A significant portion of the meeting delved into the challenges posed by recent changes in federal funding protocols. A government official presented an overview of the city’s grant division, established the previous year as a central hub for managing federal grant activities. This division provides technical assistance and support across various departments.

The official noted the complexities introduced by the federal administration’s rapid issuance of executive orders, which often conflict with the slower agency responses. This friction complicates the city’s ability to navigate and implement necessary changes. Highlighted was a funding freeze initiated by the Office of Management and Budget through a memo on January 27. This freeze led to widespread confusion and was temporarily restrained by a federal judge, allowing grantees time to organize their financial requests.

The meeting also addressed several executive orders that influence federal funding, including those requiring compliance with newly defined anti-discrimination laws, the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs within federal agencies, and a reorientation of funding decisions to align with the administration’s political priorities rather than legislative guidance. Changes related to immigration funding were particularly contentious, with potential funding withholding for jurisdictions that do not comply with federal immigration enforcement.

The implications of these changes are significant for St. Paul, where around $260 million in federal funding is at stake. Of this, $192 million is under contract, with $140 million designated for project-based grants with set timelines, and $50 to $53 million for annual operational support grants. An additional $66 million in grants is in the obligation phase, with another $66 million in pending proposals. The disruptions to feedback timelines due to recent federal changes could ripple through projects like geothermal upgrades at community centers and a lead service line replacement initiative, both part of long-term city plans.

Immigration policy changes were another focal point, particularly an executive order denying federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions. St. Paul’s long-standing separation ordinance, in place since 2004, prevents city employees from enforcing federal immigration policies or soliciting immigration documentation, with exceptions for law enforcement in specific situations. The council discussed the potential repercussions of losing federal funding due to this policy, noting the city’s involvement in a lawsuit against the federal government challenging the legality of such an order.

The assistant city attorney’s presentation on recent federal immigration policies highlighted several changes, including the review of birthright citizenship policies, the pause on refugee resettlement, and the reinstatement of expedited removal processes. Concerns were raised over the designation of drug cartels as terrorist organizations, potentially leading to military involvement in immigration enforcement, and the rescinding of the sensitive locations policy, which previously protected schools and religious institutions from immigration actions.

Community organizations are stepping up to offer consultations and help families prepare emergency plans for potential detentions. These plans include documentation to designate authority over children’s education and healthcare decisions. The city has also developed a webpage offering information on food, healthcare, housing, legal assistance, and citizenship programs, providing a crucial support network for affected families.

An assistant city attorney committed to providing further information on the status of federal grants and their impact on St. Paul’s projects.