More than a week after the release of the last Collins D.C. Council Report, Ward 4 D.C. Councilmember Janeese Lewis George became mayor-elect, bringing with her a security detail that stands in the back of council chambers during legislative meetings.
With her inauguration less than two months away, Lewis George has her eyes on local fiscal policy. So much so, she recently implored her council colleagues to pump the brakes on legislation affecting Events DC’s excess cash calculations.
“I know they say that there is no fiscal impact, but there’s obviously a fiscal impact if the current practice is precisely what’s been challenged,” Lewis George said during the council’s Nov. 10 breakfast meeting. “If we’re clarifying, I guess it doesn’t answer whether District residents are receiving the money they are entitled to under the existing law.”
The bill in question, DC Excess Cash Calculation Clarification Amendment Act of 2026, was introduced by D.C. Councilmember Anita Bonds (D-At large) in October— one year after the Office of the D.C. Auditor (ODCA) found that Events DC incorrectly calculated its excess cash to the tune of more than $68 million. After Events DC returned some of the funds, that amount lowered to $45 million.
As revealed in Bonds’ Oct. 1 letter to D.C. Council Secretary Nyasha Smith, Events DC had already conducted an in-depth review in 2019 and, before then, corrected excess cash calculations for Fiscal Years 2008-2018. She pointed out to council members that calculating excess cash in a manner that ODCA recommended in its 2025 report would preclude the agency from carrying out its agreement with bondholders, as well as its operation of a Convention Center Fund, Sports and Entertainment Fund, and Marketing Fund.
Even so, Bonds opted to delay a first reading of the bill until the council’s Nov. 17 additional legislative meeting. In her remarks on the dais during the Committee of the Whole meeting preceding the council’s legislative meeting, the outgoing Democratic at-large council member conveyed what she believed to be the urgency of advancing her legislation.
“Events D.C. would be severely harmed should this $45 million be returned to the District and to the general fund because of their financial responsibility over the RFK project and other projects,” Bonds said. “Again, this legislation is a targeted technical clarification that preserves the District’s interest while ensuring Events D.C. can responsibly meet its operating and financial commitments.”
Lewis George, a democratic socialist, will officially become mayor next year as the District inches closer to what D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and Chief Financial Officer Glen Lee described as a fiscal cliff this past summer. The members of her transition team— which include Jennifer Levy as transition director; along with Aaron Jenkins, Beatriz “BB” Otero, Gautam Raghavan, Greg Akerman, and Kimberly Perry as transition co-chairs— will select agency leadership, develop a 100-day plan, and, most relevant to this dilemma, conduct an audit of the District’s finances.
To that last point, Lewis George remains adamant about preventing any scenario that obscures her ability to fully scrutinize the District’s books. On Nov. 10, she questioned whether the Committee of the Whole and the Committee on Executive Administration and Labor, the latter of which Bonds chairs, received information about: the amount that would return to the general fund with the passage of the latter’s legislation; and evidence that the larger reserves allowed by the bill are necessary for Events DC’s operations.
The committees, Bonds acknowledged to Lewis George’s dismay, had received neither.
“As a steward of District finances, I would not at this moment support changing those rules without a clear accounting of what we are giving up,” Lewis George said. “I’m hopeful that between now and the postponement that we can get some clear answers from Events D.C. on this. I think it would be prudent for the council to do so before we move forward on this because I do not want to be hamstrung and for us to miss out on dollars by not asking the right questions and only receiving general information.”
The Question of a Housing Production Timeline at RFK Campus
During its Nov. 10 Committee of the Whole hearing, the council, which now includes At-large D.C. Councilmember Jamal Holtz (D), unanimously approved on their first reading two pieces of RFK Campus-related legislation— the Robert F. Kennedy Campus Master Plan Approval Resolution of 2026 and the RFK Campus Small Area Plan Amendment Act of 2026.
D.C. Councilmember Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) voted “present” on the former. Later, during the legislative meeting, D.C. Council members Charles Allen (D-Ward 6) and Wendell Felder (D-Ward 7) introduced an amendment on the latter bill to ensure the connection or extension of WMATA’s metrorail regional transit network from or near the site.
“If we do this right, it serves as an opportunity to create the economic activity that Ward 7 desperately deserves. And that’s a part of realizing the development,” Felder said during the council’s Committee of the Whole meeting. “We want to make sure that if we’re talking about a world-class development,…we have a world-class transit system that supports neighbors being able to get in and out of that new community that will be developed.”
Per legislation approved by the council last year, the Washington Commanders will return to RFK Campus in 2030 in a state-of-the-art stadium surrounded by parkland, commercial activity, housing, and other amenities. Parker, who collaborated with Lewis George on provisions to produce jobs during development, questioned whether the legislation held the Washington Commanders accountable in the production of housing on RFK Campus.
