County warned of federal budget cuts to housing and health as $70 billion immigration package advances

Don Gilchrist, representing Thomas Walters & Associates, told the Santa Barbara County Legislative Program Committee that Congress's attention has been dominated by a budget reconciliation package he said would provide "$70 billion for immigration enforcement," and that the package is moving toward House consideration.

Gilchrist told the committee the broader appropriations picture is worrisome for local programs. "The president proposed a 10% cut in domestic spending," he said, but House bills under consideration instead reflect smaller aggregate reductions with uneven impacts across agencies. "For instance, the EPA would be cut by 20% under the House bills," Gilchrist said, and "in housing, there would be an 8% reduction." He added several health and human services programs also face double-digit cuts in some proposals.

On housing, Gilchrist described amendments approved in the full appropriations committee: a Republican amendment that would tie federal funding to cooperation with federal immigration enforcement (which he said the county would oppose) and a Democratic provision that would block a HUD proposed rule on mixed‑status benefits, a development he called "a clear win if we can get that one to stick for the county." He said committee members rejected an effort to eliminate the Continuum of Care program, although Homeless Assistance Grants were cut and the county will "have a good shot at reversing that moving forward."

Gilchrist also highlighted local wins included in House vehicles: he said the House Labor, Health and Human Services bill includes $500,000 for the county’s mobile dental vehicle and the Transportation‑HUD bill includes about $1.88 million for the Oasis Senior Center. He said two other county projects—a USDA facility and a farm‑to‑market paving project—were not advanced by senators.

The consultant warned that the Homeland Security bill is replenishing FEMA’s disaster relief fund (he cited roughly $28.4 billion on top of earlier appropriations) and funding preparedness grants that matter to counties, but it also funds ICE and Border Patrol without the reforms the county has advocated. "It does fund ICE and Border Patrol and it does not include any of the reforms that the county's been advocating for," he said, noting that could be a point of significant conflict in negotiations.

Committee members asked several follow‑ups, including whether the $70 billion was additive to prior DHS increases; Gilchrist said it is on top of earlier increases enacted in HR1. A supervisor also asked Gilchrist to watch for any federal line items that could enable construction of detention facilities after the county's earlier 4–1 board vote opposing a local detention center; Gilchrist agreed to monitor relevant line items.

The committee voted to receive and file the federal update. The Legislative Program Committee will meet again July 6.