that. back-and-forth has reflected that dynamic gradually. there is a question now of reciprocity which has been discussed here, and we can get into that because i think that is going to be an extremely complicated process. but the net result is we are in very uncertain times, and one of the things we learned about uncertainty, because this sort of happened across north america during the first trump administration when there was sort of the threat of the united states withdrawing from the nafta agreement and the outcome was also uncertainty, and we saw investment across the united states, canada and mexico drop host: speaking of businesses in particular because you mentioned the response from the business sector, i want to read the statement from the u.s. chamber of comme which set american families and businesses are

struggling with high cost. it is one of the topssues they want policymakers to address. the chamber support the administration's efforts to advaogrowth policies like regulations and less taxationwill grow our economy pand opportunity and eproblems like our broken border and stopping the flow of fentanyl into the country. we also want to work together to keep costs down, but tariffs ll only raise prices and increase the economic pain being felt by everyday americans across the country. we urge reconsideration of this policy and a swift end to these tariffs. even though some of these are on hold, what will this mean for

>> a couple quick update about tomorrow's session. birth will be joined by a panel from politico or journalist who will give us a briefing on the newly-created department of government efficiency and its impacts on the federal workforce and federal programs. at the end we will have some time for questions. so we want to hear from you. we need to hear from you. immediately following this general session, you will receive a push from -- through the nlc conference up, with a link to where you can put your questions and send those questions to the reporters. please make sure you submit them by 5:00 p.m. tonight, whatever that question is, and you may just hear your question up here on this stage tomorrow afternoon . before he died in, i just want to remind everyone that -- about

nlc's code of conduct and as you remain considerate and respectful of our speakers. we will kick things off with a panel discussion i think you will find a truly interesting and compelling, and a topic growing increasingly relevant to each one of us in our communities, and i mean each one of us, when it comes to disaster response and recovery. from dealing with growing numbers of natural disasters happening across the country, to being prepared for infrastructure failures. the city leaders are on the frontlines of these kinds of unexpected events, and as all of you know, when they happen, we have to be ready to go. today you will hear from a few really inspiring state and local leaders who have had to act quickly in these kinds of situations with these disasters, to ensure the safety of their communities.

this has happened more recently. from this very important conversation, please join me and our very own nlc second vice president, where van johnson, -- mayor van johnson to moderate this conversation with marilyn governor wes moore, and west hollywood, california mayor, chelsea bias. [applause] ♪ [applause] >> thank you, mayor patterson, and thank you to our

panelists. everyone today stows together now just as leaders, but also as guardians of our communities. as local leaders, we're the first when people call when disaster strikes, whether it is natural or man-made. and then they blame us for everything. from a catastrophic collapse of baltimore's key bridge, to the firestorms encircling los angeles, to the hurricanes that assaulted my old community of savannah, georgia, each crisis, unique yet equally jarring, requires us to reimagine our approaches to disaster readiness and resilience. none of us are immune to the challenge do but we can share our experiences to build a free market and a playbook of better disaster management practices and make us all a more resilient to and were prepared for future threats. so with that, let us get into our discussion with our wonderful panelists. let's give them another round of applause. [applause]

governor moore, let's start with you. can you tell us a little bit about a pivotal actually attack or a decision that you made that significantly impacted maryland's recovery efforts immediately following the collapse of the key bridge? >> first, good afternoon everybody. it's great to be with you. great to be on this fantastic panel. thank you so much. i would be remiss if i didn't give a shout out to some of the best part of the governor could ever ask for and that is our maryland delegation. [applause] shout out maryland! [laughter] [applause] the question, it actually reminds me of what are the first thing that happened when i was governor-elect. we had gotten together with all the new governors, simply call a baby governor school. [laughter] which by the way my mother came back and said what grade did you get?

i was like it's not a real school, mom. [laughter] but all the new governors got together with people who were in their second terms, that kind of thing. i remember one of the best pieces of advice i got was from one of the were saying listen, you are coming in, you have to build a new administration and you have a lot of jobs to fill. if you want to put a political lens on certain things, you can do that. don't do it with emergency management. do not do it with disaster relief. because you will realize that very early in your tenure, you will have an emergency to deal with and you better make sure you have people in there who know what to do, and people who know how to respond. that can help you to respond well. and i think about that with the key bridge. one thing i said i have learned about this job is that when your phone rings and the middle of the night, you are not about to get good news.

at 2:02 in the morning, my phone rang to let me know that the key bridge, which is about a two mile long bridge and was really one of the heartbeats of our economy, it was now sitting at the bottom of the patapsco river. and i remember everything that was happening in those first hours, putting the state of emergency, first responders in the water, divers looking to save lives, and i think one thing that happened very quickly that was an incredibly important thing, and it was a collective decision, was, you had to establish a unified command immediately. you had to be --, as i said, i'm an old army guy and they say in the army, when in charge, be in charge. also make sure you had a unified command in the way that you were talking to people and updating them into what was going on, the way you are incorporating those

state and local and federal resources and infrastructure that had to be in place. that if you lash the people in those first hours, you were never going to get them back. they need to see you in front. they need to see you working together. they need to see and understand that that response was going to be collective. and they had to be able to know who is in charge. where can we get our answers from. so one of the most important things that happened early was, in addition to the amazing work of our team and first responders and all our local elected officials and the navy and the coast guard et cetera was by being able to say "one thing we are not going to do is have a bunch of dueling press conferences. have a whole bunch of people giving different information. when they were not going to do is put out information before it's verified. make sure that the people are getting accurate and critical information in a collective

fashion." and i think that was the baseline for why i'm really proud of what i think was a case study that the state of maryland put together on how to respond to these moments. >> well, we were watching. the world was watching. give them a round of applause for that. [applause] i know for me and savannah and our report, all of a sudden, i'm asking about our bridge and the shape under that bridge. the collapse of that bridge was obviously a huge national crisis. could you share a lesson he learned about crisis leadership that you think all local leaders should have in their back pocket? and could you speak to how important it is to actively collaborate with local elected officials like our friend mayor brandon scott in baltimore, in these moments of crisis? >> first, let me say, mayor scott was lights out. . he just responded so well.

i say both him, the county executives, because one of the really complicated things about the situation is it in just impact one jurisdiction, you had baltimore city, you had baltimore county, anne arundel county, all big areas within the state that were directly impacted. so there had to be a measure of collaboration. one of the things we saw and learned and one of the big lessons i have is that the best way to do disaster relief is making sure you are really good at disaster preparation. you've got to prepare for this stuff before it happens. and the first conversations i'm having with mayors or local elected officials or with emergency managers cannot be when the emergency happens. because there is a sense of trust that has to be built. a sense of confidence, of competence that has to be understood. and if that is not there, it makes when the crisis hits really, really complicated and tricky. and i've said where the reason

why these things are so important is, at one of the things i remember i learned in the army was that, i never learned anything about anybody in times of peace. if you ever want to learn anything about anybody, what, where it's hard. when it was tough. watch them when there were no good decisions left. and see how they lead and how they mobilized. but the reason we were even able to get to that point was because of the really strong relationship that we had tried to build between the governor and our mayors and the state and the locals. that when you have that sense of trust that's in place, it makes the hard times are a whole lot easier because you do have a well of goodwill and of trust that you will have to tap into in order to make sure that you can effectively navigate really complex situations.

