Palm Coast mayor gets no confidence vote after investigation shows charter violations
With a vacant seat front and center on the dais, the Palm Coast City Council unanimously approved a vote of no confidence in Mayor Mike Norris and agreed to censure him.
The decision stems from a 57-page report released April 21 regarding allegations that Norris violated the city charter, interfered with city employees and behaved unprofessionally.
Norris, who was sworn into office in November 2024, was notably absent from both business workshops April 22. He did not return a phone call or text from The News-Journal.
Adam Brandon of Lawson Huck Gonzalez, PLLC – a Tallahassee-based law firm – conducted the investigation and his summary of the accusations includes reviewed materials and statements from several current and former city officials, which point to Norris' alleged offenses.
Most notably, Brandon's report focuses on Norris' 'unilateral attempt to obtain the resignations of the acting city manager (Lauren Johnston) and chief of staff (Jason DeLorenzo),' which Brandon argued 'crossed the line into interference with operational and personnel decisions that Mayor Norris is not entitled to make in a council-manager form of government.'
Johnston told the investigator that Norris 'suggested as early as December 2024 that Jason DeLorenzo, Patrick Buckley, and others in the building department should be fired,' according to the report. 'However, Mayor Norris backed off once Ms. Johnston advised him that Mr. DeLorenzo was essential to the city's operations.'
Johnston also told Brandon that 'during a meeting on March 10, 2025, the mayor explicitly stated he had lost confidence and requested immediate resignations from her and Jason DeLorenzo,' which she described as a 'one-way conversation.'
The report also includes City Attorney Marcus Duffy's recollection of 'a conversation in which Mayor Norris told him, 'You've got to help me convince Lauren to fire Jason. He's at the top of the spiderweb of corruption.''
The "spiderweb of corruption" or just the "spiderweb," is a term used multiple times throughout the report in quotes from Norris or people quoting him. However there are no specifics or evidence of any such corruption in the report.
Duffy 'advised the mayor that he did not have the authority' to fire Johnston or DeLorenzo. According to the report, the city attorney also 'told Mayor Norris on three occasions that he could not interfere with city employees who are not charter officers, including the chief of staff.'
According to Brandon, Norris' alleged conduct 'likely meets the definition of inference under the charter.'
The Palm Coast city charter does not specify what could happen in case of interference by a City Council member 'in the operational and personnel decisions reserved to the city manager.'
Although it doesn't define the term 'interference,' the charter stipulates that such interference 'could constitute malfeasance,' which 'can generally lead to penalties such as removal from office, suspension, public censure, salary forfeiture, civil fines and restitution,' according to the report.
'While some of these penalties require a political process (e.g., a censure resolution adopted by a majority vote of the City Council), the Florida Commission on Ethics can also impose certain penalties,' Brandon's report added.
In his own statement to Brandon, included in the report, Norris claimed that there has been 'a lot of confusion' regarding his conversations with Johnston and DeLorenzo.
'I want to be clear: I did not demand their resignations,' Norris' statement reads, according to the report. 'City Attorney Marcus Duffy was on the phone during the conversation and may have assumed I was demanding they resign. That was not my intent. I never instructed Lauren to fire Jason, and I did not tell Marcus Duffy that he needed to resign either, though it's possible he interpreted my remarks that way.'
Norris acknowledged that he 'requested their resignations, but I did not demand them.'
'As the Mayor, I believe I have the right to request a resignation when I lose confidence in a staff member,' Norris continued. 'I recognize I do not have the authority to terminate employees, and I have never claimed otherwise.'
Brandon argued that Norris 'did not simply express a personal view or provide evidence of corruption by a city employee. Rather, Mayor Norris explicitly sought to pressure the acting city manager and chief of staff to submit their resignations.'
Brandon's report also includes accounts from 'numerous city employees, a former member of the City Council, and other citizens' who have reported what the investigator described as 'ethics violations, the creation of a hostile work environment for city employees, and other alleged unprofessional behavior' from the mayor.
Some of these accusations include:
'Inappropriate and profane comments directed at female staff.