Despite, at one point, recommending that the council table approval of the RFK Campus Master Plan, Parker relented with the hope that the legislative body would hold the Commanders’ feet to the fire.
“I know the master plan and passing that is important to have this project move forward, including zoning and for our ultimate timeline to stay on track, so I don’t necessarily need to stall that,” Parker told The Informer, “but I do think in short order we should be coming together to ask very serious questions of the Commanders to say: ‘Annually, what is your commitment for housing on the site, as well as for the District and the Kingman Commons area, what is our commitment for housing on the site?’”
Earlier in the day, D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D) suggested that Parker work in conjunction with the Committee on Housing during the next council period to establish a housing development timeline for RFK Campus. Parker ultimately took him up on the offer.
“I hope that by the end of the first quarter of next year there’s legislation, [and] there’s a hearing where we’re pressing on this question of when can residents expect housing to be delivered on the site,” Parker told The Informer. “Looking ahead, what I fear could happen is that 2030 comes, we have a nice fancy stadium, and there’s empty land and lots because that’s all we’ve been focused on.”
As a framework for 180 acres of land along the Anacostia River that’s bounded by Benning Road, Independence Avenue, 19th Street, and Oklahoma Avenue in Southeast, the RFK Campus Master Plan focuses on an integrated campus, active streets and connected public spaces, multimodal mobility and access, active recreation and open space, environmental stewardship, and expanding equity.
In total, there will be six districts. When it comes to housing, the master plan makes note of anywhere between 5,500 and 6,500 units— including a mixed-use neighborhood with 2,200 homes on what’s called the Plaza District; 3,100 homes along the Anacostia River in the Riverfront District; and 1,200 homes in the Kingman District along with recreation.
The final document’s circulation to the council on the Friday preceding the Nov. 10 meetings, as noted by D.C. Councilmember Elissa Silverman (I-At large), comes weeks after Bowser and D.C. Office of Planning (OP) submitted the RFK Campus Master Plan to the council, and the legislative body conducted a public hearing. Other milestones include: more than 30 community engagement meetings, town halls, and site walks, along with the agency’s reception of more than 3,100 public comments.
The council aims to approve the plan on or before Dec. 14. Much to Parker’s chagrin, approval doesn’t establish zoning or authorize individual development projects.
“If we did not put some deadlines that you now want to see, then shame on us, but that’s the deal we negotiated,” Mendelson told Parker on the dais during the council’s Nov. 10 Committee of the Whole meeting. “I would be happy to host a meeting with you and me, actually any other member who wants to, and the Commanders, and we can talk about what the housing delivery schedule will be.”
Such an exchange will take place at a time when, as noted by elected officials and developers, housing production is at a standstill due, in part to, high rent delinquency that’s heightened developers’ anxiety. Though the RENTAL Act had set out to rectify this dilemma, affordable housing advocates call residents’ inability to pay rent a symptom of a greater socioeconomic malady.
Parker acknowledged that dilemma, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach that provides housing providers with capital and tenants with resources.
“We have to right-size the relationship between landlords and tenants, and we’ve done some of that work, but the data tells us there’s more for us to do there,” he told The Informer. “We need to be thinking about what more support we can provide to tenants who are struggling to make ends meet for any number of reasons. But the status quo tells us if we do not do something different quickly, we’re going to lose thousands of affordable housing units and undermine the billions of dollars of investments that we’ve made over the last 10 to 15 years.”
The Fight Over Utilities Continues
On its first reading, the council unanimously approved the Guiding Renewable Interconnection and Distribution (GRID) Amendment Act of 2026— a bill by Allen that, by the time it arrived before the entire council, included elements of three other bills introduced by some of his council colleagues.
Holtz was absent for this vote.
This version of the legislation included an amendment by Allen and Mendelson that allows for utility-owned battery storage. Another amendment by D.C. Councilmember Trayon White (D-Ward 8) aims to hold utility companies, in their development of energy infrastructure, accountable for meeting workforce development and certified business enterprise participation criteria.
“This is an opportunity for us to figure this out, and this is one of many ways to address it,” White said during the council’s Nov. 10 legislative meeting. “I do know that we have the D.C. Infrastructure Academy…that’s overcrowded with applications, and so this is an opportunity for us to get a real plan on how we expand.”
The council’s deliberation of the GRID Act comes months after Pepco-Exelon’s standard offer service rate, as approved by the Public Service Commission (PSC), increased by 7%, or nearly $10 via the utility provider’s “Climate Ready Pathway” plan. A March D.C. Court of Appeals ruling, however, vacated the previous approval and compelled PSC’s further examination of its rate plan application.
