Listen 8 min
Comment on this story Comment
Gift Article
Share
As the mayor arrived at Nationals Park for a news conference in the hot stickiness of Thursday morning, a Nationals official took the lectern and started things off with a story.
“It was about 19 years ago that our city was wrestling with the question of whether to seek a Major League Baseball team and build a stadium,” began Gregory McCarthy, the team’s senior vice president of community engagement, as he stood on a balcony overlooking the ballpark. “However, there were some doubters.”
Fast, informative and written just for locals. Get The 7 DMV newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. ArrowRight
To the ears of at least a few Washington Commanders fans, he might as well have been talking about RFK Stadium.
As with Nationals Park 19 years ago, the future of RFK is approaching a crossroads, with many die-hard Commanders fans embracing a return of the team to its hometown, but some lawmakers doubting that a football stadium project is the best use of the valuable riverfront real estate. Federal legislation that would give D.C. control of RFK introduced Thursday by Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) has reinvigorated that debate, inching the District a step closer to redeveloping RFK even though concrete proposals may be a long way off.
Advertisement
Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D), who wants to turn the site into a Commanders stadium and mixed-use development, celebrated the bill at her event Thursday. The legislation, if passed, would extend the District’s lease of the RFK land from the federal government for 99 years and modify it so that the city would be allowed to redevelop RFK into any number of possibilities: residential and commercial, recreational facilities, and, of course, a stadium.
But council members, when asked by The Washington Post about their positions, varied greatly in their openness or opposition to a stadium, portending a heated debate in the months ahead about the future of the site.
While they expressed broad support for Comer’s bill, enthusiasm for a Commanders stadium is lukewarm among council members. Of the 11 of 13 members who answered questions from The Post, five expressed some level of openness to turning RFK into a stadium. Three were clearly opposed or leaned in opposition. The rest offered vague or noncommittal answers, or didn’t respond. Council member Trayon White Sr. (D-Ward 8), who has previously expressed support for returning the Commanders to D.C., did not respond to questions; a spokeswoman said he was out of town. Council member Janeese Lewis George (D-Ward 4), who last year opposed a Commanders stadium, declined to answer questions.
Advertisement
That landscape represents a significant change from last summer when seven members — a majority of the council — said they firmly opposed a stadium in a letter to Norton. An eighth, Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), did not sign the letter but advocated for federal RFK legislation to prohibit a stadium.
A lot has changed since then: This month, NFL owners ratified a sale of the team from scandal-ridden Daniel Snyder to private equity billionaire Josh Harris, marking a fresh start for an organization plagued last year by allegations of sexual harassment and financial impropriety. The scandals left many council members against luring the team back to D.C. — especially if taxpayer money were involved.
Should the legislation pass Congress, D.C. would still have to compete with Maryland and Virginia to attract the Commanders, who play at FedEx Field in Landover, Md., and who are looking for a new stadium home. Harris has not expressed a clear preference, though he has spoken with or met with all three jurisdictions’ leaders. He visited Bowser at the Wilson Building recently. And on Thursday, Harris invited Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) to the Commanders’ football practice.
Advertisement
But it’s unclear if D.C. would put any public money up as an incentive to lure the team, something Bowser said is too early to discuss when asked Thursday if that is a route she would pursue.
Among council members, six expressed to The Post clear opposition to using public money for construction of a stadium, an early sign that, as in the Nationals Park debate, tough choices over whether to use taxpayer money to fund a stadium may become a major inflection point.
Council member Matthew Frumin (D-Ward 3), who attended Bowser’s event Thursday, said in an interview afterward that he could imagine himself supporting a proposal for a football stadium at RFK — or not, if the proposal used public funds to directly pay for the stadium construction.
Council member Anita Bonds (D-At Large) said she would be open to a stadium if the development also included retail, recreational facilities and affordable housing — but similarly drew a line against public stadium funding. “The team or the league should pay for the construction of the stadium,” she said. “However, the city should provide the infrastructure because we want all infrastructure in and around the development to be fully available for public use.”
