Trump officials offer cities tens of millions for Memphis-style police surges – with conditions

The Trump administration is offering grants of tens of millions of dollars to cities across the US to create more Memphis-style enforcement surges – on the condition that they abandon progressive ideologies on policing.

The US Department of Justice says it will announce up to four finalist cities which will split $300m in grant funding under a federal “Model Cities” policing initiative (MCI) next month, setting the stage for some of the largest federal policing grants ever awarded to individual US cities.

In exchange for the funding, cities are required to comply with federal immigration enforcement requests, enact conservative policies on anti-homelessness rules, and potentially repay millions of dollars in the event of a surge in violent crime or “civil unrest”, according to a grant document.

The document cites Washington DC and Memphis, Tennessee – two cities with national guard troops patrolling the streets – as a model to emulate. The administration has so far defied calls to suspend its controversial taskforce in Memphis, following four officer-involved deaths since its launch last September.

“That’s not a model I’d be looking for,” said Steven Reed, the mayor of Montgomery, Alabama. Reed said he had seen the grant and passed on applying. “Everybody wants a quick fix, and no one wants to invest in the root cause of the issue,” he said.

Despite the significant funding boost on offer, Reed is one of several leaders of large municipalities with Democratic majorities who have signaled they will not even consider applying for the grant.

The justice department has offered policing grants to cities through programs of the office of community oriented policing services (Cops) since 1994, disbursing more than $20bn since then. The Cops office of the justice department offered city governments about $700m this fiscal year to supplement hiring, training and equipment.

The MCI, a product of funding from Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, offers another $300m to two to four municipalities with more than 100,000 residents. Grant funding will last three years under the program.

Unlike most previous grants, awards will be seemingly be awarded after evaluation by senior political appointees in the justice department, and not through a more politically neutral recommendation process of peer review, said Amy Solomon, a senior fellow at the Council on Criminal Justice, who previously served as assistant attorney general of the office of justice programs under Joe Biden.

The grant guidelines require applicants to have documented “buy-in and support” across the local government – mayors, sheriff’s offices, city councils and county commissions – as a condition of approval.

The initiative focuses on reducing violent crime, to “surge substantial, targeted federal funding into select cities”, according to a justice department presentation on the grants. City governments can use the money to hire more police and fund substance abuse recovery programs, prisoner re-entry programs, facilities, training and other initiatives.

A justice department spokesperson claimed jurisdictions have “expressed intense interest” in the initiative.

“Senior department leaders have made themselves available in a variety of formats to answer questions about how cities can submit the most competitive application possible,” a spokesperson replied to emailed questions. “[The justice department] looks forward to reviewing applications from across the country that demonstrate how creative solutions and close teamwork between local and federal partners can achieve the same dramatic gains in public safety seen in Washington DC and Memphis. This is the Make America Safe Again mission in action.”

The department did not answer questions about the repayment provision, and declined to say whether it had yet received eligible applications, or whether city governments would be required to accept the activation of the national guard under the grant program.

“Awards under this funding opportunity will include a condition (the specific terms of which will govern the award) related to the future reimbursement of the costs associated with federal law enforcement intervention or assistance provided in the event of a surge in violent crime or public disorder,” the grant document states. “The condition will, generally speaking, require an MCI Department of Justice award recipient to fulfill any such future reimbursement obligation(s) incurred in accordance with its terms.”

“To my knowledge, this funding condition is unprecedented,” Solomon said. “It forces applicants to agree – preemptively – to foot the bill for future, unspecified federal interventions in their own back yards.”

It is among the sharpest sticking points for municipal leaders and critics, who view the grant as a $300m enticement to accept a package of Trump’s ideological interests.

The grant requires municipalities to directly support immigration law enforcement operations. It also requires the enforcement of prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping, loitering, squatting, and “standards that address individuals who are a danger to themselves or others and suffer from serious mental illness or substance use”.

It calls for assisted outpatient treatment for people experiencing mental health problems that have led to homelessness, but it repudiates the housing-first model for homelessness relief by requiring compliance with treatment to retain housing.

Few municipalities with populations larger than 100,000 residents also have Republican political majorities. Fewer still are in states with Republican governors, which would be a realistic requirement for a national guard activation.

“In other cities, they have killed American citizens for reasons that turned out to be lies. Do we really need this in Billings?” said Karen Jarussi, speaking to the city council of Billings, Montana, this week.

The Billings city council voted 9-1 against forwarding a grant application for the MCI. The city of San Bernardino, California, withdrew a vote on its agenda on Tuesday after public outcry.