>> speak a little more about that. obviously, sometimes, it's not always good relationships between cities and counties and cities and states. and how it makes a difference when times of tragedy come. >> listen, in maryland, we always get along. [laughter] about the ravens, yes. no there are times there will, be turns conversations and disputes and there will be certain things we don't agree on. but one thing i do believe is that if we disagree on a monday, the only thing i'm asking is, can we please together on a tuesday and find something else we can work together? right, that is the only thing we ask. [applause] i do think that becomes really important because of other great things -- things we are seeing and that i are exhausted by --

people are exhausted by their partnership. people are exhausted by, should i work with this person or this person? who ran against me before. or this person is part of a different political party -- nobody cares. the only thing they care about is, are you trying to make my life a bit easier? [applause] and so i just think the ability to say, guys, we should be able to tussle with tough problems. we should be able to say, ok, i believe in x, y, and z and i know you believe in a, b, and c. and let's find the truth is. let's put the politics to the side. executives cannot be ideological. you either do their job or you don't. and if you're not going to do

the job, moved to the site i met someone else get in there and do it. [applause] but it really does require that sense of confidence and trust and building that. you have to build it with your local elected officials and say that the goal is to make sure we have the same unified goal, make sure our people are cared for and make sure we can fulfill their best destinies. >> great deal. mayor byers, you are a yourself in dealing with the complexities of wildfire management. how has west hollywood collaborated with neighboring jurisdictions to enhance regional planning and coordination? could you provide an example of how this cross-community approach has improved the overall response to wildfires? >> absolutely, good afternoon everyone. the city of west hollywood is a 1.89 square miles city carved out of unincorporated los angeles county just south of the hollywood hills, illinois between the cities of los angeles and beverly hills. we are nestled in a really large

region that experienced a number of wildfires all at once. , frankly, we were a city born in crisis four years ago -- 40 years ago at the height of the aids epidemic. that lesson early in our city's history is what helped us to do a little bit long term disaster preparedness work, investing in community-based organizations who our residents could rely on for their basic needs to be met. we saw how those agencies and those nonprofit organizations became a resource for our community members, folks living with disabilities, living in isolation as older adults in their apartment buildings, those are the organizations that focus water to turn to to get support when they were asking where to get those resources. in addition, we learned that housing is one of the most vital resources a community can have in terms of crisis. we saw that immediately as folks were fleeing their disaster prone areas and looking to the city of west hollywood, which

was largely an impacted, to find home for a long-term place. we are a city that had a long-term vacation rental policy in place and also a one-year minimum policy in place, to ensure our precious housing stock is used for long-term rentals. in this instance, we had to leave space to make sure people who needed housing for any amount of time in this crisis could find room in our city. it's a high resource area, transit-i and has things everybody would need. that was a key will we played early on in making sure house and would be available to the wider region. and making sure that as folks are looking away from los angeles at this time, that we can be a beacon of economic vitality moving forward in the region, that we could make a message that businesses are open. but it is still safe to come to this area. and in fact we need you in

-- your investment now more than ever. i want to check out the mayor of the city of santa monica. her city was directly impacted and continues to be, as a beachside community in the face of this. and as our economic outlook as a region is not long-term, in a troubling situation, i ask that you look to these disaster stricken areas as a priest to return to and to reinvest in the community. it is in desperate need of those resources. >> i was just there three weeks ago and had the opportunity to tour. just absolute devastation of neighborhoods. you saw a chimney standing up. just she. because chimneys are obviously insulated to withstand heat. reflecting on the intensity of this most recent wildfire season, could you describe a moment or decision that reshape your perspective on disaster management and preparedness in the west hollywood area? >> absolutely, the moment i got the evacuation warning on my phone was the moment i believe i

was sent into a different train of thought. i knew that our city were not going to be asked to evacuate, and still got a notification on my phone from the larger county resource that said we were supposed to evacuate. as a leader of the community, i had resources at my fingertips, i could call city management, i could ask what was going on. it was my responsibility to share that with as many trusted messengers as possible. and still, it was too late. we had a logistics nightmare and folding. folks at the hillside who needed to get out or bottlenecked on those roadsides by people who didn't need to get her ear. recognizing the role of crisis communications, we all have work to do to make sure community-based organizations, neighborhoods, apartment buildings, each one has that trusted message or we can turn to to get the information we need and make sure we are put in the right direction. that was a really big take away. we had folks asking for tools like sirens. we are not digital billboards across the city to share

messages. all of that was a part of helping understand what the future of this looks like. it really is communication, building trust. we know that everything moves at the speed of trust and we need to be able to make sure that we are unlocking that trust at different levels more than ever before. >> and we used to think it was something that happened just on the west coast. but since then, right outside of -- in south carolina, outside of myrtle beach and long island, now dealing with these same issues. any advice for those communities and communities that find themselves in fire's way? >> i think the governor said it well, we have to be prepared. we are in a 10 year plan right now to make sure we are preparing for the big earthquake to hit the region. yesterday there was a four point two earthquake that hit los angeles county. we have been investing tremendous resources, face to

the partnership of fema and grants we have gotten to fix these building people have lived in long term. that work, we are still in the middle of. to be dealing with concurrent disasters, to be questioning whether or not we will continue to get resources where we need them most, i think the work of preparing for the long haul, to make sure our community is ready to play their important role in this work, is what we can do. >> both of you have been led -- have led through some difficult and trying times. can you share it with a summative idea or practice that has emerged from these challenges that you think could revolutionize how cities nationwide prepare and respond for future emergencies? >> i think housing is one of the biggest rules key. people will want to feel safe and secure in their community, whatever their community looks like. we can't be the community that tried to pull away because we don't have enough housing to accommodate.

