Aidan Quigley is an editorial intern at Politico.

The nation’s mayors never bought Donald Trump’s “American carnage” description of their cities. But they say his proposed budget, which would cut a $54-billion hole right in the heart of the programs that their cities live and die by, could bring his rhetoric closer to reality.

A large majority of America’s mayors—88 percent—say that Trump’s proposed budget, issued March 16, would be “devastating” or “extremely painful” to their city, according to POLITICO Magazine’s new quarterly mayors survey. The poll confirms the deep concerns mayors expressed in the previous survey released immediately after the Inauguration in January. But the largely theoretical anxiety that urban chief executives articulated earlier this year now has specific dollar amounts attached and the programs slated for cuts—some of them eliminated entirely—are ones that benefit their poorer, most vulnerable citizens.

The mayors expressed the most concern about cuts to federal housing and urban development programs, including Community Development Block Grants, a workhorse of the Housing and Urban Development budget. Seventy-seven percent of mayors surveyed said the $6 billion in proposed cuts to housing, including for low-income energy assistance and vouchers, would be “devastating” or “very harmful.”

...



Cuts to transportation programs rank alongside housing on the mayors list of top concerns, followed closely by education (after-school programs and teacher training, for example). Public safety and legal aid for low-income citizens were tied, with just under 60 percent of mayors saying that cuts in those areas would be “devastating” or “very harmful.”

The massive cuts led 63 of the mayors surveyed (93 percent) to say they don’t believe Trump’s statements that he wants to improve the inner cities. Only five mayors said they still believed him.

“America is only great when American cities are great,” Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said. “Cuts make our national economy weak, leave Americans less protected and widen the gap between successful and struggling residents.”

Sixty-eight mayors responded to the ninth installment of Politico Magazine’s mayors survey, part of the award-winning What Works series. Mayors from across the country responded to the unscientific and anonymous survey during the first half of April. More than 80 percent of survey respondents, 57, were Democrats, mirroring the leftward tilt of America’s city halls. Five Republicans and six independent or non-partisan mayors responded.


Mayors are most concerned about the elimination of the $3 billion Community Development Block Grant program administered by HUD, now run by neurosurgeon turned failed presidential candidate Ben Carson. While the Trump budget says the CDBG “is not well-targeted to the poorest populations and has not demonstrated results,” those seeing the effects of the program, mayors, are defending it vigorously.

The CDBG funds are used to provide affordable housing, provide services to the poor and create jobs through business expansion and retention in around 1,200 state and municipal government units nationwide.

In fiscal year 2016, 73,757 households were aided through CDBG housing programs and 17, 545 jobs were created or retained through economic programs. Nationwide, 9.2 million Americans benefitted from public services funding from CDBG that went to programs ranging from substance abuse programs to employment training.

Denver mayor Michael Hancock, a Democrat said CDBG funding helps cities like his “revitalize struggling neighborhoods and create jobs.”

“Cities helped power the country out of the recession with the support of these programs,” he said. “They are vital and help us ensure that all our residents have the opportunity to live a good life. We risk going backwards if budget cuts affect most those who have the least.”

These concerns were shared by at least one of Hancock’s Republican colleagues, Steve Hogan of Aurora, Colorado. He said CDBG was “hardly a wasteful program,” as the locality spends most of its around $3 million in CDBG funding on police, fire, water, sewers, streets and parks. “Which of those are we supposed to cut in order to make up for the loss of CDBG dollars to address the needs of our citizens?” Hogan asked.

But the fight over CDBG funding isn’t new to America’s city halls. Mick Cornett, the Republican mayor of Oklahoma City and the president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, said the mayors went through this under the Obama administration. Despite campaign promises to maintain CDBG funding, President Obama recommended cuts throughout his presidency, including a $200 million cut in his budget for fiscal year 2016. Cornett said this led mayors to mobilize and lessen cuts to the program.

“I don’t know of a mayor who’s not very protective of CDBG funding,” Cornett said. “I think time and time again you’ll see in city after city, that these dollars are spent well.”

