The Hall of Doom, well one of many in Washington, formerly EPA headquarters. (WMP&I)

The federal government has confirmed its cancellation of a $20 million environmental grant to the city of Springfield, but officials are not giving in. On Monday, the City Council passed a resolution that “respectfully” asks “the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider and restore” the funds “to ensure continued progress in improving the quality of life, environmental conditions, and health outcomes for Springfield’s residents and the broader region.”

There is a formal, administrative appeal process. Yet, it seems improbable that Donald Trump’s EPA shall willingly return the funds to Springfield. When city officials learned of the grant’s cancellation, it said it was considering all options. Since then, the city has been in touch with the office of Attorney General Andrea Campbell. That could add some firepower to Springfield’s response.

“The threat of cancelling the $20 million grant has been looming over the City,” Springfield City Solicitor Stephen Buoniconti told WMP&I last week. “Now that it is official, the AG’s Office has offered to intercede on our behalf and other communities across the State.”

Residents, councilors, officials and environmental activists had feted the grant’s announcement last year. Springfield was the only New England city to have received a Community Change grant as of then. The funds came from former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Despite its name, the legislation’s principal purpose to address climate change.

In a presentation before the City Council in December, Housing Director Gerry McCafferty explained the city plans. The grant would fund decarbonization of buildings, tree planting and street reconstruction in the North End. Even with Trump’s impending return, it had seemed like the funding would be secure. The city and its partners began planning and making commitments.

The money did not come, however. Almost immediately upon taking office, Trump and his minions began haphazardly defunding programs, often in violation of law. While courts have restored billions in funding, a filing in Rhode Island shows Springfield’s EPA grant was not among them.

“The grant monies already have been dedicated to important projects that the City cannot fund” using its own money, Buoniconti emailed. “Projects like the West Street Improvement project are now in jeopardy of not getting done.”

Campbell has become a central figure pushing back against Trump, including his EPA. (WMP&I)

The addition of the Attorney General to the equation is a hopeful sign, though. As her predecessor—and now-Governor—Maura Healey had been during the last go-round, Campbell has become one of the most visible and active legal foes to the Trump administration. The record is not perfect, but the abject lawlessness of the federal regime has often left it exposed in court.

In a statement, Campbell’s office said it was in contact with municipalities facing grant cancellations, including Springfield in particular.

“We are aware of the termination of this grant. The Trump Administration is intent on clawing back resources for projects dedicated to ensuring everyone has equal access to basic human needs such as clean air, clean water, and healthy and climate resilient homes and neighborhoods,” the spokesperson said. “Our office, alongside our multistate coalition of attorneys general, will continue to fight to ensure communities are protected from policies that harm our residents.”

Adding to the commonwealth and Campbell’s import in these legal battles, many plaintiffs have filed cases against Trump in Massachusetts or states inside its appellate circuit. One such early case was in Rhode Island, which sought to stop the mass cancellation of federal grants to states. Confirmation of the EPA grant recission arrived in another lawsuit that nonprofits had filed in Rhode Island federal court. It was part of a purge of environmental justice grants.

While the judge in that case had paused mass cancellations, she allowed terminations to occur after individualized assessments. In a ruling last week, she said she might have looked more skeptically had the EPA cancelled everything. The grants were all from the IRA and Biden’s infrastructure bill.

Providence would deliver confirmation from Rhode Island federal court. (via wikipedia)

“To be sure, there can be reasonable differences of opinion about what constitutes an individualized review,” Judge Mary McElroy wrote on May 6. “But the Court determined that EPA’s explanation was sufficiently specific in this context: compliance proceedings about an injunction forbidding a much broader pause.”

In a footnote, the judge suggested that a different lawsuit might yield a decision that goes further.

Buoniconti said that working with the AG’s office, the city would “explore every option, including filing our own action” to get the money back.

City officials had blasted the grant’s recission when it became official. Tina Quagliato Sullivan, Springfield’s deputy development officer for housing, community development and neighborhoods, told The Republican that although City Hall was “devastated and disappointed,” the EPA’s move was not a shock. Director McCafferty said it was part of “an agenda.” She that it would have financed the efficiency Trump and company claim to want.

The agency itself offered the newspaper pablum about the grant not meeting current priorities. It has claimed to be following a Trump executive order that has declared an energy emergency. That emergency purportedly necessitates less renewable energy and more fossil fuels. Campbell joined 14 other attorneys general last Friday in a suit to challenge Trump’s alleged energy emergency.

Senator Ed Markey, long active on climate matters, condemned the cancellation. In a statement, he noted the city’s high asthma rate. Markey also underscored the grant’s aims  to improve tree cover and refurbish housing, among other benefits.

“The Trump administration is attempting to steal $20 million dollars from the people of Springfield to fund tax breaks for billionaires,” Markey said, alluding to the multi-trillion tax cut that is lumbering through Congress.

Markey is not letting the change in political climate kill Springfield’s grant. (WMP&I)

“These funds were rightfully awarded through a rigorous review process to the Springfield community to help clean up polluted air and ease the burden of asthma that has long strangled children, seniors, and people of all ages as a result of generations of concentrated pollution,” the senator continued.

At-large city councilor Brian Santaniello spearheaded the resolution before the Council on Monday. Markey sent his Western Massachusetts district aide, Jesse Lederman, a former councilor, to deliver a statement. He also briefed the Council efforts to recoup the money.

Councilors expressed outrage at the recission and recalled the pride in the city receiving the award.

“I was so proud when Gerry McCafferty came up to ask us to approve this particular grant because it is the largest in the state. It is Western Mass and it is Springfield,” at-large Councilor Tracye Whitfield said, while backing the resolution.

Ward 7 City Councilor Timothy Allen noted that the news came just as developers, who seek to build a biomass power plant on Page Boulevard, scored a legal victory last week.

“Not only did we take this gut punch on the 20 million, we took the gut punch of seeing biomass get another breath of fresh air,” he said.

Allen also noted the city’s asthma rate. Two of his grandchildren have the condition, he said. They are not alone. At-large councilor Jose Delgado said he suffered from the condition as does his daughter. His statement was succinct, but representative of the feeling among councilors and the city overall.

“You know when I learned of the Trump administration cutting this I was pretty pissed off,” Delgado said.