Demeaning comments directed toward the communications and marketing department.
Alleged age discrimination.
Use of profanity and verbal intimidation.'
Accounts from city employees in the report refer to comments Norris allegedly made about a female city employee's toenail polish and another's professional attire.
Brittany Kershaw, the city's director of communications and marketing, accused Norris of 'berating the department's work on the Starlight Parade livestream, using profanity, calling the work 'garbage' and 'horse (expletive).'
According to the report, Norris apologized to the communications team and said he was 'kidding.'
'In the grand scheme of things, I don't really care about a video of a parade,' Norris wrote. 'I'm not trying to degrade your service. It's just a crappy video.'
Renina Fuller, the city's human resources director, reported a meeting where Norris 'explicitly advocated for hiring younger employees due to older employees being costly in health care benefits,' according to the report.
'The mayor's guidance, if followed, could have exposed the city to age-discrimination claims,' Brandon argued. 'However, I found no evidence of actual age discrimination by the city.'
In his defense, Norris claimed that he made a 'factual observation' that 'older employees cost more in benefits.'
'I never instructed the HR department to hire or fire anyone,' Norris wrote. 'I was simply pointing out that a younger workforce tends to cost less.'
Council members were disappointed with the results of the investigation, but not surprised. More importantly, they were ready to stop wasting time on issues with Norris and start working for the residents of Palm Coast.
"I don't want to be working on this," Councilman Ty Miller said three hours into the second meeting. "I want to be working on the city and getting the city better every day. Instead we're dealing with a constant distraction, trying to build trust while another person is trying to tear that apart."
Miller said Norris' absence, of which he didn't notify any city staff or fellow members, shows he's not willing to do the work and not willing "to confront things he may not like.
"If it's in a back room where he can intimidate someone and tell them what to do – certainly (he's) willing to do it. But not in public. We can't talk about it there."
Vice Mayor Theresa Carli Pontieri said she reached out to the mayor earlier in the morning to make sure he was OK, but he never responded.
She said Norris' actions have already taken a toll on the city, which is evident in candidates dropping out of the city manager search "and it's probably affecting people moving and investing in our community. These are not things that an investor wants to see – they want to see 'stability' and 'predictability.'"
She called Norris a "coward" for refusing to bring issues to the board for public discussion and instead calling "secret meetings."
"I don't think this is what the voters of Palm Coast genuinely voted for," Pontieri said. "The voters of Palm Coast did not vote for a dictator. The voters of Palm Coast did not vote for a mayor to come in and disregard the rules and the procedures set out in the city charter and not want to work with the board as a governing body, because that's what we are. We are a governing body and a republic. We are not part of a dictatorship."
Council members also brought up their disappointment with the state of the city address and Norris' inability to show leadership and collaborate with others.
Councilman Charles Gambaro, who made the motion for the censure and no-confidence vote, said he was especially concerned in the malfeasance finding and was disappointed in the mayor's behavior, as well as "the wild accusations against this council, members of our city staff which has been clearly documented and members of our community without any facts supporting his claims."
One example he gave included his interview on a local website in which he gave council members the middle finger.
Councilman David Sullivan, who was only recently appointed to the board, called Norris a "coarse bully."
"I look at it as the difference between the mayor and us is he has that title – mayor – he's supposed to be kind of the front person for the city," Sullivan said. "He gets one vote like all of us, but the little difference is he he gets elected citywide for the job. But he's not doing that job. He's actually having a negative impact on Palm Coast right now, not a positive impact and he doesn't seem to understand what his proper role should be. I think what we have here is a coarse bully. He's acting as a bully and usually that's the sign of somebody who has an inferiority complex."
The council discussed sending a formal letter to Gov. Ron DeSantis asking him to remove Norris from his post, but in the end, Gambaro made a motion to file a formal complaint to the Ethics Commission against Norris for malfeasance.
In the meantime, Brandon will give a presentation of his findings and council members will decide whether or not to finalize the letter to the governor.