Trump’s budget represents a different kind of threat for the program signed into law by Republican President Gerald Ford. From a peak of around $15 billion a year during the Carter administration, funding for the program has fallen under presidents from both parties. This includes about a 50 percent decrease since 2000. But mayors say a complete elimination of the program would have an unfathomable impact on their communities.

With Republicans holding the presidency and majorities in both houses of congress, budget cuts are likely in whatever budget finds its way to Trump’s desk, but some mayors are finding solace in the budget's long path to passage. Only 35 percent said they were extremely worried Trump’s budget would pass, while half were somewhat worried and 13 percent not worried at all.

Although the U.S. Conference of Mayors has reached out to the White House and individual cabinet members, its main efforts are focused on Congress, which holds the purse strings, Cornett said. “I tend to think that Congress had made up its mind years and years ago that these are worthwhile programs, and they’ll want to put them back in the budget,” he said. “If this is a new day and a new era where these kinds of programs are eliminated, I guess I’d be surprised.”

To rally against these cuts, the mayors say they have turned to each other for support. Eighty percent of the mayors said they are conferencing with mayors across the country to fight the proposed cuts. Seventy-two percent said they are appealing to their congressional representatives, while 58 percent are speaking out in the media to address the cuts.

With cuts to transportation and education spending also on the table, more than two-thirds of mayors said those proposed cuts would be “devastating” or “very harmful” to their cities. The budget proposes a 13 percent, $2.4 billion cut to the Department of Transportation. Trump’s budget eliminates funding for the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program, part of the 2009 economic stimulus which funds local transportation projects. The cuts also include funding for long-distance Amtrak trains and the Federal Transit Administration's Capital Investment program which pays for rail, streetcar and bus projects.

Trump has also proposed a $9.2 billion, or 13.5 percent, cut to the Department of Education. These cuts include $2.4 billion in teacher training grants, $1.2 billion in summer school and after school programs. Federal work study programs are facing cuts, and the Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG) program which offers aid to 1.6 million low-income undergraduates every year is on the chopping block.

Even some more conservative mayors, who say they understand the need for cuts, are struggling to reconcile these cuts with Trump’s signature campaign promise to build the border wall with Mexico.

“I don't mind necessary cuts, but I struggle at the highest level when you take the dollars saved and then put them towards things like a border wall at $8 million per mile that won't provide taxpayer value at all,” Mike T. Huether, the independent mayor of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, said.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimates building the border wall would cost $21.6 billion, enough to fund around seven years of the CDBG at current levels. Constituents in these cities are taking notice of the proposed budget, with 49 percent of mayors saying their inboxes were “overflowing” with constituents feelings on the proposed cuts. Thirty-two percent of mayors say they haven’t heard a peep, while 10 percent said their constituents are happier with the rollback of regulations than they are concerned with the budget.

“I think a lot of our constituents are worried about the issues and not the mechanics of how that plays out,” Democratic mayor Suzanne Jones of Boulder, Colorado, said. “It’s not that they email us about budgets, but they do email us about concerns.”

Along with the housing, transportation and education cuts concerns, more than half of the mayors said cuts to public safety and legal aid for low-income residents would be “devastating” or “very harmful.” Trump’s budget would eliminate the $375 million-a-year Legal Services Corporation, which provides legal aid to low-income residents. The budget also cuts anti-terrorism funding for cities, including $200 million from the New York Police Department. Mayor Helene Schneider of Santa Barbara, California, a Democrat, fears Trump’s budget cuts would have “devastating” effects on her constituents, primarily cuts to affordable housing and the SNAP program which provides low-income students breakfasts and lunches at school.

Additionally, she fears the Trump administration’s cuts to the National Endowment for the Arts will affect the city’s libraries and art scene. The city’s culture plays a role in driving tourism, which bolsters the local economy, she said. Schneider wasn’t alone in pointing to the economic impact they foresee if the budget is enacted.

“President Trump — you've said your main focus is economic growth, but by punishing America's cities, you will slow the economic engines that move our country forward,” San Francisco Democratic mayor Ed Lee said.

