D.C. https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc D.C. en-US Thu, 22 Oct 2026 18:13:31 GMT Trayon White’s Lawyer Says the Government Is Targeting Him Based on Race https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc/trayon-white-retrial-jeanine-pirro Jenny Gathright Federal prosecutors announced Thursday they will seek a second trial and a new indictment against White, the D.C. Council member accused of bribery. Thu, 22 Oct 2026 18:13:31 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc/trayon-white-retrial-jeanine-pirro Trayon White walks our of courthouse after a judged declared a mistrail.
Trayon White leaves the courthouse after the judge declared a mistrial last month. (Jenny Gathright/The Washington Sun)
Prosecutors intend to seek a new indictment and proceed with a new trial against D.C. Council member Trayon White, they announced in court Thursday — a proposal met with strong opposition from White’s defense attorneys, who said the lawmaker was being unfairly targeted in part because of his race.

In a hearing in U.S. District Court, Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebecca Ross said she expected a new trial could begin in May at the absolute earliest. Ross said the government intends to seek a superseding indictment from a grand jury, which would replace the original indictment against White and could contain different or new charges.

White, 42, faced trial for bribery last month and stands accused of accepting cash as part of a corrupt agreement to influence city contracts. But the proceeding ended in a mistrial when the jury could not agree on a verdict; nine jurors wanted to acquit White and three wanted to convict him, according to White’s attorneys. On the day the judge declared the mistrial, U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro’s office swiftly released a public statement saying it would retry the case — but Ross’s statements Thursday entered the plan into the official court record.

The announcement means the embattled lawmaker, who represents Ward 8 on the council, is in for a lengthy extension of his more than two-year legal saga. His defense attorney Gary Kohlman said the government’s decision appeared calculated “to put [White] in a situation where he will be defenseless,” given how expensive it would be for White to retain his current lawyers. Kohlman also said that if the council member was white, prosecutors would “never consider” re-trying the case after a jury split 9-3 in favor of acquittal.

“In over 50 years of practice. I've never made that accusation before, never, not once,” Kohlman told reporters afterward, referring to his statements about racial bias. “Trayon White is African American. He represents, by and large, an African American community that has repeatedly elected him. He had nine people out of 12 that found him not guilty in this case, and I cannot think of any other explanation.”

Asked about Kohlman’s statements at an unrelated news conference Thursday, Pirro called the claim of racial bias “absurd.”

“We don’t care what color he is,” she said. “We care about the people of this District.”

White was arrested in August 2024 and accused of accepting $35,000 — and agreeing to accept upwards of $150,000 — in illegal bribes. The charges stemmed from meetings White had with a businessman named Allieu Kamara in the summer of 2024. Unbeknownst to White at the time, the FBI was recording their conversations because Kamara, who faced separate criminal charges of his own, agreed to act as a confidential informant to help them investigate the council member.

The videos show White accepting envelopes of cash and the two men discussing business. In the tapes, Kamara, a prolific D.C. government contractor, repeatedly asked White for help securing lucrative government grants for violence-interruption work. White agreed, and the two men discussed plans to further Kamara’s business with the city, including in other areas such as mental health services.

But White’s attorneys argued that the lawmaker never took serious steps to carry out the alleged bribery scheme and said the cash payments, which they acknowledged White accepted, could have been political donations. D.C. officials testified in court that White had discussed Kamara’s businesses with them but had never pressured them to extend the grants.

To convict White of bribery, 12 jurors would have to have agreed that White actually intended to carry out the agreement to influence the contracts. For nine, Kohlman said, the government’s evidence did not clear the bar.

Now, the prospect of a new trial and many months of additional litigation in the interim may mean White has to get new lawyers. In the FBI recordings shown at trial, White could be heard telling Kamara that he was “bankrupt”; other evidence the government agreed not to introduce to the jury showed that White also struggled with gambling debts. Kohlman said continuing with his current legal team may be prohibitively expensive.

“This is designed to break the back of Mr. White’s efforts to effectively defend himself,” Kohlman said.

Pirro said her office’s responsibility is to follow the law and pursue justice.

“We don’t throw up our hands in the air and say, ‘Oh, we’re going to go home, let it go,’” she said. “No — he took the cash. Let a jury decide.”