i think that is why the biggest challenge is, how we build a housing landscape that is attainable and suitable enough to accommodate other dynamic changes we go to the dynamic changes we continue to face as a country. >> governor? >> there are three things i would say briefly. one is you need to make sure this is a real priority for your team. we signed executive orders that have greater things like a chief resilience officer, the person's responsibility to make sure they are coordinating with these parties. there we have been able to create a state disaster relief fund. so you actually have capital allocated. in addition you have emergency management. to know that we can actually have a quick reaction force. to be able to ensure your people are taken care of. to make sure that as chief executives, that you set that as a priority. the second piece is, when these

disasters strike, you have to get a consistent and steady and predictable communications cadence with people. where would we literally would have press conferences at 3 p.m. every single day. people on what has happened in the past 24 hours. some of them it was like, there is not a lot to say today, but does anybody have any questions? you had to make sure people understood, what was the steady communications cycle that you would have with people in a unified fashion? the third piece i would say briefly is, when these disasters strike, you will spend a lot of time in your emergency operations center, your eoc, receiving briefings. don't forget to get out there with the people. don't forget to get out there and have them see you, making sure that you are listening to what they are going through. because sometimes i think you are working on, there might be a level of oversight because you haven't actually spoken directly to them. make sure you're over spending

time, even in the most tragic situations where your days will be filled with brief after brief after brief, decision after decision after decision, make sure the people are the ones who are helping to inform your thinking, your decision-making, and the speed with which you are forcing folks to move and communicate. >> well, i think we can all agree that the state of maryland is fortunate to haous governor, and the city of west hollywood is fortunate to have you as mayor. thank you both so much for sharing your perspectives. [applause] big round of applause. thank you so much. ♪ >> please remain seated as we prepare for a visit from the vice president of the united states. ♪

announcer: announcer: in a short break here in the national league of cities conference, where more than 2000 government officials are gathering for the conference in washington. live coverage when it continues, here on c-span3. ♪

[♪standing next to you (usher remix) playing♪]

>> we are joined now by the deputy editor of "military times," here to discuss proposed cuts to the v.a. welcome to the program. guest: thank you for the invite. host: let's first listen to a portion of an interview. [video clip] >> there is a memo out, a report that there could be up to 80,000 customers, fundamental realization and investment abounds. is that the plan? are we looking at cuts of that size, a complete changing of how the v.a. is organized? >> also responding to what the administration has cited, we are going -- undergoing a total

reorganization forced to the v.a. has a large footprint to go there. if you look at the numbers we are going there now, the question is going to come, though, and i've shared this with some of other people as well, is if the answer with money and people, then we should have done that a long time ago. the question is always utilizing that function in the best way we possibly can. i'm sure we are a bit long in the tooth on the heel here. the question is not, are we putting money? there is an energy here, and it has been here for years, and it's called let's give money to the v.a., and then take it when when they are not doing what we think they should be doing. we are not going to do that anymore. we are going to work with the funds and resources to make a better product to some of the best employees on the ground. host: when did you make of his answer?

guest: yeah. it is really interesting. this was the day after the memo linked, so it was confirmation they were looking to go under 400,000 employees at some point this year. if this is not immediate because like we see in the past few weeks and the trump administration, this is more developing a plan to scale back, what the v.a. footprint is going to be over the last few months paid by august, we will more concrete plans. this will be a mix of some folks. >> thank you to the federalist panel. you are being resilient. now, i'm on the stage, please allow me to introduce our headliner speaker for this evening. he began his career serving in the united states marine corps for four years, including a tour in iraq. upon returning home, he went to law school, became an investor in startups across the midwest, and penned the best-selling

memoir, hillbilly elegy. he was elected to senate, representing the state of ohio, where he served for two years. during his time in the senate, he worked closely with an lcd to advocate rail safety legislation and congress and to make communities safer, cosponsoring the railway safety act of 2023. last year, he stepped up to join donald trump and was elected vice president of the united states in november 2024. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming the vice president of the united states, jd vance. [applause] ♪ vp vance: thank you all. thank you. please, please. please take a seat.

it is good to see everybody. good afternoon, and thank you all for having me. thank you to councilman kramer for the kind introduction. i was talking to him backstage a little bit. my wife and i both love the city of louisville and spent a lot of time here. thank you. it means a lot. thank you for the kind words. i sent to all of you, when i was in the senate, and i was in the group from ohio, all over the country, cities and municipalities, i always say, enjoy the town, because it is your city. i think washington is a beautiful place. it is a beautiful place to spend a few days, but i also think it is important to get out there and see the people's city, it was built with your tax dollars, buildings and museums supported by all of you and the people you represent. i hope you enjoy your time and washington, d.c. i know you are busy, and i know it is never easy to come here to washington, especially on a monday, so i appreciate the

effort involved in getting here, and i also appreciate the mission of this conference. the work you all do back home is extremely important. most americans, of course, they interact with their state or local governments far more regularly than they do with the federal government, and that's the way it's supposed to be. that's the way the constitution sets it up. we know that good government starts at the local level. so while those -- [applause] so while those of us in washington certainly take up most of the press attention, and we do that whether we want to or not, i want to acknowledge the enormous impact local governments have on the lives of our great american citizens. now, the trump administration believes in the wisdom of federalism, in leaving local officials to local officials. [applause]

but we also recognize the importance of supporting and collaborating with all of you, because so many of the issues that you deal with, of course, implicate local issues, but state issues and federal issues as well. one area of shared issues between president trump and i think every single person in this room is the importance of providing good housing for our citizens at a reasonable and affordable cost. and i should say, i'm hard-pressed to think of a time in my 40 years of life where it has been so hard for rural american citizens to afford a home. even renting a home has become a challenge, or worse yet, fallen completely out of reach for so many of our families. i was talking with a relative a couple of years ago, and she made kind of an offhanded observation come as a younger person that i am, she was looking to buy her first home, and just mentioned that when her parents were growing up, they could afford a nice home on a single middle-class income, and

she was sort of mentioning this as a historical thing. she was sad that that was not true for her generation, and i think all of us in this room, certainly including me, have a little more work to do to make housing more affordable. i want to talk about that, because i think it is the issue where our interests, and some ways, are most aligned with people in this room. i read a report that the average income it takes to buy a new house is nearly two times the average salary of your typical american family. not the average american worker, but the combined income of a husband and wife, and that is just not acceptable or sustainable in the united states of america. we want americans to be able to afford the american dream of homeownership, because we know when americans own their home, it makes them a stakeholder, it makes them a stakeholder in their neighborhood, in their city, and ultimately, of course, in this country that all of us