At the conclusion of his report, Brandon made several recommendations to the City Council's course of action, including referring the matter for further review by the Florida Commission on Ethics and moving to censure Norris.
He also encouraged the city to 'strengthen the charter's enforcement mechanisms,' clarifying what punishment could result 'when elected officials engage in malfeasance or attempt to make operational and personnel decisions reserved to the city manager.'
He also recommended the City Council hire a permanent city manager 'who has been approved by a vote of the full City Council;' implement mandatory training on the city charter, Sunshine Law, ethics rules for public officers and more; support staff and whistleblower protections; and monitor 'concerns about the relationship between the City Council and city employees, including regular updates to the Council from the City Manager and Human Resources.'
This article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: Palm Coast mayor gets unanimous no confidence vote
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
34 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
No Supreme Court win, but Mexico pressures U.S. on southbound guns
MEXICO CITY — More than a decade ago, Mexican authorities erected a billboard along the border in Ciudad Juárez, across the Rio Grande from El Paso. 'No More Weapons,' was the stark message, written in English and crafted from 3 tons of firearms that had been seized and crushed. It was a desperate entreaty to U.S. officials to stanch the so-called Iron River, the southbound flow of arms that was fueling record levels of carnage in Mexico. But the guns kept coming — and the bloodletting and mayhem grew. Finally, with homicides soaring to record levels, exasperated authorities pivoted to a novel strategy: Mexico filed a $10-billion suit in U.S. federal court seeking to have Smith & Wesson and other signature manufacturers held accountable for the country's epidemic of shooting deaths. The uphill battle against the powerful gun lobby survived an appeals court challenge, but last week the U.S. Supreme Court threw out Mexico's lawsuit, ruling unanimously that federal law shields gunmakers from nearly all liability. Although the litigation stalled, advocates say the high-profile gambit did notch a significant achievement: Dramatizing the role of Made-in-U.S.A. arms in Mexico's daily drumbeat of assassinations, massacres and disappearances. 'Notwithstanding the Supreme Court ruling, Mexico's lawsuit has accomplished a great deal,' said Jonathan Lowy, president of Global Action on Gun Violence, a Washington-based advocacy group. 'It has put the issue of gun trafficking — and the industry's role in facilitating the gun pipeline — on the bilateral and international agenda,' said Lowy, who was co-counsel in Mexico's lawsuit. A few hours after the high court decision, Ronald Johnson, the U.S. ambassador in Mexico City, wrote on X that the White House was intent on working with Mexico 'to stop southbound arms trafficking and dismantle networks fueling cartel violence.' The comments mark the first time that Washington — which has strong-armed Mexico to cut down on the northbound traffic of fentanyl and other illicit drugs — has acknowledged a reciprocal responsibility to clamp down on southbound guns, said President Claudia Sheinbaum. She hailed it as a breakthrough, years in the making. 'This is not just about the passage of narcotics from Mexico to the United States,' Sheinbaum said Friday. 'But that there [must] also be no passage of arms from the United States to Mexico.' Mexico is mulling options after the Supreme Court rebuff, Sheinbaum said. Still pending is a separate lawsuit by Mexico in U.S. federal court accusing five gun dealers in Arizona of trafficking weapons and ammunition to the cartels. Meanwhile, U.S. officials say that the Trump administration's recent designation of six Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations means that weapons traffickers may face terrorism-related charges. 'In essence, the cartels that operate within Mexico and threaten the state are armed from weapons that are bought in the United States and shipped there,' U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told a congressional panel last month. 'We want to help stop that flow.' On Monday, federal agents gathered at an international bridge in Laredo, Texas, before an array of seized arms — from snub-nosed revolvers to mounted machine guns — to demonstrate what they insist is a newfound resolve to stop the illicit gun commerce. 'This isn't a weapon just going to Mexico,' Craig Larrabee, special agent in charge of Homeland Security Investigations in San Antonio, told reporters. 