White declined to comment on the prospect of another indictment and trial, saying he stood by the statements of his attorney. Asked by a television reporter what the money was for, if it wasn’t a bribe, White was silent.]]> Rep. Joyce Beatty Is Trying to Reveal Trump’s Kennedy Center Communications https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/trump-kennedy-center-communications-joyce-beatty Torrie Herrington Her attorneys also pointed to a newly disclosed consultant report that they say undercuts the administration’s justification for the shutdown. Thu, 22 Oct 2026 14:41:41 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/trump-kennedy-center-communications-joyce-beatty Trump Kennedy Center
Beatty’s lawyers argued that Trump’s communications with Kennedy Center staff about renovations and the closure fall outside the scope of presidential communications privilege. (Mariam Zuhaib/AP)
Rep. Joyce Beatty is asking a federal judge to force the Trump administration to turn over communications about the president’s management of the Kennedy Center, arguing that executive privilege should not shield his decisions as the institution’s chair because the storied arts institution is not a part of the executive branch.

In a court filing Tuesday, the Ohio Democrat’s attorneys said the administration has improperly withheld information about President Donald Trump’s role in the decision to close the performing arts center for two years. They also pointed to a newly disclosed consultant report that they say undercuts the administration’s justification for the shutdown.

Beatty’s lawyers argued that Trump’s communications with Kennedy Center staff about renovations and the closure fall outside the scope of presidential communications privilege because he was acting as the center’s board chair, not in his capacity as president.

“It would do a terrible disservice to the rule of law—to say nothing of disserving the search for truth in this important litigation about a national memorial to a slain President—to permit Defendants to hide the ball in this way,” Beatty’s lawyers wrote, referencing the administration’s “sweeping claim of executive privilege.”

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

Beatty’s filing is the latest development in the lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s control of the Kennedy Center, including its efforts to rename the institution and close its main building for renovations.

The administration has invoked presidential communications privilege to withhold information sought by Beatty’s legal team. Her attorneys argued Tuesday that the administration has failed to adequately identify the specific communications it seeks to protect or establish that Trump personally invoked the privilege for each of them.

Beatty’s attorneys also argued that the privilege, which protects a president’s confidential deliberations, should not extend to the daily management of a performing arts institution that operates outside the executive branch.

The dispute has taken on new significance following the disclosure of a report prepared by real estate consultant JLL on Aug. 20. Beatty’s attorneys said the report, which was not provided to the Kennedy Center’s board, found that a phased renovation was feasible and appeared to contradict information presented to trustees.

The report was not disclosed to Beatty’s legal team until Oct. 19, after depositions had already taken place, according to the filing.

Beatty’s attorneys also cited a document in which JLL was told by Kennedy Center management that “Q3 2028 reopening is absolute; driven by Presidential mandate.”

The statement, they argued, raises questions about whether the two-year closure timeline was independently determined by the center’s consultants or dictated by Trump before the board considered its options.

The filing said Matt Floca, the Kennedy Center’s executive director, testified that Trump had decided on the two-year closure. Beatty’s attorneys argued that the newly disclosed JLL report was directly responsive to their discovery requests about renovation alternatives, scheduling and costs.

They also questioned why Floca did not disclose the report during his deposition, despite being asked about the consultant’s findings.

The administration has maintained that the board’s decision was supported by expert analysis. But Beatty’s attorneys said the evidence raises questions about whether the consultants’ work was independent or shaped by Trump’s preferred outcome.

Beatty’s attorneys argued that the board could have breached its responsibilities as trustees if it relied on a predetermined recommendation while ignoring evidence supporting alternatives.

The filing also renewed concerns about Trump’s threats to demolish the center if his name is not added to the building. Beatty’s attorneys said they need access to communications about those threats to determine whether the renovation plans could change based on the outcome of the separate dispute over the institution’s renaming.]]> As Affordability Concerns Persist, Could D.C. Reduce Parking and Traffic Fines? https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-reduced-parking-traffic-fines Martin Austermuhle Lawmakers have discussed the possibility, but making tickets cheaper could be costly for D.C. Thu, 22 Oct 2026 09:15:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-reduced-parking-traffic-fines Rush hour traffic on North Capitol Street.
Rush hour traffic on North Capitol Street. (Kainaz Amaria/The Washington Sun) (Kainaz Amaria/The Washington Sun)
Few people agree on most things, but D.C. residents and visitors alike often find common ground on one gripe: Parking and traffic tickets are plentiful and expensive.

But new proposals in the Wilson Building are reviving discussions around whether D.C. should reduce the fines associated with parking and traffic tickets, with some lawmakers contemplating fully cutting them in half while others propose doing away with the practice of doubling fines after 30 days.

“I do think we need to address this problem,” D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson said this week. “We are seeing tickets issued in much greater volume. In a sense that’s a good thing because there are bad drivers. However it means that fines are racked up quickly and are quite hefty. There are drivers that owe thousands of dollars. That’s not sustainable.”

Earlier this month, At-Large council member Robert White proposed halving all parking fines, which start as low as $20 for parking within five feet of an alley and can increase quickly thereafter: Parking in a restricted rush hour zone can fetch a $100 ticket, blocking an emergency snow route is $250 and excessive idling is $500.

