On RFK, do residents get a say?

I’m Gordon Chaffin. I own a dog care business, lead a community nonprofit, and advocate in D.C. local civics. This is my newsletter with news and researched opinions.

500+ public witnesses on RFK Stadium. For What?

This week, the D.C. Council will hold a marathon hearing on the deal Washington, D.C., has cut with the NFL’s Washington Commanders to return to the long-dormant RFK Stadium. Over 500 public witnesses are set to testify across two days, amounting to perhaps more than 20 hours of input in 3- and 5-minute chunks plus rounds of questions from the Council’s Committee of the Whole. It will be exhaustive, attracting passionate residents, advocates, and interest groups. But will any of this matter to the final votes the Council will take on the deal over the next few weeks?

The NFL team has played out of a stadium in D.C.’s Maryland suburbs since 1997. Mayor Muriel Bowser has made it a primary goal of her tenure, from 2015 to date, to get the team back into the District. Now demolished, RFK stood on a large land area at the minimally developed and high-potential waterfront of the Anacostia River. The plot is owned by the federal government, like so much of D.C. land that, in practice, serves primarily residents. It wasn’t until the last tfwo years that Congress allowed D.C. to take control of the space, which cued up Mayor Bowser’s team to negotiate the stadium development deal. Probably more than 75% of residents support the District government facilitating the return to RFK, buoyed by a brand-new team owner who replaced the former owner, who was a jerk by most accounts. That support is less resounding depending on the details of tax dollar use in the deal.

D.C. government’s part of the deal requires approval from the Council. Council Chair Phil Mendelson reached an updated agreement with the Commanders, including additional accountability measures and community benefits. However, sports business and economic development experts are mixed on the concrete benefits of the updated agreement. After hearing hundreds of witnesses at the mega hearing this week, the 12* other council members will propose amendments to the Chair-brokered deal. This is D.C. Home Rule in action: we District residents get to vote for councilmembers and the Mayor, and they advocate for us, so long as the feds act as partners rather than bad faith paternalists. At least, this is public input in theory.

*Ward 8 will only get a councilmember back following the swearing in of a special election winner, and only maybe in time for the final RFK vote.

I have mixed feelings about the impact those 500+ public witnesses will have this week. What’s the point in testifying when the Mayor talked as if her original deal with the Commanders was already locked in, and the Council Chair’s deal may have only dotted some Is and crossed some Ts? What if the Council gets the needed supportive votes by modifying the agreement in ways I like — but then the Commanders don’t want to abide? I’m not sure. This is the limit of the metaphor of politicians as singular dealmakers when actual, meaningful public participation in decision-making is messier.

I’m grateful D.C. residents or other stakeholders who want to can get on Zoom this week and speak. It’s a pressure relief valve, but is it more than that? Personally, I’m not sitting on Zoom for hours waiting for my turn. I’ll point you to the written testimony of my nonprofit, though: “Transit and Trails at RFK, not Parking Garages.”

Check out this nonprofit supporting our neighbors

DISCLAIMER: All opinions and analyses in this newsletter are those solely of Gordon Chaffin and do not represent his dog care clients or community groups with which he’s affiliated.