'It's going to arm the cartels. It's going to fight police officers and create terror throughout Mexico.' In documents submitted to the Supreme Court, Mexican authorities charged that it defied credibility that U.S. gunmakers were unaware that their products were destined for Mexican cartels — a charge denied by manufacturers. The gun industry also disputed Mexico's argument that manufacturers deliberately produce military-style assault rifles and other weapons that, for both practical and aesthetic reasons, appeal to mobsters. Mexico cited several .38-caliber Colt offerings, including a gold-plated, Jefe de Jefes ('Boss of Bosses') pistol; and a handgun dubbed the 'Emiliano Zapata,' emblazoned with an image of the revered Mexican revolutionary hero and his celebrated motto: 'It is better to die standing than to live on your knees.' Compared with the United States, Mexico has a much more stringent approach to firearms. Like the 2nd Amendment, Mexico's Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. But it also stipulates that federal law 'will determine the cases, conditions, requirements and places' of gun ownership. There are just two stores nationwide, both run by the military, where people can legally purchase guns. At the bigger store, in Mexico City, fewer than 50 guns are sold on average each day. Buyers are required to provide names, addresses and fingerprints in a process that can drag on for months. And unlike the United States, Mexico maintains a national registry. But the vast availability of U.S.-origin, black-market weapons undermines Mexico's strict guidelines. According to Mexican officials, an estimated 200,000 to half a million guns are smuggled annually into Mexico. Data collected by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives illustrate where criminals in Mexico are obtaining their firepower. Of the 132,823 guns recovered at crime scenes in Mexico from 2009 to 2018, fully 70% were found to have originated in the U.S. — mostly in Texas and other Southwest border states. In their lawsuit, Mexican authorities cited even higher numbers: Almost 90% of guns seized at crime scenes came from north of the border. Experts say most firearms in Mexico are bought legally at U.S. gun shows or retail outlets by so-called straw purchasers,who smuggle the weapons across the border. It's a surprisingly easy task: More than a million people and about $1.8 billion in goods cross the border legally each day, and Mexico rarely inspects vehicles heading south. In recent years, the flood of weapons from the United States has accelerated, fueling record levels of violence. Mexican organized crime groups have expanded their turf and moved into rackets beyond drug trafficking, including extortion, fuel-smuggling and the exploitation of timber, minerals and other natural resources. In 2004, guns accounted for one-quarter of Mexico's homicides. Today, guns are used in roughly three-quarters of killings. Mexican leaders have long been sounding alarms. Former President Felipe Calderón, who, with U.S. backing, launched what is now widely viewed as a catastrophic 'war' on Mexican drug traffickers in late 2006, personally pleaded with U.S. lawmakers to reinstate a congressional prohibition on purchases of high-powered assault rifles. The expiration of the ban in 2004 meant that any adult with a clean record could enter a store in most states and walk out with weapons that, in much of the world, are legally reserved for military use. 'Many of these guns are not going to honest American hands,' Calderon said in a 2010 address to the U.S. Congress. 'Instead, thousands are ending up in the hands of criminals.' It was Calderón who, near the end of his term, ventured to the northern border to unveil the massive billboard urging U.S. authorities to stop the weapons flow. His appeals, and those of subsequent Mexican leaders, went largely unheeded. The verdict is still out on whether Washington will follow up on its latest vows to throttle the gun traffic. 'The Trump administration has said very clearly that it wants to go after Mexican organized crime groups,' said David Shirk, a political scientist at San Diego University who studies violence in Mexico. 'And, if you're going to get serious about Mexican cartels, you have to take away their guns.' Special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal contributed to this report.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Small Michigan auto suppliers face a tariff crisis with thousands of jobs at risk
