPEAKER_04 16:44

Oh, wow.

SPEAKER_02 16:44

That was going to allow us to connect the Flint River, which is the second longest river in the state of Georgia, to to the community and provide access and and a network of trails so that we could have the have the amenities in our region that the people expect and deserve. Right. It was heartbreaking to learn that we were not gonna get that grant.

SPEAKER_01 17:13

And this goes back to the funding freeze at the very start of this administration and grant review. So right.

SPEAKER_02 17:21

And and it was something that that we celebrated because it it was really going to be the the thing that allowed us to kick start just so much.

SPEAKER_04 17:37

Right.

SPEAKER_02 17:37

Honestly, it was it was just such a heartbreak not for that to happen. And it is a worthy project that our residents on the South Side should have. But the the priority shifted, and so the money through.

SPEAKER_01 17:57

Well, and those amenities are an economic driver too. You know, those are the kinds of places people want to live by. Um kinds of places that, you know, Main Street businesses can take advantage of, you know, and uh and I think people forget too, like these projects aren't one-off, like one and done. There's a sequence to the development. You talk about planning, and these things are years in the making, laid out sequentially, and if that sequence breaks down, you're not jeopardizing just that project, you're jeopardizing the whole uh everything in the future stemming from that project that's already in the works.

SPEAKER_02 18:33

Right. Absolutely. And and the the whole idea that it's not just one project is so critical because we know that if we are investing those public dollars, the private ones will follow.

unknown 18:47

Right.

SPEAKER_02 18:48

That economic development, it it will, you know, if you build it, they will come. I didn't I can tell you about my hometown of Cleveland, Ohio, uh, and their investment in the Euclid Avenue bus rapid transit. And the um the amount of economic development that has just flooded into that area because there's been a commitment to the plan for good transit, and people recognized, okay, now we've got opportunities for our workers to get places.

SPEAKER_04 19:25

Yep.

SPEAKER_02 19:26

And they're they're doing it easier. And so we need to be around this. And when I was growing up, when I was a kid, there wasn't a heck of a lot there. There were it was kind of the it it was the it was sort of the fallout of the Huff riots. Oh wow where I where I uh started my days and it and it has transformed that part of Cleveland. We know those public dollars, you know, you put one in, and you're gonna get multitudes of of private investment if we do this right. But we've got to stay the course. And so that level of uncertainty is really problematic when we're trying to develop our communities for the next generation.

SPEAKER_01 20:15

Yeah, just trying to raise the standard of living, you know. Um, and and it is unsettling how quickly that could um be jeopardized by science. This is probably the biggest consequence we're worried about with this proposal is just the um, you know, the power to just cut off a grant midway through, and really very little that we can find in ways of recourse to challenge that or fix whatever the problem was. Um ability to cure a grant, as they say. This seems to be more going directly to um recapturing funding that's out of step, perceived to be out of step with uh an executive order or an executive action. Um from the white. What about next week? Well, what about next week or next administration? I mean it could be administration, you know. I mean it's yeah, yeah exactly.

SPEAKER_02 21:02

And and I think I think this should be something that we really think very closely about and and and use our voices to express how we're feeling about it. I know that um I'm kind of hopping ahead a little bit here. Um deadline is July 13th.

SPEAKER_03 21:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 21:24

We need our member cities to engage because this is going to directly impact them. This is going to be something where this could turn your your relationship with federal funding on its ear. And the federal government needs to hear from you. There's been over 30,000 comments submitted already, but we need cities to step up. We need them at the table because we are going to be the entities that are directly impacted by this. We can't But we can't let this opportunity slide. We've got to make our voices right.