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

“Residents are drowning in costs,” White said. “[They] have to stretch every single paycheck further just to cover the basics. I’m hearing about this every day in every part of the city. A parking ticket can make the difference between covering bills and falling behind, but it is not just those making minimum wage who are feeling the squeeze and stressed by it right now.”

In the 2025 fiscal year, D.C. issued 1,093,880 parking tickets worth more than $59 million in fines. White said the average parking ticket fine that year was $59.20, which at the city’s current minimum wage would take more than three hours of work for some residents to pay off.

This week Ward 8 council member Trayon White — who has long argued that D.C.’s parking and traffic fines are too high — introduced a bill that would end the existing doubling of any fine if it’s not paid within 30 days of the ticket being issued.

“I believe that drivers should slow down and drive safely. We can hold motorists accountable without financially devastating them,” he said on Tuesday. “If I don’t have the money in 10 days I don’t have double the money after 30 days.”

Mendelson — who himself said he would favor cutting parking fines in half — said his colleagues should also look at the cost of tickets issued by the city’s many traffic cameras; those fines start at $100 and escalate rapidly, especially as a driver’s speeding gets more egregious. (In 2025 D.C.’s traffic cameras issued 3.3 million tickets.)

Still, the populist impulse to respond to D.C. residents’ affordability concerns would be costly, and past efforts to reduce fines have fallen short because of the fiscal reality that any reductions in revenue from the fines would lead to reduced spending on other programs and services.

“I’d love to see how we could reduce those things,” said Ward 6 council member Charles Allen, the chair of the council’s transportation committee. “The reality is, unless I have something to offset it — especially in lean budget years when we’re scrambling to help protect funding for child care and health care and housing — it makes it increasingly hard.”

The reason D.C. is virtually dependent on revenue from parking and traffic tickets has to do with the city budget. Every year the mayor and council craft a budget not just for the upcoming fiscal year but also the three that follow. Those budgets — which by law have to be balanced — are built on estimates of how much revenue the city is taking in, from traditional sources like taxes and fees but also parking and traffic tickets.

In 2025 the value of all fines from parking, traffic cameras and moving offenses amounted to more than $754 million, out of an annual budget hovering in the $11 billion range. That year, some $316 million worth of fines were actually paid. Reducing those fines would mean replacing the revenue the associated tickets were supposed to bring over four years.

“It's hard to justify cutting tickets in half when we’re cutting education programs and food assistance,” said Ward 5 council member Zachary Parker earlier this month.

This is not a new political and fiscal reality for many council members. In 2018 the council actually passed a bill authored by Trayon White that would have changed the point at which an unpaid fine doubles, from 30 days to 60. It was never implemented, though, because it would have cost $111 million in revenue over four years.

Robert White’s idea of halving parking fines was estimated to cost D.C. between $10 and $20 million in revenue annually.

Lawmakers have tried to break the costly link between fines and the city’s broader budget. Within the past five years, the council mandated that fines from traffic cameras be invested only in traffic safety programs, but Mayor Muriel Bowser redirected the funds back into the general budget, where they have remained since.

Whether D.C.’s likely next mayor will do anything differently remains to be seen. Asked by The Washington Sun whether reducing parking and traffic fines would be on her radar, Ward 4 Council member Janeese Lewis George said there were more elements to consider than a ticket left on a windshield or mailed to a driver.

“We have to balance affordability and the conversation around enforcement and accountability,” she said. “We’ve also had a number of traffic crashes. We've lost lives. A number of times when we look up the tickets of the person who committed some of those dangerous behaviors they have a large amount of tickets. It’s a nuanced conversation.”

And one that she’s been hearing more and more about. “It’s the one thing people yell at me, they’ll say, ‘My tickets are too high!’” she added.

There have been other attempts to address the issue. Earlier this year D.C. implemented a pilot program where it gave a one-time 50% discount on minor traffic tickets to residents receiving food benefits, based on research showing that income-based fines can sometimes increase payment rates while promoting safer driving. A traffic safety bill authored by Allen and passed by the council in late 2024 would give residents a chance to take driver safety classes in lieu of paying $500 in traffic fines, but the program hasn’t been funded.