Small Michigan auto suppliers face a tariff crisis with thousands of jobs at risk Show Caption Hide Caption Appeals court allows Trump tariffs while appeal plays out An appeals court ruled the Trump administration will be allowed to levy tariffs while an appeal on previous court rulings plays out. Michigan auto parts suppliers are struggling with the 25% tariffs imposed by President Trump on imported vehicles and parts. Smaller suppliers are especially vulnerable, facing potential job losses and business closures due to increased costs. Industry experts warn that tariffs could lead to supplier consolidation, potentially driving up prices for consumers. Michigan-based auto parts suppliers are getting creative in their attempts to mitigate President Donald Trump's 25% tariffs on imported vehicles and auto parts. They must, because many industry experts worry the tariffs could put smaller players — which constitute the bulk of auto suppliers — out of business and result in widespread job losses. Take Michigan-based Lucerne International in Auburn Hills, which is looking for the U.S. government to grant it foreign trade zone status to help it delay its tariff bills and free up its cash flow. Another supplier, Team 1 Plastics Inc., is reassessing its business model, including what to do about a much-needed factory expansion that may no longer be affordable. Still others are asking automakers to help foot the bill. 'We've had a lot to think about when you take an industry that is as far-flung as the supply base is in automotive, and then throw in tariffs.' said Gary Grigowski, vice president of Team 1 Plastics, Inc. Adds Lucerne CEO Mary Buchzeiger, "I wake up in the morning and I deal with tariffs. I go to bed and I deal with tariffs. Then the policy keeps changing and when that playbook continuously keeps changing and we don't know what is going to happen two weeks from now … that's a challenge for any industry.' In Michigan, auto parts suppliers are huge employers and contributors to the economy. While experts believe the big suppliers will adapt to tariffs, it's all those smaller companies, such as Team 1 Plastics, which has just 80 employees, that industry observers worry about. In case you missed it: Economists estimate new tariff costs to range between $2,000 to $12,000 per vehicle "University of Michigan economists said tariffs on the auto industry, along with steel and aluminum, can be expected to reduce employment by roughly 13,000 jobs over the next several years. That's a lot of jobs," said Glenn Stevens, executive director of MichAuto. "This is what we've been concerned about because our industry is so tied to Mexico and Canada and the global auto supply chain. We were concerned that the tariff situation would cause an outsized impact on Michigan's economy.' Industry consolidation could drive up prices On May 28, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that the president had overstepped his authority in imposing 'reciprocal' tariffs globally, as well as duties on Canada and Mexico. Some in the auto industry said they were encouraged by the ruling, until they realized that the tariffs Trump put on autos still apply, providing no relief from the worry over possible supplier consolidation and job losses. The next day, an appeals court ruled Trump can continue to levy tariffs — which are taxes an importer pays on goods when they cross borders — while challenging the court order that had blocked them. Stevens said there are 'absolutely conversations going on' between suppliers and their customers, including automakers, about ways to shoulder the extra tariff costs together. 'When you have a tremendous increase in costs … that has to either be absorbed by the company, which is very difficult for small suppliers, or passed along to the customer,' Stevens said. 'What we don't want is it passed to the consumer, because that means repressed demand and lower sales, which leads to job losses. It's a fine balancing act.' Other industry experts report that the topic of the day among suppliers is how to remain solvent when faced with the tariffs potentially eating up their operating cash. "We are actively speaking with the tiered supplier community about this topic," said Joe McCabe, CEO of AutoForecast Solutions. "Everyone is taking the tariff talks seriously and looking at ways to improve efficiencies internally and investigate secondary supply strategies. The further down the supply chain you go, the more exposed the supplier will be." McCabe said the Tier 1 suppliers are in the strongest position to adapt to tariffs. They are bigger suppliers that sell directly to automakers. They have a diverse product portfolio to either relocate production and/or pressure the lower-tier suppliers — those companies that sell parts to the Tier 1 supplier — with price-reduction demands while investigating new suppliers in low-to-zero tariff regions. But in times of volatility, there has always been concern that the smaller suppliers will not be able to weather the storm, allowing larger suppliers to buy the distressed suppliers on the cheap and strengthen their product portfolio, McCabe said. As the number of suppliers dwindles, it could allow those that remain to strong-arm carmakers on the prices they pay for the parts, he said. The number of suppliers According to U.S. Census data in 2022, 3,814 firms operated at least one plant classified as producing auto parts in the United States, with a total of 4,846 plants in