Wilson Building Bulletin: Let the great stadium debates begin!

It only took years of pleading and an act of Congress, but the push to give D.C. more control over the old RFK Stadium site is now a done deal. During Tuesday’s monthly legislative session, the D.C. Council approved the city’s new 99-year lease with the federal government – the first step towards what many hope is new housing, retail, parks, and possibly a football stadium for the Washington Commanders on the 177-acre plot of land.

The lease outlines a handful of requirements D.C. must follow, including specifying that everything but a narrow stretch of land closest to the Anacostia River is open to development, but that at least 30% of the site must be dedicated to open spaces to be named “Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Park.” (Recall that D.C. already has some parks and open spaces on the site’s northern end.) It also says that a new football stadium can be built right away, but any proposed housing or commercial development can only start after federal environmental and historic preservation reviews, as well as an archeological survey. The lease forbids federal funding from going towards building the new stadium, and says that no federal or local elected officials can directly benefit from any of the future development deals on the site. Finally, the lease requires that parking will be available on the site (but D.C. will have the discretion to decide how much), and specifies that existing access to the Anacostia River will be maintained and improved.

The lease was unanimously approved by the council, but there’s likely to be far less agreement on what happens next – and who pays for it. Earlier this week, D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson expressed his hope that the entire campus (stadium or not) will be built under a single master plan, but it remains unclear whether Mayor Muriel Bowser will agree. And while the Commanders winning ways have certainly endeared the city’s elected officials, not everyone on the council is sold on a new stadium on the site.

“I want to urge our city to think creatively about what’s possible. We shouldn’t pencil in a stadium and all the needed parking lots as our starting point. We should pencil in a huge range of housing – some large apartment buildings, some family-friendly rowhomes, and some housing specifically set aside as affordable and for seniors,” said Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen. 

For his part, Ward 5 Councilmember Zachary Parker said he’s open to a stadium, but only if D.C. taxpayers aren’t on the hook to pay for it. “One of the owners of the Commanders recently announced that they would be building a privately-funded sports stadium in Philadelphia, and I do not subscribe to the belief that taxpayer dollars are required to fund a similar venture here,” he said in a statement.

Stadium or not, lawmakers are also already suggesting plenty of other uses for the site. Parker says he’d like to see an indoor multi-sport complex. Ward 2 Councilmember Brooke Pinto wants a performance space. At-Large Councilmember Robert White – and plenty of his colleagues – want affordable housing. 

Pre-trial detention for violent offenders extended

It was almost a year ago that the D.C. Council approved a sweeping public safety bill aimed at tamping down on violent crime. The bill, known as Secure D.C., included a provision expanding pretrial detention for people accused of violent offenses. The provision was controversial – critics noted that most people awaiting trial do not reoffend – so it was also time-limited, set to expire later this month. 

But on Tuesday, the council voted to extend the provision for another 90 days, largely because a required report from the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee on the efficacy of pretrial detention still hasn’t been completed. The only dissenting voice came from Ward 4 Councilmember Janeese Lewis George.

“It was meant to be temporary while we gather evidence on its impact. We can’t afford to have people in jail … because the government can’t fulfill its obligations. That deviates from the original intent of the sunset forcing us to make a decision about whether the new pretrial standard is working for D.C.,” she said.

New bills

• Lunch money: D.C. schools provide meals to their students, but who pays and who doesn’t is governed by patchwork regulation related to family income, school poverty levels, and more. At-Large Councilmember Christina Henderson wants to simplify things with a new bill that would use local funds to help cover the costs of all meals for all students in public and public charter schools. Henderson says the idea proved effective during the COVID-19 pandemic, when federal relief funds were expanded to make school meals free for all students. Henderson estimates that it would cost $8 million a year.
• Sunday Funday: Is Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen angling for the kid vote? He’s got a new bill that would require that all of the city’s recreation centers open from at least noon to 5 p.m. on Sundays. He’s also got another measure that would give designated D.C.-based youth sports leagues priority when it comes to using public fields. 
• No-dumping ground: Neighbors of various neighborhoods in Wards 4, 5, 7, and 8 have long complained that they are disproportionately impacted by environmentally unfriendly sites and services that create issues like air pollution or hazardous waste. A new bill from Ward 5 Councilmember Zachary Parker and At-Large Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie seeks to create additional layers of review anytime any of these sites or services look to set up shop in a community that is already “overburdened” by them. The bill would also create a new environmental justice division at the D.C. Department of Energy and the Environment. 
• Higher hires: When D.C. was struggling to hire police officers back in 2023, Mayor Muriel Bowser started offering $25,000 incentives for new hires. Now Ward Councilmember Brooke Pinto wants to extend the idea to other public safety-related jobs, including 911 call takers, correctional officers at the D.C. Jail, social workers at the Department of Human Services, and others. The hiring incentives would be more modest, though: $5,000.