Advertisement
Council members Vincent C. Gray (D-Ward 7), whose ward includes RFK, Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) and Kenyan R. McDuffie (I-At Large) also expressed openness to a stadium. Gray perhaps summed up the moment best: “We are at the beginning of a process that is equally exciting and uncertain,” he said.
McDuffie, who chairs the economic development committee, has been out front as the unofficial ambassador on the council who enthusiastically supports returning the Commanders to RFK. “I see a future not simply of a world-class stadium, but a future with a world-class sports-entertainment district that includes housing for residents across incomes,” he told reporters after the Nationals Park event Thursday.
But like Pinto, he said he wanted to wait for a formal study to conclude before making a judgment call about what kind of financing model he would or wouldn’t support. “We’re not going to put the cart before the horse and make decisions before we’re armed with all the information,” he said.
Advertisement
The mayor on Thursday announced a new “sports team” within her administration that will be tasked with retaining and expanding existing D.C. sports teams and opportunities in D.C., while also attracting new ones ― such as the Commanders. The study will include looking at financial models for stadium construction that other cities have used and assessing what may work for D.C. at RFK, said Keith Anderson, interim deputy mayor of economic development and planning.
The idea of a new stadium finds opposition in council members Brianne K. Nadeau (D-Ward 1) and Charles Allen (D-Ward 6). Mendelson appears to lean in opposition: He maintains he will not entertain any proposals that could help the Washington Commanders until the NFL releases a report, or summary of findings, from an investigation led by Beth Wilkinson into allegations of sexual harassment involving Snyder.
After Comer’s bill was introduced Thursday, Allen argued that NFL stadiums “deliver very little long-term in terms of jobs and economic activity,” doubting it would generate the boost supporters hope for.
Advertisement
“Given the team plays eight to ten home games a year, an NFL stadium sits dark more than 90% of the time,” he said in his statement. “For a city that needs more housing, this just doesn’t make sense. It’s also going to be hard to compete against Maryland and Virginia, which can certainly offer up more space to satisfy the absurd amount of parking NFL stadiums prefer.”
A spokesman for Nadeau said the council member did not view a stadium as “the best use” for the property, and would not support using public funds to build one.
Council members Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) Robert C. White Jr. (D-At Large) and Christina Henderson (I-At Large) did not take clear positions when asked whether they would or would not support a Commanders stadium.
Henderson, who signed the letter opposing the stadium last year, said she was excited for the potential of housing, retail and recreation at the site. But she said that before the District decides on an “anchor project,” “my focus is on getting this bill approved by Congress while also making sure our existing sports teams have the support they need to continuing winning here in the District.”
Advertisement
A spokeswoman for White, who also signed the opposition letter, said the council member was reticent to stake a position now before a concrete proposal existed. White added that, for him to support any proposal, “My priority is more housing that everyday Washingtonians can afford and everything has to revolve around that priority.”
Parker said he opposed public funding for a stadium but did not answer whether he would support a stadium in general, saying a proposal did not yet exist.
In a blitz of radio interviews Friday morning, Bowser laid out her own vision for the site: a Commanders home turf surrounded by housing, park space, restaurants and entertainment, recreational opportunities, access to the Anacostia riverfront. “We don’t want a lot of asphalt parking and only one use,” she told 106.7 the Fan on the “Sports Junkies” morning show. “We want vibrancy.”
She said she expected “robust community engagement”— as well as some division on the council. After all, she said, in the showdown over Nationals Park, “the votes on the council were 7-6 until the end.”
Comments
Gift this articleGift Article
More coverage of D.C.
HAND CURATED
They served decades in prison for a crime they say they didn’t commit
July 6, 2023
They served decades in prison for a crime they say they didn’t commit
July 6, 2023
Construction work begins at infamous Dave Thomas Circle intersection
July 20, 2023
Construction work begins at infamous Dave Thomas Circle intersection
July 20, 2023
He served the Army in Afghanistan. He was killed driving for Lyft in D.C.
July 8, 2023
He served the Army in Afghanistan. He was killed driving for Lyft in D.C.
July 8, 2023
View 3 more stories
Loading...
View more