Washington, D.C. — Almost ten years ago WAMU issued this scathing report showing how DC is being fleeced by the developer-class with the help of connected friends in the Mayor's Office (DMPED) and on the City Council.
At last week's legislative hearing (4hrs 35min) numerous public properties were thrust forward for surplus and disposition, threatening to continue this legacy of $1 D.C. land deals at the last minute of this Council session.
Several Councilmembers asked for these land giveaways be put on the non-consent agenda and a few ultimately voted against the surplussing legislation in the first vote.
The push back was vocal from Councilmembers:
Recent election winner, Councilmember Anita Bonds: “I really think that doing the dispositions on these surplus properties we really need to slow down enough” pointing to the fact that there aren't many public parcels left to giveaway and that there isn't a comprehensive plan for our public land.
“You can't buy a Snickers bar for a $1” said Trayon White, Ward 8 Councilmember.
Councilmember and 2022 Mayoral candidate, Robert White said, “We need to do a lot better” and said he's working on reforming the public property surplus legislation.
Ward 4 Councilmember Janeese Lewis George pointed out that the deals before the Council now (except for one) are in fact divestment from the public and largely benefit wealthy developers.
At Large Christina Henderson: “We are giving away so much land for housing, and yet there's no planning for schools, or parks, or recreation centers nearby,” pointing to the lack of comprehensive planning of our public land and service by DMPED in these giveaways.
Despite these points, the legacy of $1 deals for public properties in D.C. may continue at the last legislative hearing of this Council period, next Tuesday.
The first vote went forward with a sheepish yes from At Large Councilmember Robert White and full throated support from Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie.
Council Chair, Phil Mendelson offered: “It's a function of economics, I can't say what the economics [of the proposed deals] are. I do think the Council would be better off if we did our own appraisals on these projects . . . “ so as to determine the viability of the Mayor's deals.
So far, no one on the Council has seen independent appraisals of the five or more public parcels threatened with disposition for a $1.
###