Tampa Bay tree-planting programs lose federal funding in DEI purge
There were 183 trees planted in Childs Park in St. Petersburg. And $19,000 from the federal government's U.S. Forest Service was used to accomplish it.
Hurricane-damaged hotel in St. Pete Beach receives $34K internet/cable bill
The same government agency cancelled the funding for a nationwide tree planting program because it no longer aligns with the agency priorities regarding DEI.
'It's hard to believe that trees have anything to do with diversity, equity, and inclusion. I mean we need trees everywhere,' said Pat Fling, the co-chair of the Sierra Club political committee. They advocate for a clean environment and say trees contribute to it.
Fling said not having this funding can hurt some areas.
'It'll be hard for those residents who can't afford to plant trees on their own. Lower income neighborhoods might be closer to commercial businesses which are generating pollution, so trees can help mitigate some of that,' Fling said.
This has been a focal point for Jabaar Edmond. He is the former president of the Childs Park Neighborhood Association.
'The tree planting is an investment for the future more so than an investment right now,' Edmond said. 'We're still battling air quality emissions from factories in our industrial corridor.'
He said it's going to be up to the city and state to fill gaps left by the federal government.
'The reality is sometimes we have to be the ones to issue the grant and not be the ones receiving it,' Edmond said.
The nonprofit Take MAR (More Action for Regeneration) plants trees across Tampa Bay. They say on average, planting one tree can cost between $1,000 to $2,000.
'Trees are expensive, not just for the planting, but also to maintain, and they require labor cost of trees, mulching, fertilizing, etc. So with cities that have more affluent neighborhoods, they have more funding for certain things, so we are also looking at the importance of planting and underserved communities,' said Michelle Ellena, the Co-Founder of Take MAR. 'Looking at communities that trees might not be their first priority but are very necessary in order to, yeah, help with storm protection, flood mitigation air and water quality, and urban heat reduction.'
The Sierra Club mentioned how their organization and others are still counting the number of tree's lost during Hurricanes Helene and Milton. These groups hope people realize the need for newly planted trees and are willing to pay for it.
'It almost feels like a defeat sometimes, but at the same time, trees are resilient, so we're going to be resilient,' Ellena said.
It's unclear where Governor Ron DeSantis stands on federal funding being cut for programs to plant trees. But the governor has been vocal about assessing state spending and bringing in government efficiency.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
16 minutes ago
- Business Insider
'Something's Gotta Break!': Target Stock (NYSE:TGT) Slips, New Boycott May Rise
There are some cracks emerging in the facade of retail giant Target (TGT). Foot traffic is still down even six months after the last boycott hit. Moreover, there could be another boycott brewing that will hit Target ahead of holiday shopping season. The idea left investors cold, and shares slipped nearly 1.5% in Friday afternoon's trading. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Target has had some serious trouble lately with political matters. Around two years ago, during the Biden administration, conservatives took aim at Target. They launched a boycott over Target's sale of LGBTQ-themed merchandise, as well as certain policies about the store's restrooms. The boycott seemed to work, and Target pivoted, changing display policies, bathroom policies, and even later making the move to end diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies in accordance with new policies from President Trump. But liberals saw that the boycott plan worked, and launched their own, in protest of the DEI shutdown. Reports noted that foot traffic at Target is down, and falling. In fact, foot traffic fell for the sixth month in a row in year-over-year comparisons. Yet not all the lost foot traffic is attributable to politics. Some believe that Target is '…slipping on retail basics,' like empty cart corrals and understocked, unclean shelves. Another Boycott Brewing? There are also signs that another boycott could be in the works, which might hit Target at the worst possible time: holiday shopping season. Pastor Jamal Harrison Bryant has been working on the notion of getting his flock to stop shopping at Target stores, again over issues of DEI. Bryant took to his pulpit to insist 'Something's gotta break!' in the midst of a sermon about debt, divorce, and drugs, after which he quickly pivoted to taking on Target. While Bryant acknowledges that the momentum is against him—especially given that the Trump Administration is referring to DEI programs as 'illegal DEI'—Bryant believes that a boycott might also serve as a '…way to energize those younger churchgoers that remain,' a number that has been falling off historically since at least 2007. So if Bryant, and those like him, believe they may be able to use a Target boycott to put life back in their churches, then a boycott may indeed be coming. Is Target Stock a Good Buy? Turning to Wall Street, analysts have a Moderate Buy consensus rating on TGT stock based on 11 Buys, 17 Holds and four Sells assigned in the past three months, as indicated by the graphic below. After a 27.62% loss in its share price over the past year, the average TGT price target of $103.40 per share implies 0.51% upside potential.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Removing DEI from military schools is a ‘move towards meritocracy': Attorney
Constitutional attorney Mark Smith discusses the Department of Justice's lawsuits alleging use of DEI at military schools on 'Fox Report.'
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
Judge blocks Trump administration guidance against DEI programs at schools and colleges
AP — A federal judge on Thursday struck down two Trump administration actions aimed at eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the nation's schools and universities. In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher in Maryland found that the Education Department violated the law when it threatened to cut federal funding from educational institutions that continued with DEI initiatives. The guidance has been on hold since April when three federal judges blocked various portions of the Education Department's anti-DEI measures. The ruling Thursday followed a motion for summary judgment from the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, which challenged the government's actions in a February lawsuit. The case centers on two Education Department memos ordering schools and universities to end all 'race-based decision-making' or face penalties up to a total loss of federal funding. It's part of a campaign to end practices the Trump administration frames as discrimination against white and Asian American students. The new ruling orders the department to scrap the guidance because it runs afoul of procedural requirements, though Gallagher wrote that she took no view on whether the policies were 'good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair.' Gallagher, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, rejected the government's argument that the memos simply served to remind schools that discrimination is illegal. 'It initiated a sea change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and classroom conduct, causing millions of educators to reasonably fear that their lawful, and even beneficial, speech might cause them or their schools to be punished,' Gallagher wrote. Democracy Forward, a legal advocacy firm representing the plaintiffs, called it an important victory over the administration's attack on DEI. 'Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools throughout America is part of the administration's war on education, and today the people won,' said Skye Perryman, the group's president and CEO. A statement from the Education Department on Thursday said it was disappointed in the ruling but that 'judicial action enjoining or setting aside this guidance has not stopped our ability to enforce Title VI protections for students at an unprecedented level.' The conflict started with a Feb. 14 memo declaring that any consideration of race in admissions, financial aid, hiring or other aspects of academic and student life would be considered a violation of federal civil rights law. The memo dramatically expanded the government's interpretation of a 2023 Supreme Court decision barring colleges from considering race in admissions decisions. The government argued the ruling applied not only to admissions but across all of education, forbidding 'race-based preferences' of any kind. 'Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon 'systemic and structural racism' and advanced discriminatory policies and practices,' wrote Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary of the department's Office for Civil Rights. A further memo in April asked state education agencies to certify they were not using 'illegal DEI practices.' Violators risked losing federal money and being prosecuted under the False Claims Act, it said. In total, the guidance amounted to a full-scale reframing of the government's approach to civil rights in education. It took aim at policies that were created to address longstanding racial disparities, saying those practices were their own form of discrimination. The memos drew a wave of backlash from states and education groups that called it illegal government censorship. In its lawsuit, the American Federation of Teachers said the government was imposing 'unclear and highly subjective' limits on schools across the country. It said teachers and professors had to 'choose between chilling their constitutionally protected speech and association or risk losing federal funds and being subject to prosecution.'