this industry. Those plants shipped $278.24 billion in parts and employed 575,338 people, said Jason Miller, a supply chain management professor at Michigan State University. Even the small suppliers shoulder big economic muscle. Miller said 3,045 companies with fewer than 100 employees operated 3,111 manufacturing plants that shipped $17.66 billion in parts and employed 54,561 people. In Michigan alone, data from the Upjohn Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research center in Michigan, calculates that the state has 117,675 auto supplier jobs. Team 1: A typical small supplier On an afternoon in mid-May, Grigowski drives down the highway, going from meeting to meeting as he talks on the phone to the Free Press about his ever-growing to-do list to mitigate the impact tariffs will have on his company. The company, Team 1 Plastics in Albion, Michigan, is a small supplier, bringing in about $20 million in annual revenue. Its size represents the bulk of companies that make up the auto parts supplier base, Grigowski said. "We're little companies in little towns," Grigowski said. "We employ 80 people, so it's a big deal in a town of 7,000. And we have one location, so we're making decisions that impact everything." Team 1 makes the plastic vehicle parts such as covers, switch components or underhood components. Its business is "almost 100% automotive with a little bit of plumbing," Grigowski said. It provides parts to suppliers that eventually end up on vehicles made by General Motors, Ford Motor Co., Stellantis, Toyota, Honda and Subaru, he said. The parts they make are links in the complex supply chain that weaves across North America. The good news for Team 1 is that some of the materials it uses to make plastic parts are made in the United States, so the company dodges paying tariffs there. But dies used to make other parts will face tariffs and have "a very big impact" on the company's books, Grigowski said. Team 1's troubles Grigowski said the dies, which are used to shape or form plastic into the parts, are made from suppliers in Canada and India. India is subject to a 10% tariff, but Canada and Mexico got 25%. "That was a big surprise for us — 25% is a lot," Grigowski said. "A typical die cost might be $70,000, so that's going to be $17,500 more. So it's a lot of money. We typically get 10 dies a year from Canada, so that's $175,000 more. That's real money were I come from.' Grigowski said it is unclear whether the dies will be exempt from the Canada tariffs for being compliant with the U.S-Mexico-Canada Agreement because it is not a part, but rather a piece of capital equipment. "It's unclear if that will be covered or not" under the exemption, Grigowski said. "We will have to figure it out in the next week or so" before putting in new orders. If the dies are not exempt, he said the extra cost for the tariff will be passed onto Team 1's customers. As for the dies Team 1 already ordered before the tariffs were applied, it already had quoted its prices to its customers so it will not raise those prices to offset the added expense. He said some companies in Michigan make dies, but they don't have enough capacity to meet all the suppliers' needs. And, as those companies get busier, they will raise their prices too. On top of that problem, Team 1 also needs a new injection molding machine, which is made in Japan. Grigowski ordered a new one even though the 24% tariff on goods coming from Japan tacks on $72,000 to its price tag. He is hoping the tariff on Japan will be lowered to 10%, bring down the bill to $30,000. It would be less of an impact, "but it's still painful," he said. Finally, because Team 1 has added new clients in recent years, it has outgrown its facilities and needs to make a 50% expansion to its plant. It got a construction quote six months ago and had hoped to break ground this summer. But Grigowski said he has to get a new quote now because of the recently imposed 25% tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. "We're using an American company and an American building supplier and they will use as many American parts as they can, but they will probably import some of the steel and even if they didn't, the domestics will raise their price because they can," Grigowski said. "So it's a lot of things for a company our size to keep track of." He said it's a tough situation that feeds his bigger fear, which is "nothing we hear sounds like it's going to lower the price of the car.' "Cars are already super pricey for most customers," Grigowski said. According to Cox Automotive, in April the average transaction price for a new car was $48,699. "Which means, it could lead to lower volumes for us. Lower volume is never good.' A bigger supplier's strategies Across the state in Auburn Hills, Lucerne International, which makes chassis, powertrains and body structural components for passenger cars and commercial vehicles, is