love so much. we want our citizens to feel that investment in their own country, and it is hard. it is hard to feel that investment if you feel like you cannot even own a slice of it, even if that is what you want to do. now come on a more basic level, we don't want people living paycheck-to-paycheck. we don't want them to make trade-offs between a trip to the grocery store and need in next month's rent, because even if you don't yet own a home, or even if you don't ever want to own a home, the knowledge that if you work hard and spend wisely, eventually, you will be able to afford a nice place to live that goes, i think, a very long way to giving people a sense that they belong here and a sense that they have a stake in the future. now, there are some important reasons why that believe is dwindling among americans today, and a lot of it comes, of course, from the historic inflation that the country has dealt with over the last four years. under the previous administration, to get a little bit political, the cost of a median priced home in america

more than doubled, and that was just in four years. if your salary did not keep pace with inflation and rise 20%, your buying power to even a bigger hit. and, of course, if you think about this, if the price of a home doubles and your actual salary does not double, then you are a lot worse off. we know most americans did not see their salaries double over the last four years. so it is no surprise that home sales hit a 30-year low in 2024. another reason for elevated cost comes down to zoning. the reality is, zoning is an area where federal authority is actually quite limited. i'm sure none of you want the federal government in the business of mandating how cities and towns do local laws, and is not what we want to do, either, but i would ask that we be good partners and citizens, and think

about how we address housing costs for our citizens. i think one of the ways we had to do that is to be a little smarter about our local zoning rules. in particular, what i think of zoning, i cannot help but think about it without, of course, thinking about the communities i know best, which of course are the ones i've represented in the state of ohio. columbus, ohio, columbus is a boomtown in so many ways. i've got relatives and family members who live there, who love columbus. it is a magnet because it has had so much economic development, but one of the things i worry about when i look at a city like columbus or miami, which became a boomtown during the covid years, is the unaffordability of housing. and we've got to fix that. if we want these places to be mad and is not just for jobs and investment but also the dreams of our young people, we've got to make it easier to build homes. and in particular, the city of austin has done a an interesting job, because in austin, use saw

this massive increase of people moving income of the cost of housing skyrocketed, but then austen implemented some pretty smart policies, and that brought down the cost of housing. it's one of the few american cities where the cost of housing has come down. the trump administration has taken important steps in building cheaper and boost the supply of housing. it's going to take time, but this is a day one issue for our entire team, from the president on down. on his first day in office, the president issued an executive order making it a priority to bring down prices for new buyers. part of that will come from slashing regulations, which, according to some estimates, account for about 25% of a new single-family building today. we've also seen secretary turner, our great secretary of housing and urban development, he is working hard on the issue, cutting some of the housing rules that the biden administration and high costs shifted decision-making from

local government to washington, d.c. the administrators at the epa are doing important work to bring down the cost of energy, which, of course, is a critical input to the cost of building a home, to say nothing of hating one and keeping its lights on. but i actually want to focus on something a little different, because i think this is one of the areas where what the trump administration can do and has done is going to be one of the major drivers of bringing down the cost of housing. now, local zoning regulations, the cost of energy, these things are about the supply of housing. how do we get more houses to be built? but i think it is important to talk about the demand side of the housing market, and so much of what we are doing in the trump administration when it comes to the immigration issue is framed about law enforcement, about reducing fentanyl coming into our communities, and that is true. that is a big part of why we are doing what we are doing at the border, but when we talk about housing and why costs are so

high, we don't talk enough about demand, and one of the drivers of increased housing demand, we know, is that we've got a lot of people over the last four years who have come into the country illegally. and that is something we have to work on if we want to meaningfully reduce the cost of housing, too. just think about this. if you allow 20 million people to compete with american citizens for the cost of homes, you are going to have a large and, frankly, completely preventable spike in the demand for housing. and that is what we, of course, have seen. because while we have made it a little bit harder to build homes in the country over the last four years, we have also, unfortunately, made it too easy for people to compete against american citizens for the precious homes in our country to begin with. i will say this, it is actually not just an american problem either. if you go to canada, where,

because of their laws and regulation, they've seen a massive increase in the number of people who have come into their country. you go to the united kingdom, you go across the world, and you see a very consistent relationship between a massive increase in immigration and a massive increase in housing prices. and we have to be honest about that. [indistinct conversations] i see one of our nice representatives out here wants to actually i guess continue to flood the country with illegal immigrants, making your communities and citizens unaffordable. [indistinct shouting] but, ma'am, with all respect, one of the reasons why we are doing what we are doing is because we want to make it more affordable for americans to live. that is one of the reasons why we are doing what we are doing. now, last week, i visited the

southern border, and we decided to check in on what is going in there at the southern border, and, of course, like i said earlier, you often hear about immigration enforcement as about crime and drug trafficking. that is a big part of it. i was at eagle pass, and i was talking to local border control down there, and they told me it is a matter of weeks, they're part of the small -- their small part of the border had gone from 1500 daily encounters to less than 30, and, again, that is in a matter of weeks. that is a simple matter of common sense border enforcement. that matters. [applause] thank you. and let's talk about why it matters. i mentioned housing. but one of the things i heard down there, i was talking to the mayor in that community, and he said it's incredibly stressful on local resources, it's

distressful on their local hospitals, it is stressful on their local schools to have this massive increase. so while, look, i recognize there's a diversity of opinions here -- clearly there is -- i also think it is important to be honest about those disagreements, to acknowledge those disagreements, but to say that the reason why we care about border security is because we want your communities to be safer, we want them to be more affordable, we want there to be less drugs in our country, and we want your citizens to be able to live the american dream. it is the birthright of every single one of our citizens, and we are going to fight for it every single day. [applause] so, with all due respect for some of the disagreements in opinion, i would say, we welcome disagreements.

we want to talk about those disagreements, but we also have to respect the law in the united states of america. and i can tell -- and i can tell you that, yes, of course, you are going to disagree with some of our policies. you can disagree with some of our policies, and we will have a conversation about it. they don't shout it in front of 2000 people. i can't even hear what you are saying, sir. but, importantly, on this question of immigration, we have to recognize that, yes, you can disagree with some of the laws that are in place, you can disagree with the enforcement of those laws, you can even vote for people who want to change those laws, but while we have immigration laws on the books, we will enforce them, and we

expect our local municipalities to help us. [applause] so it will be the policy of the trump administration to enforce the nation's laws and it will be the, policy of the trump administration to say it is not up to local cities to choose which federal laws that they are going to enforce. it is important. we cannot do immigration enforcement with sanctuary cities. we have to have everybody respecting the law, and that is going to be one of the major policy focuses, of course, of the trump administration, and it already has been. i want to say one final point about this issue of housing and of the strains that immigration and illegal immigration in particular put on our housing. we know from economists that blue-collar folks are often those who face the biggest cuts in wages and in services, when

