What’s in the RFK Stadium Site Bill?
December 31, 2024
by Steve Thomas
As most Washington fans know, the bill regarding the RFK Stadium site, which is H.R. 4984 and officially known as the “D.C. Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium Campus Revitalization Act”, was passed by the United States Senate on December 21, 2024. Assuming that it is signed by the guy who currently resides part-time in the residential wing of the White House for a couple more weeks, which hopefully is a foregone conclusion, the Act will become law and will therefore have a dramatic effect on the Washington franchise’s seemingly never-ending quest to be gifted a new stadium. What’s in this bill, anyway?
The Act was unmodified from the original version passed by the U.S. House of Representatives several months ago. The Act requires the U.S. Department of Interior to transfer administrative control, but not fee simple ownership, of the RFK Stadium site – what the Act calls “the Campus”, which includes a total of 174 acres – to the District of Columbia for 99 years within 180 of the date of enactment of the Act. This essentially a long-term ground lease, which is a common tool in real estate development.
The Act requires that the District only use and/or develop the Campus for a limited number of purposes, not just anything the District government wants to do; specifically, the following:
(1) “[s]tadium purposes, including training facilities, offices, and other structures necessary to support a stadium”;
(2) commercial and residential development;
(3) “[f]acilities, open space, and public outdoor opportunities”, including cultural, educational, and recreational activities; or
(4) other public purposes for which the property was used or approved for use prior to June 1, 1985.
The fact that the Act simply says “commercial and residential development” tells me that Congress probably intended to exclude things like manufacturing and warehousing, which makes sense given the nature and location of the property.
The Act also requires that 30 percent of the property, not including the waterways, be used as parks and/or open space. That’s important because the entire site is 174 acres[1], which leaves less than a maximum of approximately 120 acres for development, depending on the size of the waterway area. That sounds like alot, but it really isn’t in the world of stadium development. It’s enough to build a modern stadium, but probably not much else. To put this in context, the entire SoFi Stadum development in California, the home of the Rams and the Chargers that has a large mixed-use development surrounding the stadium, is 298 acres[2]. The NRG Stadium complex in Houston, the home of the Texans that includes a convention center, training complex for the team, a parking lot, and the now-abandoned Houston Astrodome, is 350 acres[3]. In contrast, Empower Field at Mile High, home of the Denver Broncos, is just 55 acres[4]. The takeaway from this is that 120 or so acres that encompass the RFK Stadium site is enough to build a new, modern NFL stadium, but probably not much else, and that could end up affecting the District’s plans for the property. The Act requires the District to include sufficient parking, so that probably means that they can’t just solely rely on the Metro for transportation, which I doubt they would do anyway.
The Act places a number of obligations on the District, which are supposed to be memorialized in a memorandum of understanding between the District and the federal government, as well as in a declaration that will be recorded in the real property records. I’m not going to repeat all of the requirements placed on the District here; suffice it to say that the District will be responsible for funding any and all development on the property, including demolition costs. It is also worth pointing out that the Act expressly forbids the use of any federal funding for either stadium development or related training facilities or offices; essentially, anything having to do with football.
This means that the District is now a legitimate contender for Washington’s future new stadium. However, this changes none of the issues with construction financing that I’ve been talking about on The Hog Sty Podcast and writing for years at this point. Washington owner Josh Harris is in an enviable position, in that three separate governmental entities are competing to cut a deal with him. Harris will probably accept the best financial deal, which equates to which of the governments of Maryland, Virginia, or the District are willing to put the most money into the project. I find it hard to believe that Harris will be willing to contribute much to a project if he doesn’t have an ownership interest in it and can’t further develop the surrounding property. In my view, the District is going to have the toughest time raising sufficient funds – a stadium project in today’s world is going to be at least at $1B, and maybe significantly more. Without access to federal funds, the District’s financing options are going to be much more limited that Maryland or Virginia.
Stadium projects that are owned by governmental entities are usually funded through some combination of public bond sale proceeds and excise taxes. Both Maryland and Virginia have more options than does one single municipal government for both of those pathways. The Nats Park project was only $693M. A Washington football stadium is probably going to cost twice that much. Can the District fund that amount? I tend to doubt it, which would leave a significant portion of it to Josh Harris. As I said, the idea that Harris would willingly take on a big chunk of it in the face of better financial offers from either Maryland or Virginia strikes me as unlikely, particularly given that the additional commercial development prospects at the RFK site would be limited by the maximum size requirement of something less than 120 acres.
It’s also worth noting that the local residents nearby the RFK Stadium site have never been in favor of a new stadium, understandably. Much more land not immediately adjacent to residential neighborhoods is available in both Maryland and Virginia.
In my view, as nostalgic as a new stadium on the site of the glory days of Redskins football would be, the more likely and probably better options reside elsewhere in the DMW area. What do you think? Let me know in the comment section below.
[1] https://norton.house.gov/media/press-releases/norton-disappointed-rfk-stadium-bill-excluded-house-passed-cr-will-continue#:~:text=Norton%20has%20worked%20on%20prior,in%20the%20District%20since%202017.
[2] https://www.sofistadium.com/stadium
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRG_Park
[4] https://www.sportskeeda.com/nfl/empower-field-at-mile-high-stadium-capacity#:~:text=Empower%20Field%20at%20Mile%20High%20located%20in%20Denver%2C%20Colorado%2C%20seats,field%20for%20the%20Denver%20Broncos