a bigger supplier at the tier one and tier two levels. CEO Buchzeiger declined to provide Lucerne's annual revenue or employee count, but she has been grappling with Trump tariffs since 2018 because of Lucerne's scale and reach into Asia. Trump was threatening to boost tariffs on China to 25% back then too. So she has learned a thing or two about mitigating tariffs that she's willing to pass on to smaller suppliers to help them. "The biggest issue with the supply base, especially with paying more cash up front, is cash flow and liquidity," Buchzeiger said. "The smaller suppliers can't pay that up front … it sucks cash flow out of your organization." Buchzeiger said her company has been working to get more of its supplies from domestic providers. She shares other strategies, such as what to do when the goods clear a port, as duties are due within seven to 10 days. Sometimes, the goods "aren't even at our door yet and the tariffs are due," Buchzeiger said. To offset that problem, Lucerne signed up for a U.S. Customs and Border Protection program called Periodic Monthly Statement, Buchzeiger said. That program allows a company to pay all the tariffs on the 15th of the month. So if the parts clear the border on the 16th, the company has a full month to pay it, she said. Buchzeiger said the company is also applying to be a foreign trade zone. "That allows us to bring the goods in and sit on them and not pay duties until they clear our door because we're considered a foreign trade zone," Buchzeiger said. "It's just to save millions of dollars in our cash flow because the longer we hold onto our money, the better." Buchzeiger agrees with the president's goal that more goods should be made in America. But she said to make that happen, tariffs have to be executed strategically. The U.S. aluminum manufacturers, for example, can produce only 15% of the aluminum her company requires, she said. So Lurcerne has to import 85% of it. With the 25% tariffs on aluminum now, "you just made me uncompetitive to manufacture here. To help me manufacture here, you have to understand where raw materials come from.' Find 'a path out' Like Grigowski, Buchzeiger believes tariffs will raise new vehicle prices. Buchzeiger is on the board for MEMA and MichAuto and she said the expectation is tariffs will drive up the average price of a new car by $5,000 to $7,000. As for the impact on jobs, MEMA, the group that represents the auto parts supplier industry, told the Free Press it did not have a precise estimate for supplier job losses so far due to tariffs. But it referred to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' April report that noted a national net decline of 5,800 U.S. jobs in motor vehicle and parts production since February. The bureau does not distinguish between parts and vehicle manufacturing. In March, steelmaker Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. said it would idle some operations at its Dearborn plant this summer, tied to tariffs. It said it will lay off about 600 employees. In a statement at the time, the company said, 'We believe that, once President Trump's policies take full effect and automotive production is re-shored, we should be able to resume steel production at Dearborn Works.' But MEMA spokesperson Megan Gardner said that based on its internal surveys, a growing number of MEMA's 1,000 members have reported reducing U.S. employment — both production and nonproduction — and investment since the tariffs went into effect. She said many indicated they expect to make further cuts if tariffs remain in place over the next year. Still, Grigowski said he is sticking to his plan to hire a couple people this fall to work on that new machine from Japan. He even sees a potential upside to tariffs if some work that is currently done in Mexico shifts over to Team 1. 'That's a very real possibility," Grigowski said. "We've had some additional inquiries from a Canadian company." He also believes the Trump administration will negotiate tariffs country by country and come up with something workable for the auto industry, creating a "path out" of his problems. "It's like COVID. When it first happened, we thought we'd have to shut our plant down. Then we saw a path out," Grigowski said. "Ultimately, if these tariffs were to stay in place and they drove volumes down dramatically, then yeah, we'd have to make adjustments. We have to hope cooler heads will prevail. We're in a good financial position that we can wait for a solution. I feel like it's a significant problem, but a problem we can start to work.' Jamie L. LaReau is the senior autos writer who covers Ford Motor Co. for the Detroit Free Press. Contact Jamie at jlareau@ Follow her on Twitter @jlareauan. To sign up for our autos newsletter. Become a subscriber.
Boston Globe
3 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Will Trump's policies kill Massachusetts' life sciences leadership?