SPEAKER_01 22:04

Well, I NLC joined with our sister organizations and state and local government, National Association of Counties, Conference of Mayors, Governors, et cetera. We did send a letter to OMB asking for a 45-day extension. Don't know if they'll grant it. We have no idea. Hopefully they will to give people more time to really figure out what this major proposal is that they've put out. But we shouldn't wait. We shouldn't assume that's going to happen. We should put that in. As I say, you know, you know, NLC is a nonpartisan organization. You know that. We work with uh every administration, every configuration of Congress, uh, and we work with the professional career professional staff at the federal agencies, right? You know, right now um there are real experts and agencies in these programs and community development and economic development and clean water. And um, you know, typically what happens at a federal agency who's uh administering a grant is it's those career experts that are evaluating projects, evaluating the capacity of grant applicants uh to carry out uh the work they say they want to carry out under a grant agreement, um, and uh you know, provide uh themselves as a source of expertise, right? Um city may get a consultant, they may not, um, but there are experts in HUD field offices and the regional offices. Um, there are experts, you know, at EPA that make themselves available to local governments. Under this proposal, um, that would change. Uh, the final um review would be made by the political appointees of whatever administration uh is in power in the executive branch uh at that time. And one of the fears is um the criteria by which they might be making judgments won't be um solely based on good policy or solely based on um the capacity and the need of the applicant. Right. Um they may be making some political decisions based on the, you know, the executive orders, the policies of the executive branch in power, uh, and we're um, you know, introducing that kind of element could have some serious consequences across the country, right? Depending on what the relationship is between whatever executive uh branch administration is there and cities and towns who, you know, make choices and make make choices about how to grow, make choices about their values as a community, about their community identity. We think that's the local level is the right place to make those kinds of choices. Um, but in some ways, this brings in a federal lens to really look at and potentially influence those choices.

SPEAKER_02 24:59

And I'm troubled.

SPEAKER_01 25:01

No, no, you're not.

SPEAKER_02 25:03

I am troubled by it because one of the things that I absolutely adore about serving in local government is that we are able to actually address problems. And without without this overly partisan lens. My neighbor has called me twice this week because on Monday his trash did not get picked up. And so I had to fix that.

SPEAKER_03 25:31

Sure.

SPEAKER_02 25:32

And we did. And then there's been a shift in trash service because of the holiday. And so we had another conversation about that this morning. And he I I don't know who he voted for in the last election, but it doesn't matter. My job as his mayor is to make sure that his needs are met, that the services that he expects from our city are happening at his house. And that's all he cares about. And that's all that most of my neighbors care about. And when we get the opportunity to receive federal funding to address those issues that my neighbors care about, whether it is clean water, whether it is ensuring that our police department has the tools that they need to keep us safe, uh the the the stormwater issues. They care that their houses aren't flooding, people aren't breaking into their houses. They those are the things that they care about. And I'm really concerned that we could be trying to tackle those issues midstream, and then someone decides that they don't like something else that's going on, and then things get cut off. So much of the work that we do it doesn't matter if there's an R or a D in front of it, people just want their problems solved.

SPEAKER_04 27:09

Right.

SPEAKER_02 27:09

And I can't the the local level is where it's stuff gets gets done. That's what I love. I mean, it's just it's so cool. Yeah. It's such a privilege. But policies or proposals like this can make it more difficult for that to happen. And all I'm here to do, no matter who's elected governor, president, senator, doesn't matter to me in a lot of ways. Because I'm gonna work with you regardless to get the things done for the residents of College Park. And let's let's let's keep that the focus. Like we are here to serve people. And the thing is, is that we're all serving the safe people. So let's get the work done for them.

SPEAKER_01 27:58

Yeah, well, I love that sentiment. I think that's why NLC has been so successful at working with elected officials across the political divide at the local level, uh, and really finding uh incredible consensus on issues just like that at the local level that um enhanced people's lives every day. You know, uh I think you know, from our perspective, we you know, whether you're a red state or a blue state or a blue city and a red state, red city, blue state, uh, you don't want to be thinking about um because of who overall we voted for, that's going to impact our ability to work with an administration to get dollars that are important to your city. Um and I think that that, you know, going down that road, sort of reading into this proposal, those are some of our big concerns uh here right now.

SPEAKER_02 28:54

And and let me just say, I'm gonna put my plug in. I and I hope that this makes the cut. Yes. Sir, are a national treasure and that you and the entire NLC team do an amazing job.

SPEAKER_01 29:11

Oh, thank you.

SPEAKER_02 29:12

Amazing job of advocating for all of our cities, towns, and villages across this country. And and do it in a way that allows our voices to be heard uh with you know through all of the partisan stuff that's going on in DC.

SPEAKER_04 29:28

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 29:28

Like I I think that you do an amazing job of ensuring that we do keep our our our focus on what matters, and that is the service to our communities.