That decision came down amid the significant increase of wholesale energy costs from regional energy transmission organization PJM Interconnection, due in part to the establishment of data centers, modernization of power grids and shutdown of power plants.
Months before the appeals court decision, PSC approved a rate hike for Washington Gas Light Company’s (WGL). A portion of those payments, which went into effect at the beginning of this year, are funding the utility company’s District Strategic Accelerated Facilities Enhancement (SAFE) pipe replacement plan, estimated to cost $215 million over three years. As the Office of the Attorney General, Office of the People’s Counsel, and Sierra Club coalesce around the push for further scrutinizing WGL’s plan, District residents are dedicating an increasingly larger slice of their paychecks to utilities.
For Allen, chair of the council’s Committee on Transportation and the Environment, the GRID Act aims to tackle a problem spoken about throughout much of the year, particularly during the Democratic mayoral primary.
“We know that residents and businesses need help on utilities, and this legislation will do it,” Allen told The Informer. “It will deliver lower rates. It’ll [deliver on] the affordability crisis we have.”
The GRID Act, as presented to the council’s Committee of the Whole, paves the way for the installation of apartment balcony solar panels and the creation of an ombudsman office within PSC. The legislation, which expands PSC from three members to five, also mandates gas and electric companies to submit a detailed description of their capital expenditures when applying for a rate change with the decision-making body, while also capping the rates of third-party energy suppliers at 10% higher than that of conventional utility companies.
Other provisions— including those limiting the return on equity (ROE) to a 10-year treasury bond yield plus 2%, and requiring PSC to approve multi-year rate plans under certain circumstances— have drawn the ire of utility companies fearful about an exodus of private investors.
“I would equate it to an individual person who now has a very bad credit score. It’s going to be a lot tougher for you to buy a car, purchase a home, and it’s going to be more expensive, said Amber Perry, Pepco-Exelon’s vice president and regional president. “We won’t be able to make the same investments. It could impact jobs in the District. It could impact certain multiyear [projects] that we have across the city.”
As Perry recounted, Pepco-Exelon participated in committee hearings that Allen conducted about energy costs earlier this year. She said that’s when the utility company posited community solar and utility-owned battery storage as viable means to bring down rates, especially in the absence of a local powerplant that could decrease Pepco-Exelon’s dependence on energy from PJM Interconnection.
“They’re shorter-term solutions where customers will start to see those benefits quicker than obviously having to wait for a nuclear plant or a gas plant to be built,” Perry told The Informer. “If you’re focused…from an environmental perspective too, those are the cleaner energy. They come online very quickly and can help our customers in short order compared to some of the other power source options.”
Perry criticized Allen for, as she described it, not allowing enough time for discussion about the ROE provision— what she called an infringement on PSC’s power and expertise.
“This legislation would essentially overstep in a very, very rigorous process that’s already in place,” Perry told The Informer. “There are a lot of other variables that go into a rate case. It’s not just ROE. We want to absolutely make sure that it receives that level of rigorous review.”
While speaking with The Informer, Allen challenged the notion that the Committee on Transportation and the Environment didn’t dedicate enough time to deliberate on the ROE provision.
“It was advertised in the hearing notice so that it was specifically wanting to be talked about and advertised asking people to come talk about it,” he told The Informer. “Several witnesses talked about it. As you might imagine, there’s a lot of conversation that takes place in the middle of a hearing, but there’s a lot of conversation that takes place after the hearings as well.”
On the dais, Felder expressed concern about the ROE provision. Although he had set out to introduce an amendment mandating “rigorous analysis by national experts,” he opted to delay it and speak with Allen one-on-one before second reading.
“We need clear answers before we proceed. Unfortunately, we do not have enough information to answer those questions today, nor have we had enough time to complete the due diligence that a measure of this complexity warrants,” Felder said. “We’re asking to vote on a nuanced issue that nationally recognized ROE experts, utility regulators, financial analysts, and other specialists examine every day. The council should have an opportunity to hear directly from those experts and test the assumptions underlying this proposal.”
As the council gears up for a second reading of the GRID Act, a former legislator said he wants to help his one-time colleagues shape the legislation further.
“If anything was evident at [the] breakfast meeting and at the Committee of the Whole meeting and at the legislative meeting is that there are a significant amount of unanswered questions from members of the council that Councilmember Allen cannot answer,” said Brandon Todd, a former Ward 4 council member who currently serves as vice president of government affairs, policy and advocacy at WGL.