Although almost 70 percent of mayors remain as or more optimistic about the economy in their city as they were six months ago, this reflects a drop from January, when that number was closer to three-quarters. It’s the second quarter in a row that mayors have tempered their optimism.

While there is broad consensus on big ticket items such the block grants program, many mayors also have concerns particular to their city. In Boulder, Jones is deeply concerned about the economic impact of cuts to federally funded labs, research at the University of Colorado Boulder and transit cuts.

The labs in the Boulder area and Northern Colorado study issues ranging from extreme weather and climate change to energy efficiency of household appliances. Cuts would also lead to layoffs, which would hurt the economy, Jones said.

“It would have a huge impact economically as well as substantively with the good work being done,” Jones said. The dramatic, theatrical political fights in Washington don’t trickle down to the localities, as Jones said city halls across the country realize these issues affect all mayors, regardless of party.

“I think mayors in the cities in general understand that these issues aren’t partisan, this is about delivering services to our communities,” Jones said.

Participating Mayors: Noam Bramson, New Rochelle, NY; Joseph M. Petty, Worcester, MA; Claudia Bill-de la Pena, Thousand Oaks, CA; George Van Dusen, Skokie, IL; Paul Dyster, Niagara Falls, NY; Jonathan Rothschild, Tucson, AZ; Helene Schneider, Santa Barbara, CA; Nan Whaley, Dayton, OH; Javier M. Gonzales, Santa Fe, NM; Jon Mitchell, New Bedford, MA; Steve Adler, Austin, TX; Frank C. Ortis, Pembroke Pines, FL; Kate Thomas, Reno, NV; Paul Soglin, Madison WI; Timothy McDonough, Hope, NJ; Ed Lee, San Francisco, CA; Mike T. Huether, Sioux Falls, SD; Mark Stodola, Little Rock, AR; Jeri Muoio, West Palm Beach, FL; Patrick J. Furey, Torrance, CA; Steve Chirico, Naperville, CA; Norm Archibald, Abilene, Texas; Steve Hogan, Aurora, CO; Frank Cownie, Des Moines, IA; Terry Tornek, Pasadena, CA; Michael Taylor, Sterling Heights, MI; J. Christian Bollwage, Elizabeth, NJ; Bob O'Dekirk, Joliet, IL; Joseph Ganim, Bridgeport, CT; Walter Campbell, Coral Springs, FL; Denny Doyle, Beaverton, OR; Cynthia Chase, Santa Cruz, CA; Bob Buckhorn, Tampa, FL; Esther Manheimer, Asheville, NC; Dan Pope, Lubbock, TX; Levar M. Stoney, Richmond, VA; Andy Berke, Chattanooga, TN; Allison Silberberg, Alexandria, VA; Larry Wolgast, Topeka, KS; Jackie Biskupski, Salt Lake City, UT; Jennifer Roberts, Charlotte, NC; Rick Kriseman, St. Petersburg, FL; Lovely A. Warren, Rochester, NY; Madeline Rogero, Knoxville, TN; Andrew Gillum, Tallahassee, FL; Adrian O. Mapp, Plainfield, NJ; Jim Darling, McAllen, TX; Toni N. Harp, New Haven, CT; Bob Sampayan, Vallejo, CA; Buddy Dyer, Orlando, FL; Darrell Steinberg, Sacramento, CA; Robert Garcia, Long Beach, CA; William Capote, Palm Bay, FL; Mitch Landrieu, New Orleans, LA; Elizabeth Tisdahl, Evanston, IL; Suzanne Jones, Boulder, CO; Marilyn Strickland, Tacoma, WA; Jim Kenney, Philadelphia, PA; Stephanie Miner, Syracuse, NY; Bruce Whitaker, Fullerton, CA; Karen Freeman-Wilson, Gary, IN; Marni Sawicki, Cape Coral, FL; Michael Hancock, Denver, CO; Pauline Cutter, San Leandro, CA; Edward B. Murray, Seattle, WA; Lucy Vinis, Eugene, OR; Mark Mitchell, Tempe, AZ; Eric Garcetti, Los Angeles, CA.