Advertisement Although the industry is centered in eastern Massachusetts, there's a statewide benefit from all the tax dollars those businesses and workers pay. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up In all, Massachusetts organizations — including universities, research institutes, and hospitals — received $3.5 billion in funding from the National Institutes of Health. Massachusetts-headquartered companies raised $3.26 billion in venture capital funding. Among all drugs in the development pipeline in the United States, 15 percent were being made by companies headquartered in Massachusetts. But actions taken by President Trump and his administration — cutting funding for scientific research and universities, flirting with tariffs, fanning skepticism about vaccines — threaten to devastate the ecosystem. Today, the industry is at a precipice, and uncertainty abounds. Some companies are already feeling the pinch of terminated federal grants, while others are anxious about what might come. Taken together, Trump's policies could force some companies and scientists to take their money, talents, and products overseas. Advertisement Christopher Locher, CEO of Lowell-based Versatope Therapeutics, which develops a platform to deliver vaccines and therapeutics, said he worries the Greater Boston life sciences ecosystem is 'being flushed down the toilet.' For example, Trump is Trump's funding cuts are already having a large impact on some local companies. Part of the problem is the Trump administration isn't only cutting funding, but it's picking which technologies to fund — in some cases apparently based on politics more than science. Take flu vaccines. The Trump administration recently announced a $500 million campaign to fund the development of a universal flu vaccine, which doesn't require annual updates, using technology being worked on But simultaneously, he cut funding for other work on a universal flu vaccine. Versatope Therapeutics got $14 million in NIH funding and spent five years developing a universal flu vaccine. It had approval from the US Food and Drug Administration to begin clinical trials when Trump terminated the contract's remaining $8 million, with the reason given being 'convenience,' Locher said. Trump also Advertisement Company executives say decisions by Trump officials to disinvest in vaccine-related technology — and concerns about whether government will approve new technology — means it's nearly impossible to find private investment funding to replace lost federal dollars. 'We're faced with bankruptcy in the very near future,' Locher said. Ironically, given Trump's stated commitment to bringing businesses back to the United States, one potential option Locher is eyeing is opening a subsidiary abroad. Conducting clinical trials would be cheaper in another country, whether in Europe, Australia, or China, Locher said, and some countries are offering financial incentives to American companies to relocate. Companies also face a potential workforce brain drain. There have been MassBio officials said China has less rigorous — but faster — safety and research protocols than the US. Australia allows a faster timeline for clinical trials. If regulatory approval of medicines is held up because the FDA is understaffed, companies may seek European regulatory approval instead. The loss of talent to foreign countries will be compounded if the pipeline of local university graduates dries up. One draw for life sciences companies to Boston/Cambridge is the presence of elite schools like Harvard and MIT, with their potential for faculty collaboration and skilled graduates. Advertisement Trump is trying to Chip Clark, CEO at Vibrant Biomedicines in Cambridge, said cuts to university research funding both 'shrink the pipeline of great ideas' that form the basis for many biotech startups and translate to fewer available scientists. Clark said the administration's policies 'seem like a deliberate attempt to try to cede scientific leadership to Europe and Japan and Korea and China. ... They will be delighted to capitalize on our talent, technology, and investment capital to make their robust biotech sectors grow and ultimately compete successfully against the US industry,' he said. Don Ingber, founding director of the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University, said he has postdocs with US visas applying for jobs in Europe, and others who were accepted to work at Harvard but are going elsewhere. 'The fact that places like Harvard and MIT and American universities are magnets for the best and brightest from around the world is what's driven our technology economy and certainly the Boston/Cambridge ecosystem,' Ingber said. 'With this uncertainty, I fear we'll lose a generation.' Ingber, who was forced to stop work on two government-funded projects on drugs designed to prevent injury from radiation exposure, compared administration policies to 'eating seed corn' needed to grow crops. Advertisement Trump's vendetta will undermine one of the most vibrant state economies in the country and set back American science by years. And it's not just eastern Massachusetts that will pay a price; the entire country will. As Ingber noted, it might take years to see the impact of medicines or technologies that aren't developed because of these shortsighted cuts. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