SPEAKER_01 29:40

Yeah, well, thank you very much. Uh we do, I mean, I have an incredible team here, incredible colleagues at NLC. I've been here 20 years, so you know, I I much like it. Um, but it's also a place where I've met some of my best friends, yourself included. So it's uh been meaningful work. Uh okay, we can stop congratulating ourselves now. How about uh uh let me ask you this. Several provisions would add new administrative and reporting requirements for grantees. For a city like yours, what does that actually mean in practice? You know, how much do you uh end up spending on these administrative parts of uh spending your grant? Do you have the staff capacity really to absorb more compliance work, more complex work around um around these grants?

SPEAKER_02 30:28

In short, no. But I think one of the big challenges for us and other cities around the country is the fact that we are seeing a wave of retirements. We're in that silver tsunami. So it's harder to find the experts to help us along the way to to get this work done. And that is something in talking with elected officials, no matter where they are, they're dealing with those challenges. Those seasoned municipal staff members are going on and living their best lives, and they should. And they've they've served well and had had really distinguished careers and moved their municipal municipalities forward. But the the the search for talent is real.

SPEAKER_03 31:21

That's true.

SPEAKER_02 31:22

It is it is absolutely real. We had a grants manager position open for I want to say, I mean, it was close to a year before we found someone because we can't pay what other folks might pay. I mean, these these folks are in high demand. So even though our funding in our city is not as tight as some others, we do have a lot of uh revenue sources when when things are good. Right. When you're not in the midst of a pandemic. Um but so even though we could pay someone, it's real I mean, something, but still not the private sector money. It's finding people. And it's finding the people who can help us work through this, those folks are in super, super high demand. And we we just can't compete with the private sector on that.

SPEAKER_01 32:21

Yeah, that it reminds me. I mean, I'm I'm go back, I'm gonna go back to state and local fiscal recovery fund just because it's the only instance of a of a federal grant going to all 19,500 plus cities, towns, and villages across the United States. And we had a productive relationship with the Treasury Department. You know, technically, um, the rules would have been that every single one of those grantees would have been subject to a very expensive single audit requirement. And I mean we made the case successfully because it was true. The small communities, in some cases, the requirement uh would have cost more than the grant itself.

SPEAKER_03 33:00

Right.

SPEAKER_01 33:00

There's just it wasn't going to work. And so Treasury made a reasonable accommodation, kind of split half the biggest cities from the smaller cities, and gave smaller cities a reasonable alternative ability for to hire an accountant and go through all the work and the books and compliance, but not to the level of the single audit, which is a professional standard. Uh, and that really was necessary to make that work. Now, under this proposal, it's not clear that an agency would maintain that authority to make that kind of accommodation anymore. I think it's the uh Office of Management and Budget would be making those choices alone. Um, and that's kind of what happens when uh I forget the second goal here was to I'm looking for it. Here it is. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 33:51

Existing guidance regulation.

SPEAKER_01 33:54

Elevate existing guidance into form your regulations. It sounds very bureaucratic, sounds very boring, really, but it's not. Umb currently issues guidance to agencies. It's not binding. Uh it is uh it's guidance, it's advice, but agencies currently have uh the authority to make those kinds of accommodations because they needed it to make programs work. You know, not uh Congress doesn't capture every single possible condition in statute every time they write a bill. You know, agencies have a lot of latitude that way. Um, but but taking that away from agencies.

SPEAKER_02 34:29

I mean, they they get to be nimble when it's actually in practice.

SPEAKER_01 34:32

Right, right.

SPEAKER_02 34:34

And that's important. And and the experts need to be able to make those calls. Because look, Mike, I don't even cut my own hair, okay? Because I'm not trained to do it.

SPEAKER_04 34:46

Right, right.

