Council votes to bring Commanders stadium back to DC

WASHINGTON — After a marathon meeting, DC Council members have voted 11-2 to bring the Washington Commanders back to the District.  

The DC Council took its second and final vote Wednesday on the $3.7 billion project to redevelop the RFK Stadium site in Ward 7. The vote authorizes the use of $1.1 billion in taxpayer money to bring the football back to D.C. 

“Today is a historic day for D.C., the Commanders organization, and our fans,” Commanders Managing Partner Josh Harris said of the passage. “With the Council’s approval, we can now move forward on the transformative RFK project that will bring lasting economic growth for our city … We are deeply grateful for the warm return to the District and the center of the DMV, and look forward to officially bringing the team back to its spiritual home in 2030.” 

Here’s a closer look at how it all came together.

The vote comes after Commanders President Mark Clouse wrote a letter to members of the Council decrying what Clouse called last-minute demands.

“Less than 24 hours before the final vote, the Commanders organization was presented with a list of unworkable and impractical last-minute demands by Councilmembers, which we simply cannot agree to as it jeopardizes the deal,” the letter reads. “Given our deep engagement with the council over many months and our proven willingness to address any Councilmember feedback, this is unexpected and unfortunate.”

In August, the council voted 9-3 to move the legislation forward, with Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau, Matt Frumin and Robert White as the three “no” votes. On the second vote, Wednesday, Frumin changed to a ‘yes’ vote, while White and Nadeau voted against the legislation, again. 

“I actually was struck by some of the things that Councilmember Pinto said today,” Ward 3 Councilmember Matt Frumin said Wednesday night.

“It’s gonna happen I think let’s all get shoulder to shoulder and make this as great as it can be and try to use whatever tools we have to increase accountabilities. While I didn’t get what I hoped for. I’m going to vote in support of this bill,” he announced as the room erupted in gasps and cheering.

The DC Council considered 12 amendments ahead of the second and final vote on the RFK stadium deal. The changes proposed by members of the DC Council were not all new issues. The majority have been brought forward during the first council vote in August.

Among the most vocal about necessary changes to the deal was At-large Councilmember Robert White who pushed his colleagues to move forward with stricter penalties for the Washington Commanders if the NFL team does not deliver the mixed-use parcels on time, pecifically the 6,000 housing units included in the plan.

When asked if his last-minute demands could jeopardize the deal entirely, Robert White told reporters, “Stadiums get built without taxpayer money. The owners of this stadium are some of the wealthiest people in the world. The city right now is in a deficit. Most of us in this city would like to see them here but they can afford to build a stadium.”

White emphasized that the Commanders would not see penalties until 2053 under the revised plan. He proposed an amendment that would have fined the Commanders $10 million a year if they did not deliver the mixed-use parcels on time. The amendment was struck down as well as another proposal that would transfer the land back to DC if the land is not substantially developed by 2050.

Frumin shared similar concerns about the timely delivery of the mixed-use parcels. 

“Where we are right now is, if they did very little building, they would begin to pay a penalty in 2050 or later, timelines are all moving around and they could sit through the 2040s not building and not being penalized or halfway there and not being penalized. I think we need to start penalties hit sooner,” Frumin told WUSA9 ahead of the vote.

While the stadium has a target of 2030, the economic impacts would begin immediately. Through jobs for consultants, designers, and architects starting as soon as 2026, the District would start benefitting from the deal long before Washington football officially returns home nearly half a decade later.

Before the vote, there were mounting concerns over public funding and impacts to nearby neighborhoods. 

In a recent conversation with WUSA9, Mayor Muriel Bowser did her best to answer those concerns, starting with the $1+ billion in public funding, something she says is necessary as an investment in infrastructure that the city would make regardless of the tenant partner, and is far less than some other cities have committed in similar deals.

“I think all of us wouldn’t have done our jobs if this $4 billion project doesn’t benefit our businesses that in turn hire DC residents,” the mayor said, explaining that specific and targeted benefits for local residents include a $50 million package for Ward 7 aimed at job training and to help local businesses secure various contracts.

“I’m cautiously optimistic,” said Alexis Pazmiño, a Ward 7 resident who has been closely following the project.

For months, Pazmiño and fellow resident Meredith Holmgren have organized community meetings and testified during public hearings to ensure that neighborhood concerns are considered. Among their top priorities: clear plans for parking, transportation, and sustainable development.

“We haven’t been able to see enough progress on the parking aspects of the plan,” Holmgren said. “We have very vague promises about transportation, the site, and sustainability.”

While some city leaders tout the stadium’s potential to spur economic development east of the Anacostia River, residents like Ward 7 Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Patricia Stamper say the community’s needs must come first.

“I know they want to entertain us, give us a football team,” Stamper said. “But I drive past Gateway every week. I see the field promises of my mayor — and I want a grocery store.”

Wednesday night, Councilmember Robert White also brought up some concerns about the impacts to the community.

“After the stadium comes they become whiter, wealthier, and less accessible to the very communities that gave life to them. That’s not speculation. It’s what happens again and again. Unless we act it will happen here,” White said, before introducing multiple amendments that he explained would protect the communities and culture.

However, Chairman Mendelson told WUSA9 after the vote, that he didn’t agree with that concept.

“If the values were to go up, that’s actually wealth to the residents,” he said.

Housing development was a key part of the discussion. At-large Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie emphasized the scale of new housing planned for the site.

“Thousands of homes that are gonna be built on that site, anywhere from 5,000 to 6,000 homes, with a huge number of those being affordable housing,” McDuffie said.

Environmental sustainability was also addressed in the bill, according to Mendelson. “We wanted to make clear the commitment to be as green as possible while still giving them some flexibility,” Mendelson said.

The Washington Commanders’ proposed stadium project is set to advance into the regulatory approval phase, marking the next critical step in the team’s timeline to open a new facility by the 2030 football season.

Following final approval of the stadium deal, the Commanders must navigate a complex regulatory process involving two key federal agencies and multiple zoning approvals before construction can begin.

The National Capital Planning Commission will conduct one major review, evaluating whether the project benefits the broader region. The NCPC includes presidential appointees, congressional appointees, D.C. government appointees and delegates from Maryland and Virginia.

The Commission on Fine Arts will separately review the stadium’s design to ensure architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the District. While the CFA carries more regulatory authority than the NCPC, team officials do not anticipate significant obstacles from either agency.

Local and federal zoning approvals will also be required before construction can proceed.

The Commanders are continuing to develop the stadium’s design, though plans have not been finalized. Utility work is expected to begin in spring 2026, followed by the completion of RFK Stadium’s demolition by fall 2026.

Ground-breaking for the new stadium is planned shortly after the RFK site is cleared. The team maintains its target of completing construction in time for the 2030 NFL season opener.

The regulatory approval process represents a crucial milestone in the Commanders’ efforts to return to D.C. after decades of playing in suburban Maryland and Virginia venues.

Following the vote, Commanders Managing Partner Josh Harris released a statement, calling the decision a milestone for the team and the city.

“Today is a historic day for D.C., the Commanders organization, and our fans. With the Council’s approval, we can now move forward on the transformative RFK project that will bring lasting economic growth for our city,” Harris said.