Federal Policy

Santa Monica Accepts $2 Million Federal Grant to Study 10 Freeway Removal

A city-approved environmental study funded by federal dollars tests how infrastructure decisions intersect with urban planning policy, historical equity claims, and local fiscal accountability.

The Congressional Times · June 20, 2026

Santa Monica, California accepted a $2 million federal grant to conduct a study examining whether a segment of Interstate 10 should be covered with a park structure or removed entirely, according to a resolution recently approved by the Santa Monica City Council, as reported by the Santa Monica Daily Press. The council's resolution cites "historical harm" and "environmental hazards" as the basis for exploring reconnection of neighborhoods divided by the freeway corridor.

The study will focus on a stretch of the 10 Freeway running through the city. The $2 million figure represents the full grant amount accepted by the council. The source agency for the federal grant has not been identified in available public reporting; the USASpending.gov federal contracts and grants database would be the primary public record to confirm the awarding agency, grant number, and program authority.

Critics quoted in the Santa Monica Daily Press characterized the expenditure as a "complete waste of money," objecting to public funds being directed toward a study rather than direct infrastructure investment. Proponents of the study, including city officials, argue the research is a prerequisite for any future action and is consistent with federal environmental justice frameworks that have guided similar urban freeway studies in cities including Rochester, New York and Syracuse, New York, where federally funded freeway removal projects have advanced under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58, enacted November 2021).

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act included $1 billion over five years for the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation, specifically to fund planning and capital construction grants aimed at removing or retrofitting infrastructure that divides neighborhoods. Whether the Santa Monica grant was awarded under this program or a separate funding mechanism is not confirmed in available source material; a Freedom of Information Act request to the U.S. Department of Transportation or a search of USASpending.gov under Santa Monica's recipient profile would clarify the program source.

What remains unknown as of June 20, 2026: the specific federal program and grant number funding the study, the timeline for study completion, whether any Santa Monica city matching funds are required, and what formal action, if any, the city council would take upon the study's conclusion. The Santa Monica City Council's meeting minutes and the full resolution text, available through the city clerk's public records portal, would provide the precise scope of the approved study and any conditions attached to the grant acceptance.

We Follow the Data, Not the Narrative

The Congressional Times exists because public records are public — and the analysis built from them should not be exclusive to those who can afford $60,000-a-year intelligence subscriptions.

Every story published in The Congressional Times is sourced to a verifiable public record: a court filing, a Senate lobbying disclosure, an FEC contribution record, a USASpending contract, or a verified news report. We state our sources inline. We show our math. When we are wrong, we say so publicly.

We do not editorialize in news coverage. We do not use loaded language. Both political parties are held to identical standards.

The Follow the Money investigations are the heart of this publication. Each begins with Gab-E Political Intelligence running against 10+ million government records before a single word of editorial is written.

How We Source, Verify, and Correct Our Work

Every factual claim in a Congressional Times story is checked against a primary source: a government filing, a court record, a direct quote, before publication. When a claim can't be verified or doesn't hold up as originally reported, we drop it or reframe it. We do not publish disputed claims as settled fact.

When we get it wrong: we correct the story directly, note the correction and date at the bottom of the piece, and update the record. We do not quietly edit and move on.

Bylines: stories with a named byline are written and fact-checked by that person. Stories without a byline are sourced from Gab-E Political Intelligence, our automated research platform, and are labeled as such.

Ownership: The Congressional Times is published by Gab-E Holdings LLC. Gab-E, our intelligence platform, powers our sourcing and research pipeline.

Corrections or concerns: support@gab-e.com