SPEAKER_02 34:47

So why why do we not let I mean this is on a on every level, there are people who have been trained to do the work that they're doing. And by and large, when we let those folks lead in their areas of expertise, we get good outcomes. And I think that the flexibility that we saw with um SLRF, excuse me, the SLRF, uh really made the difference for communities. Like I said, some were some sent in information on paper, and then some folks were doing QuickBooks. And so um, you know, I use it from I use QuickBooks for my small business. Running a city on that is could be a little bit different. We have to meet cities where they are, and that means that we have to be flexible because as you said, we've got over 19,500 of them. They're operating differently. And whether you've got three people on your staff or 3,000, you you you've got to be able to work within the confines of what you've got. And um I think shifting the flexibility away from the folks who know the most and are most connected to us and are seeing some of the the opportunities and challenges when Congress implements uh legislation. I think it's it that just makes sense.

SPEAKER_01 36:27

Yeah. Well, I think one, you know, one of the things we always, you know, in our point of view here at NLC, and when we uh working with members of Congress and and and thinking about how to make legislative ideas work in practice, um, you know, we urge Congress really to enlist local elected officials and local governments into any effort to achieve a national objective, right? Um and that's what State and Local Fisk Recovery Fund was. Uh really that's what community development block grant is, um, to, you know, raise the standard of living in different communities, revitalization, um, you know, providing local governments with funding and resources and tools to do their part in their community to ultimately reach a national objective. That works because local governments can move quickly compared to to states and certainly the the federal government. So these bottom-up approaches, we like to see that in federal policy. This is a this is a very top-down approach, this proposal here. If you could sit down with OMB and tell them what cities actually need for federal grant reform, what would you share with them?

SPEAKER_02 37:36

I would share with OMB that cities need partners. We need partners within the federal government to help us navigate these systems and not additional hurdles.

SPEAKER_03 37:53

Right.

SPEAKER_02 37:54

And to your point about uh what members of Congress are trying to do and versus what's actually happening. I think every time that I've had the opportunity to sit down with a member of Congress and talk about these issues, they all want to make sure that they are bringing resources back to their districts. That is their goal. And they but they need to hear our stories about the disconnect that's happening because they don't recognize that once they've passed whatever bill they passed that that we're having issues uh with implementation on the local level or on the state level. So I think it's absolutely critical that we maintain those lines of communication with our federal elected officials to keep on bringing home the fact that these proposals and these policies, they're not abstract, they are impacting the people that we all serve, and this is how they're doing that. And they won't know unless we tell them. But they are open to hearing it. I mean, I've I've sat down with with federal elected officials of both parties, they want to serve, they want to do the work, and they want to bring those resources to us on the local level, but they don't always know how where things break down. So the the more that we can bring that message home to them with concrete examples of how things aren't working in your community, the better they can represent us on the federal level.

SPEAKER_01 39:44

I couldn't say it better. That's it, that's exactly right. It is critical, really, I think, for local officials like yourself, and you've done this, but to build and maintain those lasting relationships with your federal delegation, your representatives, your senators, um, because you know, not even in a time of crisis, but just at any any critical time, being able to pick up that phone and read them in quickly without a huge amount of background, um, you know, they will move, they will act, they will send letters to agencies, they will do what they need to do, I think uh in most instances that I've I'm aware of to help their district, to help their state, um, regardless of the politics. Right.

SPEAKER_02 40:24

Absolutely, absolutely. And and to that point, the elected officials and their staffers, and their staffers, for sure. You should have the numbers of the staff members.

SPEAKER_01 40:36

Right.

SPEAKER_02 40:37

Because you won't always be able to get your member of Congress on the phone, but you should be able to get someone from their office. That's right.

SPEAKER_04 40:44

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 40:44

And they should be responsive to you. That don't take, you know, we'll call you back in two weeks for an answer. These these folks are are serving us. And in order for us to serve the people that we represent, they've got to do it on their end. And so we need to have those those lines of communication. You need to know who those staffers are. Sometimes they they will change fairly quickly in in uh various offices, but you need to have your pulse on that. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 41:20

And if a member of Congress is a former mayor to remind them where they came from.

SPEAKER_02 41:25

How could you ever forget?

SPEAKER_01 41:27

You'd be surprised up here.

SPEAKER_02 41:29

I, you know, I guess so. But this is I mean, look, this is the place where you walk your dog down the street and someone will tell you a problem and you can solve it.

SPEAKER_04 41:39

Oh, sure.

SPEAKER_02 41:40

That is so cool.

unknown 41:41

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 41:42

I love it. I love it. Like I I don't know how they do it on the federal level, but there's nothing like local government. It's so cool.

