The headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is photographed in Washington on May 5, 2025.
Gene J. Puskar/AP
Hiding place
alternate
Gene J. Puskar/AP
Some employees of the Federal Emergency Management Agency signed a letter of public dissent earlier this week were pressured Tuesday night, according to the documents reviewed by Associated Press.
More than 180 current and previous employees of FEMA signed the letter sent to the FEMA Review Council and Congress on Monday that criticized recent cuts to the staff and programs of the agency, and warning that the capacity of FEMA to respond to an important disaster was diminished dangerous.
Thirty -five signed their names, while 141 signed anonymously for fear of compensation.
Associated Press has confirmed that at least two of the signatories received notices on Tuesday night informing them that they were licensed indefinitely, with a payment and that must still register every morning confirming their availability. It was not clear what the State was for other signatories.
The notice said the decision “is not a disciplinary action and does not intend to be punitive.”
Fema did not answer immediately to the questions about how many employees they received the notice and if it was related to the opposition letter.
Washington Post reported for the first time that some FEMA employees were being pressed.
The letter of dissent contained six “opposition statements” to current FEMA policies, including an expense approval policy, so the Secretary of National Security Kristi must approve contracts that exceed $ 100,000, which fails, reduces the capacity of the FEMA’s ability.
He also criticized the DHS decision to reallocate some FEMA employees to the application of immigration and customs, not to appoint a qualified FEMA administrator as stipulated by law, and cuts the mitigation programs, preparation and FEMA workforce.
In an email on Monday, FEMA spokesman Daniel Llargues said the Trump administration “has made responsibility and reform a priority so that taxpayers’ dollars really reach the people and communities they should help.”
“It is not surprising that some of the same bureaucrats who presided over decades of inefficiency are now objected to the reform,” Llargues said. “Change is always difficult.”
Employees from other agencies, including national health institutes and the Environmental Protection Agency, have issued similar statements. Some 140 EPA staff members were placed on administrative license to sign an opposition letter.