In speaking with The Informer, Todd questioned the degree to which Allen delved into ROE reduction and its long-term effects on energy costs. He said that the provision, if it were to pass at second reading, would lead to rate increases that build upon previous increases caused by inflation and government-induced fees.
That’s why Todd, like Felder, is imploring further study of ROE reduction.
“When we talk about lowering return on equity, that is a significant departure from the way that utility rate making and regulatory schemes across the country are done,” Todd told The Informer. “Many members asked questions around [whether this] would affect utilities’ credit ratings. Could this affect the utilities’ long-term health? And quite frankly, Councilmember Allen’s answers were unsatisfactory.”
Ward 3 D.C. Councilmember Frumin Weighs In on Equitable Housing Development Quandary
On its first reading, the council unanimously approved the Fair Share Housing Targets Act of 2025. They did so with lingering questions about a provision that triggers a third-party evaluator’s petition for a zoning change in instances when a jurisdiction doesn’t meet housing production goals.
“I think that should be what the mayor and the council do, not an unelected third party,” D.C. Councilmember Matt Frumin (D-Ward 3) told The Informer. “It’s kind of what happens in Mayor Bowser’s set goals, and then now the Office of Planning is putting forward changes in the Comprehensive Plan. So in practice something like what the legislation requires is happening, and in practice going forward, something like what the legislation is asking for will happen.”
On Nov. 10, Frumin introduced an amendment striking the aforementioned provision so that the legislation would instead allow the third-party evaluator an opportunity to address roadblocks to housing production and affordable housing before the Zoning Commission, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, the Historic Preservation Review Board or the council.
That amendment, which the council didn’t vote on, didn’t have a fan in outgoing D.C. Councilmember Brianne Nadeau (D-Ward 1). During the latter part of last year, she introduced the Fair Share Housing Targets Act along with Lewis George, Parker, D.C. Councilmember Christina Henderson (I-At large), and now-D.C. Delegate-elect Robert White.
“I don’t think that’s the intent here, but I do think this amendment would inadvertently restrict some people that right now have the right to file zoning amendments,” Nadeau said on the dais during the council’s legislative meeting on Nov. 10.
Nadeau, who will soon leave the council, went on to explain her intention behind the legislation, specifically as it relates to alleviating what she described as government agencies overwhelmed with deliberations on zoning.
“The mayor hires somebody, a consultant, a third party—because we don’t necessarily have this built-in capacity at all times— to evaluate why this happened, make a recommendation to the mayor, and then if the mayor wants, that person can file the case for her,” Nadeau said.
For Mendelson, it was a question of whether Frumin’s amendment was legally sound.
“Now, I haven’t discussed that with [the] general counsel, so I might be a little bit off there,” Mendelson said, “but the fact is…that the mayor is the one through the Office of Planning who, on behalf of the District, does prepare or petitions the Zoning Commission. If the evaluator’s analysis is so compelling that we need to change the zoning regulations, the mayor ought to act on that, and the mayor can instruct the Office of Planning to file that zoning case.”
In a 2019 mayoral order, Bowser set a goal of producing 36,000 new units of housing— including 12,000 affordable units— by 2025.
Through zoning reforms and use of the Housing Production Trust Fund, the District surpassed the mayor’s goal with more than 46,000 units of housing brought online. Historically underserved areas, like those east of the Anacostia River, had lower affordable housing targets while the Bowser administration aimed for more affluent areas, like west of Rock Creek Park, to take on a higher share of new affordable housing.
Per data compiled by the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, areas designated as Far Northeast, Far Southeast, Far Southwest, Lower Anacostia, Waterfront, and Mid-city went well beyond the threshold established for housing production within six years.
Other parts of the city, however, fell short, including Rock Creek West, which Frumin represents. Frumin says it’s not for a lack of trying.
“There’s a question of what is the impediment to getting things done,” he told The Informer. “One view is that zoning is the impediment [but] we have a number of projects that have gotten zoning approvals that aren’t moving forward because of fundamental economics at this point. And that’s a challenge that we need to confront.”
If the council passes the Fair Share Housing Targets Act, it would be following the lead of New Jersey, which has a doctrine mandating the production of affordable housing in every municipality. California also requires its cities and counties to adopt laws aimed at helping meet affordable housing targets, while Massachusetts has implemented a statute allowing affordable housing developers to bypass zoning statutes in areas with less than 10% affordable housing.
In speaking about the District legislation, Mendelson called it a case of deja vu.
“I’ve seen this before where the council legislates a process as if that’s the only way and does it with the intention that…whoever the mayor is will follow that process,” he told reporters at his Nov. 9 press conference. “Even though the mayor may agree or want more flexibility, in the end I think it comes down to vigorous oversight.”
