Public Hearing on RFK Campus Small Area Plan Amendment Act of 2026 - April 21, 2026
Public Hearing on RFK Campus Small Area Plan Amendment Act of 2026 - April 21, 2026
On Tuesday, April 21, 2026, at 5:23 PM, the Council of the District of Columbia's Committee of the Whole, chaired by Phil Mendelson, held a public hearing on Bill 26-625, the RFK Campus Small Area Plan Amendment Act of 2026. The bill would allow the future land use map for the RFK Memorial Stadium campus to be amended through a small area plan process rather than the full comprehensive plan amendment process, accelerating zoning for mixed-use development including a new stadium and 6,000 housing units. The hearing included testimony from four public witnesses and the Director of the Office of Planning. The record remains open until May 5, 2026.
Public Comments & Testimony
- William Jordan (ANC 7F? – not confirmed by transcript, but he lives in Columbia Heights): Urged the council not to pass the legislation, arguing that the Office of Planning lacks credibility, the process creates a moral hazard by truncating community input, and past projects have failed to deliver promised benefits. He cited the Donatelli project as an example of $100 million in unspecified losses.
- Parissa Naruzi (Executive Director, Empower DC): Testified in opposition, raising concerns about inconsistent application of small area plan rules (Ivy City was denied FLUM changes), lack of a racial equity lens at OP, missing anti-displacement strategy required by the 2021 Comprehensive Plan, and systemic failure to conduct environmental reviews. She noted 30% of residents in Ivy City are at risk of displacement.
- Michael Rodriguez (CEO, St. Coletta of Greater Washington): Did not oppose the bill but asked that any planning process include enforceable pathways for community participation, especially for people with disabilities. He highlighted the contrast between rapid development and the ongoing underfunding of St. Coletta's students.
- Richard Villemane (Pan-African Community Action): Testified in opposition, arguing that the bill weakens transparency and public accountability by allowing FLUM changes through a more limited process. He called for binding community control over land use decisions.
Discussion Items
- Chair Mendelson questioned the witnesses, noting that the council already approved the development framework in 2025 and that further community input will occur through the small area plan, zoning hearings, and community benefits agreement. He expressed skepticism about claims of rushing and displacement without quantification.
- Anita Cozart (Director, Office of Planning) testified in support of the bill, explaining that the RFK campus FLUM change is needed because the site is currently designated as parks/open space. She outlined a timeline: master plan release for 45-day public comment in June 2026, transmittal to council in September 2026, and zoning completion by October 2027 (versus October 2028 under the comprehensive plan rewrite). She detailed community engagement efforts including town halls, open houses (300+ attendees), community walks, and meetings with ANCs. She stated that the master plan will address design, garage siting, and massing, but not transit decisions.
- Chair Mendelson asked about the rules governing small area plans and FLUM changes. Cozart acknowledged that current law does not allow discrete FLUM amendments via small area plans but said the administration is exploring that for future DC 2050 process.
- Cozart responded to racial equity concerns by citing OP's racial equity action plan (2024-2026) and disaggregated demographic data collection. On the anti-displacement strategy, she said it is underway and she would provide a completion date by the end of the week. On environmental review, she stated that a federal environmental analysis is being conducted jointly with the National Park Service due to the federal land transfer.
Key Outcomes
- No vote was taken; the hearing was informational.
- The record will remain open for written testimony until 5:00 PM on May 5, 2026.
- OP Director Cozart committed to providing (1) a date for the anti-displacement strategy report and (2) the lead agency for the environmental analysis at RFK.
Meeting Transcript
I'm calling to order this hearing. This is a public hearing of the Committee of the Whole of the Council of the District of Columbia. I am Phil Mendelssohn, Chair of the Council and Chair of the Committee of the Whole. Today is Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. The time is 5.23 in the afternoon. We're having this hearing in the Council Chambers Room 500 of the Johnny Wilson Building. And this hearing is being recorded and will be available on the Council's website, which is WW.dccouncil.gov. The subject of this hearing is Bill 26-625 entitled the RFK Campus Small Area Plan Amendment Act of 2026. Which was submitted by the mayor on March 6th. In her letter, transmittable letter, she said this bill is necessary to facilitate the timely zoning and development of the RFK campus, which cannot proceed until the future land use map covering the site is amended to allow mixed use development. Under this bill, the future land use map could be amended in connection with the approval of the RFK campus small area plan. Amending the future land use map would still require legislative approval by the council, but the planning process associated with the map change would be more focused than for a comprehensive plan amendment. Significantly, this bill would ensure the development of the RFK campus benefits from, would ensure the development of the RFK campus benefits from the extensive community input and detailed planning that comes with a small area plan. And to read from the hearing notice the stated purpose of the bill is to amend the Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984, Land Use Element Amendment Act of 1984 to modify the requirement for preparing and submitting a small area plan for the RFK Memorial Stadium campus. This bill is intended to facilitate the next steps in zoning for the RFK campus to allow for development of a new stadium and mixed use development resulting from the Robert F. Kennedy Campus Redevelopment Act of 2025 adopted by the Council last year. The record in this matter will be open for two weeks. That is, it will close at 5 p.m. on May 1st, Tuesday, May 1st, excuse me, May 5th, 2026. I'll just add that the council, after extensive or intensive public awareness and participation, adopted the RFK Campus Act last August. I think it was August 1st was final reading. No, August 1st was first reading. To allow for the construction of a stadium to house the Washington Commanders football team, and also to allow for substantial mixed-use development on much of the rest of the campus. And that site under the current future land use map is designated as I believe Parks and Open Space, and so that designation needs to change for the mixed-use development. And that's what this is about. So we have a number of witnesses before I get to the government. Well after four. So let me call the witnesses who've registered. We'll see who's here. Ashley Ruff, who's a ANC Commissioner, ANC 7F, William Jordan, Antonio Myers, Parissa Naruzi, who is Executive Director of Empowered DC, Regina Tatum, Sarah Francis Morris, and Michael Rodriguez, who is Chief Executive Officer of St. Coletta of Greater Washington. So I believe a couple of the witnesses are online. And I see Mr. Jordan at the table. I know Ashley Ruff was in the chamber earlier, but that was while the council was meeting. So since she's not online and she's not here, I'll turn to Mr. Jordan, Europe. Good evening. I would urge the council to not pass this legislation and allow the plan to move through the normal comp plan rewrite process. And I wanted to share a few reasons why I believe it should. One, I really have no confidence in the Office of Planning. And I'm sharing this from a hearing earlier this year where the director, when questioned by Councilmember White about the number of three-bedroom housing needed in the city, basically punted on the issue and didn't answer why we need three bedrooms, and so we didn't. Also, when talking about displacement in the production of housing units, basically said that they don't count how many people have left. They only look at the number of people and the number of units produced and not the number of units lost. So if they're not even counting the total impact of policy, to me that's really insane. And then they talked about the old soldiers' home and said they were still counting the units that are going to be developed at the whole soldiers' home as part of the city's planning, and that project has died twice on the bond and doesn't even exist anymore. So I don't have any confidence that the Office of Planning takes this process seriously. The other is we're really creating a moral hazard here. And we've been doing it over and over. You know, it's always a rush.
openpublica.com