you have communities overwhelmed by illegal immigration. i come from a blue-collar family, and i think one of the main drivers is that we need to be able to give our citizens, black, white, or whatever skin color, whatever belief system that they have, if you are an american citizen, you deserve to have a government, at the local, city, and federal level, that fights for the american dream for you. and we have seen -- [applause] and we have seen, yes, over the biden administration, but let's be honest, over 40 years of american policy, we seen a lot of our blue-collar americans, urban and rural, struggling, struggling to afford a home, struggling to raise their kids in safe communities, struggling to look to the future with hope and optimism. and so, with all respect for policy disagreements, i think that one thing that unites us in this room is that we want to

give our blue-collar people in the united states of america a shot at the american dream again we may disagree about how exactly to do it, but let's do it together. let's fight for our people together come and let's reinvigorate the american dream for the american citizen once again. [cheers and applause] and let me close here with just an acknowledgment here. i know you guys have some of the hardest jobs in government. democrat, republican, or nonpartisan, you guys are the ones, of course, who fix the pot holes, you guys are the ones that make sure our local police have the funding they need, i would local firefighters are able to do the incredible job that they do. i want to let you know, from the trump of administration, from the president, the vice president, and everybody else, we respect what we do, we are impressed by you guys are doing a great job, and we want to make

sure that you have a presidential administration that is making your lives easier and not harder. so, please, consider our administration one with an open door. please come to us when you have issues, even if you don't like what we are doing on the policies, you guys have got to be able to come and talk to us. so keep doing a great job, keep doing what you are doing, enjoy the rest of your time in washington. god bless you guys come and thank you for doing the great job. [cheers and applause] ♪ ♪

, frankly, thank you, everybody. -- councilman kramer: thank you, everybody. i'm thrilled to introduce our next panel discussion, which will take a deep dive into some of the most pressing legal questions that we are currently facing as city leaders. moderating today's discussion, i'm honored to introduce amanda, executive director and general counsel of the international municipal lawyers association. please welcome amanda and our panelists to the stage. ♪

amanda: well, good afternoon, everyone. it is my absolute pleasure to join nlc here at the congressional city conference, to moderate this conversation on the recent executive actions and their impacts on local governments and cities, towns, and villages. my organization, the international municipal lawyers association, partners with cities through our work at the local government legal center. we provide local governance before the courts. today, we want to help local leaders understand the impact on municipal corporations. as we all know, beginning

shortly after the transition of this administration, president trump issued several executive orders that had direct impact on local communities. today, i'm joined by esteemed legal experts to help me unpack these executive actions and what you as local elected officials need to understand in terms of reliability and the legal implications of those actions. first with me here today to my immediate left is anna schwab, and she draws on her years of experience in government, advocacy, and law for a variety of agencies and secure federal funding opportunities to local communities and special districts. also to her left is professor rick hsu, who is the distinguished professor of law at the university of north carolina school of law. we have some north carolina people in the state.

in his role, rick teaches local government law, immigration, and federalism. his research focuses on the intersection between cities, immigration, and the criminal justice system. thank you for joining us today for this important conversation. first, i want to get the lay of the land. the administration, as we all know in this room, has moved swiftly to enact president trump's agenda, across all federal programs, federal agencies, including those that directly affect local governments with grant funding, technical assistance, and resources. to advance the president's agenda, the executive branch can and often does use existing authority to make those policy changes, and that is not always require the approval of congress. but at the same time, through these executive actions, we seen the executive branch under president trump seek to expand presidential authority in ways that may call into question some commonly accepted legislative branch authority, otherwise known as the power of the purse.

many of these actions have direct impact on local communities. so as we set the table there, i want to turn to anna here. why don't you help us get a little bit of the lay of the land here with the federal funding frees that went into effect? tell us about the most recent executive orders impacting local communities, including the diversity, equity, and inclusion executive order, as well as the guidance from the ce management and budget related to the federal funding freeze. anna: awesome. thank you, amanda, thank you, mayor patterson and the entire nlc team for having me here for this important perspective. i will try, for everybody's sake, to not make this into an admin law or environmental law class, but there are sticky things to navigate. so, amanda, you touched on the executive orders, there were a series of them issued on the first day, and the one i would

say that really caused a lot of questions are dealing with american energy, mostly because it raises the question of federal funding. they issued a memo and it essentially said, please pause all federal funding and disbursements and loans and agreements. and that cause some confusion and raised some questions them absolutely, and it was on all federal assistance them anything that had funding assistance with the executive orders that the president had just signed. and within about a little less than 48 hours, when that was issued, the agency had a report back and stop all funding freezes, so that really caused some confusion. as we were looking at that, we also saw a couple of lawsuits.

that then instigated the office of management and budget to say we are going to suspend this. we are not going to do this anymore. but there were still questions, because the white house press secretary was trying to reiterate that the executive orders were still in force, while also saying the funding associated, there were still questions. and how the executive orders were going to get implemented because of that. amanda: you alluded to this a little bit, but parties inculcated by this funding -- implicated by this funding did not stand by idly. there was a flurry of litigation related to the omb memo and some other executive orders, the dei executive order. can you give us the lay of the land of where this litigation stance, and what do local leaders for cities, towns come and villages need to understand as it relates to this litigation and these funding freezes? anna: so, the very first case that was put into motion was a

group of nonprofits and small businesses, and in that case here in the district of columbia, the court issued an administrative state, basically that the funding freeze was not going to go into effect while everything was sorted out. the big thing we are seeing action on is involving the state. it's 22 states in the district of columbia filed suit in rhode island. they actually cited the press secretary cozy tweet, because even though the memo was rescinded, there were still questions that last week, we heard from the judge who issued an order, a temporary, per limiter injunction, and that sent to the administration that they cannot reissue or adopt a memorandum, that they cannot freeze or suspend or terminate these agreements, and they need to provide written notice to make sure the funding goes to the states as, you know, this order is put into place. interestingly enough, too, one of the reasons the judge cited

in this case was regarding fema, we heard this afternoon that disaster recovery, we don't want to be talking to our disaster planners, but when we need them, we need them to be there and be partners with us. fema, there's been a lot of questions about fema recovery and being able to have that support, and the judge cited that support and provided its own status reports. so there's a lot happening. those are directives to our local governments, but there is a slowdown to our states, and it raises the question, how is it going to be, you know, how are we going to process the goals of the administration through their executive orders to have this all done? and while it is not directly about local government funding of states, it is also important to know that the supreme court is starting to weigh in on this as well, when the supreme court said that they need to have a little bit more of direction as to what the freeze on foreign aid would be. so there is not a blanket how to

do it. local governments say, well, what do we do with our agreement? what do we do with our contract? how do we rely on these things and move forward? the big thing is, you know, obviously, work with your counsel, but go with what is in your contracts right now, and until you receive an addendum for a change from the federal government, you have your own obligations under those. amanda: that is really helpful, ana. i want to highlight one thing you said, for folks in the room to understand, the litigation you were talking about regarding the omb funding pause, the preliminary injunction, that injunction just applies to states that brought the litigation, right? ana: yeah. amanda: i think that's important to note, it has gotten a lot of attention. ana: 22 states and the district of columbia. amanda: but as it applies to state and local governments, technically that injunction does not apply to them.