SPEAKER_01 41:49

Well, I, you know, I love working with local elected officials, I'll say that.

SPEAKER_02 41:54

Yeah. I mean, we're we're we're we're good eggs. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 41:58

Um well, you already sort of touched on this, but it's important. So let's do it again. The common deadline to OMB is July 13. That's what it is. Even if we've asked an extension, we've not gotten an extension. So we're gonna say it's July 13. What would you say to other mayors who may not yet be engaged on this issue, hasn't heard about it yet, or or maybe has heard about it, but it sounds bureaucratic. Why does it matter to cities and towns show up and respond?

SPEAKER_02 42:23

Well, I mean, it it it is bureaucratic.

SPEAKER_01 42:26

Well, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 42:27

It doesn't just sound bureaucratic. It is bureaucratic. Let's be real. Yeah. But sometimes we have to get in the weeds. If we're not in the weeds, who else is going to be advocating for us? NLC does an amazing job, but they need to hear the stories, they need to understand, and this is an opportunity. Put your comments in with the 30,000 plus others that have already been submitted, because they need to know what this will do in your community. And even if you are not receiving federal funds, even which is, I mean, you're you're getting federal funds in one way, shape, or form. But it even if you don't have some direct uh line right now, there's probably a reason why. And say that. Tell them why this will be a barrier to you even trying to get federal funds in the future. Talk about what the processes look like before, what your concerns are, but also talk about the good stuff. We want things in plain English. NOFOs and executive summaries, and I mean the executive summaries of a no fo in plain English is awesome. Great. We should give praise where it is due. We should also be frank with our feedback and how it will impact our communities and therefore jeopardize our ability to serve our residents. That's what we're here for. We are here for advocacy for the people who have elected us. So now's the time to step up, get your comment in and let them know how you feel.

SPEAKER_01 44:07

Yeah, and I just remind folks too, it's it's not hard. It's not um, you know, really you go on the website and it's just like typing an email. It can be that easy to submit it, but you can also submit a formal letter, a formal resolution. You can go as as formal as you want, but you know, um, it's a low barrier to submit those comments, uh, which is one of the reasons we've seen so many submitted so far. Well, Mayor, Mayor Bianca Motley Broom, it's been a delight. I love talking to you. Thank you so much for stopping by Cityspeak today and breaking down how these proposed changes would impact communities.

SPEAKER_02 44:43

It is always such a pleasure being with you. I look forward to seeing you in a few weeks.

SPEAKER_03 44:49

Yes, yes, yes, yes.

SPEAKER_02 44:51

And um I just am soywilly. Yes, in Louisville. It's it's gonna be it's gonna be a good opportunity to learn a little bit more about our president's hometown and um looking forward to engaging with all of our folks at the summer board. That's right. But I I just before we close out again, I just want to thank you and NLC for everything that you do for us because you are our voice. You are that collective voice for us uh as cities, towns, and villages and across America. It is, I don't know what we would do without you. And and the the detailed policy analysis that you are able to give us and the entire team about some of these really complex issues allows us to better advocate and better represent our communities. So thank you.

SPEAKER_01 45:45

Well, thank you. But you know, our job in a nutshell is to stick up for cities and mayors like you who stick up for your city make that um a lot easier and uh and really is what's behind our ability to be successful at the federal level. So so thank you again. And and note to our listeners if you'd like more information, you can visit nlc.org to find more resources on the proposed changes, including a blog spelling out from our points of view, but we also link to the nonprofits association's points of view. Our friends at the uh National Station Counties have a blog out. And um, so you know, there's lots of views to choose from, but I think you'll see some consistent concerns across all these different stakeholders in the public sector side. So thank you again, Mayor, and uh look forward to see you soon. Thanks everyone for listening to City Speaker.

NLC 46:43

Thanks for listening to City Speak with Clarence Anthony. If you like this show, let us know. Share this episode with your friends, and make sure to subscribe. We're curious to hear what you think, what you want more of, and how we can improve. If you have feedback or an idea for a guest you'd like Clarence to sit down with, send us your thoughts at Cityspeak Podcast at nlc.org. Join us next month for a new episode. Like and subscribe here or wherever you get your podcast. See you next time.