ana: it also highlights that there are a lot of questions. each administration is able to support what their goals are, but how does it impact of the current contractual obligations of the government has as well? we don't have exact answers yet, but we can look at the players on the field and understand different acts so far. amanda: ok, that's helpful. let's turn to you, rick, because i don't want you to be lonely over there. immigrations obviously the focus of the current administration. there were a number of executive orders that directly touched on immigration, but i think the most pertinent one we've discussed already is protecting the american people from inpatient executive order. this executive order specifically talks about sanctuary jurisdictions, it talks about -- we can get into it or not -- but in your view, what is this executive order trying to accomplish with regard

to local government cooperation on immigration? we just for the vice president touching on this theme as well. what are the broad legal principles at play here? rick: this is a big development, and suddenly local governments are at the forefront of immigration politics. at the very basic level it's what you just heard. what the executive order wants is essentially to encourage and incentivize a lot more local government participation in federal immigration enforcement. i kind of makes sense. ice is quite big, there's a lot of federal officers, but when you look at the numbers, the interest in essentially getting law enforcement officials involved in immigration enforcement is very strong. but i think besides just this general encouragement, there is a legal shift at a deeper level that is at plate with regard to this memo. -- p withlay-- play with regard

to this memo. what we are moving to is moved from may to must. when you look at current law it says local governments may participate in immigration enforcement. every community based on what your interests are in can decide where you want to participate and in what circumstances. the move is to a system that is much more rigorous and moving from may to must. i want to be clear here, there is nothing in federal law right now that requires local governments as an affirmative mandate to do anything with regard immigration. in fact, it is not clear according to the supreme court whether or not they can actually force local governments to do anything better go to immigration. we have supreme court precedent that says the federal government cannot force state or local governments to either implement a federal program or enforce federal law. this is why in the 1990's when

the federal government tried to get officials and sheriff's to enforce federal gun laws, the supreme court said a note, you can't do that-- no, you can't do that, and more recently enforce the medicaid expansion. the federal government tried to force states to expand medicaid and the supreme court said you could've tried to do this mandate by putting morning -- putting money behind it. right now as it stands, local governments have the discretion to choose under your own sort of policies and priorities whether to participating. the question is whether we are moving to a system that would make it less of a discretion and more of the mandate. amanda: thanks, rick. you touched on this push-pull between the 10th amendment and the supremacy clause, and that is this reason why, as you cite, so far it seems the federal government cannot force local governments to comply with certain aspects of the immigration enforcement agenda. obviously there is a lot of unknowns here.

i want to talk about those unknowns, and at least flag a few things for folks to understand. one of the things we are seeing is one of the top priorities in the area of immigration is compliance with ice detainer requests. acknowledging that there is diversity of views on whether this is a good idea or not, some local communities, really want to comply with dismay really want to comply and help the administrations immigration enforcement agenda, other policies may state that is a federal matter, we are going to focus on our local issues, we are not going to get involved in that. but there is this practical element to all of this, too. if you could back up and tell us what do you think these executive actions mean for local leaders in terms of how cities, towns, and villages need to respond to ice detainers, and walk us through when we talk about ice detainers, these are administrative warrants, highlighting that aspect as

well. rick: let me focus on the short-term pressures with regard to detainers but also on term effects that might be coming down as well. i assume with regard to the short-term, yes, the focus is on local communities getting involved in complying with immigration detainers. just to give you a sense of what itineraries, essentially right now the weight -- what i detainer is, essentially right now the way it is set up any time a person is arrested and their finger print is checked, not only do you run it through the fbi database, but a separate program through the immigration database, and if there is a flag for that particular individual, ice may send out a detainer request. what the detainer request essentially says, at least under our lot right now considered to be a request-- law right now considered to be a request, it asks central and local law enforcement official to hold onto an individual for 48 hours past the point at which that person should have been released. that is to give ice essentially

the possibility an opportunity to send someone down and pick up that individual and put them into ice custody or to do further investigations to determine whether or not some sort of action is necessary. this is all still kind of preliminary in the sense that there may still be mistakes that could be made. that is the detainer request. you could see this dramatically expands the ability of the federal government to identify individuals they might be interested in picking up, and communities have had different policies in terms of whether to comply with ice detainers and in what circumstances to do so. the truth is 48 hours of detention -- i will touch on it a little bit, legal issues, also just resource costs. right now in the immediate sense, the focus is on those detainers, and of course the pressure is on how do we essentially get local governments to abide by the detainers more. we are talking about some

funding action, or defunding would be the way to put it, whether we see more funding conditions, members with regard to potentially complying with ice attached to different types of grant programs. we are seeing affirmative litigation. right now we have lawsuits against chicago and illinois in a separate lawsuit against the state of new york on their "policies limiting" among other things compliance with ice detainers. those are going through the courts right now, affirmative action. i thought there would be more, that haven't been, so it is harder to whether this is the first set of test cases or there will be more forthcoming. the third is about the detainers themselves. there's been a lot of talk right now, it seems like the removal of immigration enforcement is not dramatically more than before. but if the federal funding comes through, we might see an extension of that. this is to say that even for communities that are eager and excited to participate in complying with immigration

detainers, it is hard to tell what costs will be. before you could say this is the resource cost, but going forward we may not necessarily be clear. amanda: i'm glad you touched on some of that because there is this unfunded mandate aspect to some of this, which i think a lot of folks in this room appreciate, regardless of your policy perspectives, because there isn't any funding attached if they are asking you to hold somebody for 48 hours, that is the local government's request. rick: it is, and there might be additional costs attached to that. i say to my students, if you want to find the city, you will find it between a rock and a hard place. what i'm talking about is the legal pressure you may face with regard to participating in federal immigration enforcement. unfortunately, there is also some litigation that suggests there may be costs, in addition to just the cost of providing the detention, liability costs. it might also be attached with

complying with immigration detainers. this has to do with what ana mentioned earlier about warrants. you need a warrant to arrest someone. but the warrant term is a little bit vague here, and the reason i say that is when we talk about the warrants under constitutional fourth amendment, we are referring to a judicial warrant, warrant issued by a third party, a magistrate, a judge, someone that is in themselves the law enforcement -- that isn't themselves the law enforcement official. when ice issues a detainer, they also issue a warrant, but even though they use the term warrant, those are administrative or it, in the sense that they -- administrative warrants, in the sense that they are not issued by third parties, they are issued by ice themselves. they themselves provide the warrant. for a federal immigration enforcement, especially for federal officials, that for the most part is ok. they can arrest on an

administrative warrants. the problem is due local police officers have that power under the for them and. there's been a number of cash under the fourth amendment. there's been a number of -- do local police officers have the power under the fourth amendment. l.a. county and others have faced litigation and big settlement costs. suffolk county is facing a $60 million settlement cost for complying with ice detainers. it is a strange situation where on the one hand we are turning to figure out whether or not local governments must comply with ice detainers, on the other hand we are trying to figure out whether complying with detainers might open you up to liability purposes because it is not clear that local governments have the power -- and we detain someone for 48 hours past the moment they should be legally released, that is considered a separate arrest. that is why you need a separate warrant. that is what the courts are pointing out. amanda: that is helpful, rick. some of you may not have jail

facilities, so that is not as relevant to you, but some of you do. it is important to have this context for folks to understand, and even if you don't, we hear about ice detainers. understanding the context about why your other communities might hesitate when they have lawsuits from the aclu to the tune of $6 million, it is definitely something, as rick said, you find yourself between a rock and a hard place. it is a difficult position that local governments have been put this issue. i'm keeping an eye on the time here. i do want to have one more quick question for you, rick, and then we are going to bring it back to both of you all. in terms of finding, tying this back to what-- fundindg, tying this back to what ana was talking about, we have a little bit of history with immigration conditions and federal funding, and we have been here before. i think if you could adjust briefly tell us a little bit about that history from the first trump administration and what we might expect in this time in terms of how federal

funding might be linked immigration conditions. rick: i noted earlier there is funding constraints and affirmative litigation. i do think these are happening faster but these have during the first trump administration, which is to say there was a lot of litigation over those particular issues before. for the most part if i were to report on what the results of the litigation was, i would say the vast majority of courts have essentially held that the discretion is in local communities with regard to whether or not they want to participate or not participate. for the most part cities and counties that want to have the discretion have prevailed in the first round of litigation. in that sense it would suggest at least to this set of issues coming up that we might appear to be headed down the same path. i will say there are two things to keep in mind. the first is on the one hand i think the interest here is to test these legal issues again,

and i think the courts have changed. nonetheless, i think this is still a little bit uncertain. the reason i say this is on the one hand, yes, the courts have changed, certainly at least the general understanding somehow is the supreme court made be more amenable to these kinds of policies but it is also important to remember that these policies we are talking about, 10th amendment, they are traditionally conservative policies, simply more state rights -- essentially more state rights, local control, not giving the federal government too much power. it will be interesting to see a court that is balancing on the one hand these policies but on the other hand these traditional doctrines. even if this is going to be headed to the supreme court, which i think it probably will be, not clear between those how they might rule. amanda: in almost it had to the supreme court as time and there was this deflation of dismissal because the biden administration

came into one thing i would highlight with the immigration conversation is the uncertainty with a lot of this. ana said this, too, it is important to bring in your city attorneys, town attorneys, village attorneys, and make sure you are talking to them about this. we are giving you a high-level overview, and there is so many nuances in state law, so many nuances depending on your geography and jurisdiction, you may have to comply with ice detainers, or you may not be allowed to. it will vary by state law, so i don't want to give you the impression we have all the answers on these issues, because the courts vary widely and how they approach these issues, and it is important you consult with your attorney on those issues. so i want to circle back with you, ana, and then rick, you can jump in on this, too, we have been talking about the federal government withholding federal funds, but we have been hearing rumblings about clawing back federal funds.

can the federal government clawback congressionally appropriated funds for policies that don't align with the administration's policies? ana: we can get into a little bit of history class now. so when you are looking at your agreements come any time you signed an agreement with the federal government, it has provisions from the code of federal regulations, and there is one specific code, amanda, you and i have talked about the impacts of this one specifically, it is on termination. it allows the federal government to terminate agreements, grants, loans, etc., for many reasons, one of which is a change in agency policy. the agreement no longer fulfills agency priorities or program goals. as we know, a lot of these programs are set out in statute, but they also fall within -- they are developed through the agencies. if there are changes, and we

have seen some come down from this administration, but we also saw this provision used in previous administrations as well, there's been other iterations of this, that is always something in the back pocket that can be used that people need to be aware of when you are looking at your federal money, is it really mine, or can i count on it. knowing what program you are getting your funding from is critical to understand does that program fit within the agency and administration priorities and are they amending it to be something different and will your project fulfill those goals as well. it is a lot of unknowns but you usually have your grants coordinator from the agency that you go to work with ask this question. some of them don't have the answers right now because they are still being determined, but you have that open line available. the other side of this is what we call the impoundment control act. the idea of impoundment, which is where the president can change what congress has said to do with funding, or can't, really goes back to the

beginning of our country. we have seen presidents using impoundment in some way or redirecting federal funds from congress in some way, shape, or form all the way back to jefferson, when he told congress in his third address that he didn't want to purchase the gunboats to use for the louisiana purchase and move forward from there. fast-forward to eisenhower, kennedy, johnson, nixon as well, you always hear that congress has the power of the purse, the question is the purse is doled out by the administration. in the 1970's we saw president nixon asserting his authority to withhold these funds and curtail different programs that he didn't feel fell with his administration's agency priorities, and there were a lot of lawsuits. during this time the courts said the administration needed to release the impounded funds and require the statutory duties. is the impoundment within the

statutory duties or not with the impoundment? control act coming, that is what they did. there was a process for congress to ask to switch it, but it is a question of whether that is used. amanda: i think we will have to leave it there. this was a great conversation, really tough questions. i appreciate you all being here for walking us through this and doing a great job working with city leaders. join me in thanking our experts today. [applause] ♪ >> thank you, thank you. that was in my opinion super informative. thanks to ilma for being such an important partner with the national league of cities.

now i think everyone in this audience knows this is nlc's 100-year celebration, has been, 100 years of service. national cities, towns, and villages. but we have got another big birthday coming up on the horizon. on july 4, 2026, the united states will celebrate its 250th birthday. [applause] yeah. anniversary of the signing of our beloved declaration of independence. of course that anniversary is going to be going up quick, and planning has already begun and is well underway. in 2016 a nonpartisan u.s. semiquincentennial -- say that three times really fast -- commission was established by congress to orchestrate a big celebration that engages

americans across the country that are designed -- celebration is going to be designed for the largest celebration we have ever experienced. sharing the american 250 initiative is former united states treasurer rosie rios, who i am thrilled to welcome to the stage today to share a little bit about how we can all get involved in this historic moment . please join me in welcoming the chair of america 250, rosie rios. [applause] ♪ rosie: good afternoon, everyone. i can't tell you how thrilled i am to be here today. in many ways i feel like i am

coming home. i got my start in the private sector out of college, but i got my start in government working with the cities. i was the director of economic element and -- economic to element and/or redevelopment for many cities. i worked with the cities of san leandro, union city, fremont, oakland -- hey! -- and san francisco. those were some of the best parts of my career, so thank you for welcoming me back home today. i have had the pleasure of speaking to many stockholders about america 250, but in my opinion it doesn't get any better than getting local and getting to work with cities who understand the value of service and the value of engagement and what it means to start a grassroots effort, and that is exactly what we are going to need here. for those of you who aren't familiar with america 250, as was mentioned, we were established by legislation in 2016 to plan and orchestrate

the 250th anniversary of the signing of the declaration of independence. our goal is for this to be the largest and most inspiring commemoration in our nation's history and perhaps the globe. we are working with partners at the local, state, and federal level to reach 350 million americans here and abroad. you're going to hear me say that over and over, 350 for 250 is real. no one is ever said that before, but we are going to do this, and we cannot do it without you, that's for sure. and we couldn't be more please -- thank you -- we cannot be more pleased that this administration has been very, very supportive of what we need to do to make this and create those big, inspiring moments that will define the semiquincentennial. let me be clear, america 250 is not just a big fireworks show on july 4, 2026. this is a movement, it is not a

moment. and we are taking this journey in a way that has never happened before in the history of our country. and i want this to be where it begins, is with our local communities. we are going from guam to alaska, from fairbanks to philadelphia, and everything in between. this is an opportunity to reflect on our past and more importantly, who we want to be 250 years from now. it starts with asking that very simple question, what is the spirit of america. everyone in this room likely has a different answer. if you are thinking about the spirit of innovation, if you are trying to address through american innovates. maybe it is how we think about the spirit of exploration, exploring our country, the way it was founded, trying to accomplish that through our american story. but to me, few ideas capture the essence of the american spirit better than the word "opportunity." from the very beginning,

opportunity in america has been built from the ground up in cities, in towns, and in local communities. the founders builds our nation on a tradition of local leadership, and that was already thriving in places like boston, philadelphia, charleston. they understood that in town halls and public squares where democracy is most alive is where the action and deliverables happen, and that has not changed. now, by show of hands, how many of you got your start in public service at the local level the way i did? many of us, of course. how many of you helped to solve a problem in your city because someone in your community personally reached out to you for help? exactly. look around, and this is why cities matter. that is why local governments matter. it is at the local level where leaders are made, where government is most responsive, and where the story of america's best told. one more question, who remembers the bicentennial in 1976?

i do. i absolutely do. i was 11 years old, just finishing up the fifth grade in hayward, california, and i remember it like it was yesterday. some people say once-in-a-lifetime. i get to do this twice in a lifetime. every member taking the field trip to the freedom train station in oakland. i remembered seeing the black and white tv where the tall ships came through to the boston and new york harbor. i remember very clearly as an 11-year-old getting my bicentennial quarter, my life savings at the time, and by the way, i still have it to this day and i carry it with me everywhere i go. for me, what i remember the most, though is the evening of july 4, 1976. it was a cloudy night in hayward, california, but those fireworks were never brighter. what i was thinking about that moment in time we were grateful enough to be supported by our community, our village, our parish camaro catholic parish. my mom, who was somehow able to

raise all nine of us as a single parent, somehow send all nine of us off to college, that is the story of opportunity. i remember thinking -- yes -- but i remember thinking to myself, we were in great schools, and i remember thinking as an 11-year-old girl that i had the whole future in front of me, that anything was possible, that only in america could my mom do what she did, and that my story is probably not that unique. we probably have many stories like that of people coming to this great country to pursue their own american dream, and that is what i want my kids to feel, that is what i want the next generation to feel, that they've been given this privilege of pursuing their own american dream because i remember how much that last one mattered to me. and so opportunity, being the daughter of mexican immigrants who ultimately became the 43rd treasurer of the united states and was able to graduate from

harvard, whose son graduated from harvard, and has standing in front of you to say we have that same opportunity among us and among our kids to pursue that dream, that is why stories matter. that brings me -- thank you -- that brings me to one of america 250's signature initiatives, our american story. our american story is our nation's greatest effort to preserve and collect local stories. over the next year we are literally going to build a story bank from all across 50 states, five territories, and the district of columbia. we have established america 250 commissions in all 56 of those areas. we are going to uncover the stories that have never been told. i call it buried treasure. we are going to have these stories recorded and shared for all to enjoy in perpetuity at the library of congress. you can go to our website now, america250.org, and nominate whose story you think should be preserved in perpetuity. we are going to visit farmland,

rural america, slidable nations, faith-based communities -- tribal nations, faith-based communities we want to gather those stories that have never been told. when you think about whose stories should be preserved, think about who popped up in your mind. min would bee my mom. go to america250.org, nominate someone whose story should be preserved in perpetuity, and we will work with cities and towns and states. america 250 is mobilizing for america gives, the largest year of service in 2026 ever recorded. it's never happened before. can you believe that all our kids who had to take community service hours to graduate from high school -- you had to do that? all of us, right? no one has that aggregate number of those hours that have been devoted by our kids. we want that to continue. 30% of all volunteer hours are

actually generated by faith-based communities. that has never, ever been aggregated. we are going to take the lead, and by december 21, 2026, we are going to have that number. why is that number important in 2026? we have a global platform with the world cup. the eyes of the world will be watching the u.s. for two years, three global events happening in the united states, the 250th, the world cup, and two short years later the olympics. billions of people will be watching us and what happens in this country those two short years, and we are leveraging that platform because we want this to continue. this is into one and done, this is a movement. as we create the record of the most volunteer hours ever aggregated by our country, we have some friendly competition with russia, india, and china in 2027, great. we are coming back for the olympics in 2028 and will

hopefully keep it going and inspire the next generation of leadership. the last program i want to talk about is america's filter. america's guilt trip -- america's field trip is a competition for students three through 12 answering the question what does america mean to me. we launched this as a pilot program last spring and we received thousands of submissions. the beauty of america's field trip is the reward recipients get to choose from backstage experiences with federal agencies, most of which have never been offered to the public before. it is a great win-win across-the-board. i had a chance to participate in the field trips this past summer. it wasn't just a tour of the statue of liberty. we took a private national park service boat from manhattan island to liberty island, got to the ground, we walked the hollow halls of ellis island when no one was there, we got a lunch hosted by the cio of bni mellon, we got to the ra