Trayon White has also introduced separate bills to address D.C.’s parking and traffic fines. One would expand the use of traffic amnesties, where the city waives fees and interest on unpaid fines during designated periods. Bowser ran a four-month amnesty in 2021, when more than 32,000 drivers settled tickets worth some $44 million in fines. Another of his bills would allow drivers to do community service in lieu of any fines they owe.]]> Natural Gas Will Be Used at RFK Stadium — Just for Cooking and Heating https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/natural-gas-power-plant-rfk-stadium Will Hofmann Officials say there won’t be a gas-fired power plant built, but some community members remain skeptical. Thu, 22 Oct 2026 09:05:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/natural-gas-power-plant-rfk-stadium Protesters against natural gas at RFK Stadium.
A coalition of nonprofits and neighborhood organizations held a press conference to denounce the idea of a power plant at RFK. (Will Hofmann/The Washington Sun)
A natural gas-fired power plant won’t be built as part of the 180-acre redevelopment of the RFK Stadium Campus, officials said Wednesday following a flurry of activity from community and environmental organizers who worried that project leaders could be walking back some green energy commitments.

In a statement to The Washington Sun on Wednesday, a spokesperson from the RFK Project Management Office said “there is no need for, nor will there be, a natural gas-fired power plant” as part of the $3.8 billion project. Along with new green space and parks, the RFK Campus Master Plan calls for over 5,500 new housing units, with 30% of them to be dedicated as affordable. The redevelopment is expected to bring over $4 billion in new tax revenue and create 2,000 permanent jobs, according to the master plan.

Though no power plant is planned, natural gas is expected to be used in the project regardless — just to keep fans warm and cook their hot dogs come opening day, a Washington Commanders official said Wednesday. Given the size and scale of the project, using “minimal” natural gas for heating and cooking would be required because of power capacity and to stay on track for a 2030 opening.

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

The use of natural gas in the project will require an exemption to the Greener Government Buildings Amendment Act of 2022, which forbids the use of fossil fuels in publicly funded projects. The exemption would be reviewed by the Green Building Advisory Council.

On Wednesday, a coalition of nonprofits and neighborhood organizations held a press conference to denounce the idea of building a new gas-fired power plant at the site. Attendees held signs stating, “GAS at RFK = POISON to people + planet” and “Burning gas at RFK? It’s a trick play. Block it.”

It still feels “very unclear what the plan is,” Mark Rodeffer, the political committee chair for the Sierra Club of the District of Columbia, said Wednesday. While officials have indicated they are not planning a power plant, a March request for proposals for an RFK redevelopment energy plan indicated a contractor would evaluate “the integration of a combined heat and power natural gas facility” in the RFK redevelopment.

Even if a natural gas facility is not included in the plan, Rodeffer said it was “outrageous” that a request to evaluate integrating one was in the RFP. The final energy plan is yet to be released. Officials have also complicated the language used to refer to the energy plan.

During a Sept. 30 hearing, Department of Buildings Director Brian Hanlon said that a natural gas power plant was “not under consideration,” but also said there would be a blended solution of “electricity to the stadium and natural gas systems” in order to open by 2030. Many attendees at the October press conference, like Rodeffer, had expressed concerns about the project during the hearing.

The final energy plan is expected to conclude later this year, which would coincide with a plan to hire an energy developer, Hanlon said during the hearing.]]> DOJ Watchdog Declines to Probe Jeanine Pirro’s Reflecting Pool Prosecution https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/doj-watchdog-declines-to-probe-jeanine-pirro-reflecting-pool-prosecution The Associated Press David Hearn's team argues that the watchdog is uniquely positioned to dig into allegations of misconduct against the government officials involved in the case. Wed, 21 Oct 2026 15:46:42 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/doj-watchdog-declines-to-probe-jeanine-pirro-reflecting-pool-prosecution The Washington Monument and U.S. Capitol building are seen past the fenced off Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool
Samuel Corum/Sipa USA via AP
By Eric Tucker

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Department of Justice's inspector general has declined to investigate the handling of the criminal case against a former Olympian cleared of accusations that he intentionally damaged the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, according to a letter Wednesday from the man's lawyers.

The internal watchdog told David Hearn's lawyers that the allegations of professional misconduct that they made fall outside its jurisdiction and are instead within the purview of the department's Office of Professional Responsibility, according to the letter, which urges Inspector General Don R. Berthiaume to reconsider the decision.

“Given the substantial public attention devoted to this matter, and the significant questions raised concerning the conduct of federal officials, declining independent review would risk undermining public confidence in the Department’s ability to police its own conduct. Such a result would be inconsistent with the purposes for which Congress established the OIG and would be a betrayal of its mission,” the letter says.

Hearn's lawyers this month had asked for investigations by the inspectors general at the departments of Justice and Interior, citing a broad variety of “incompetence and misconduct” that they said occurred during the criminal investigation and prosecution of their client. They say they believe they have identified potential crimes in the Trump administration's handling of the case, including witness tampering, obstruction of justice and the subornation of false testimony.

The Justice Department moved to dismiss the case last summer, saying newly produced evidence from the Interior Department showed that Hearn, 67, of Bethesda, Maryland, was not responsible for damage to the pool’s lining. A District of Columbia judge later permanently threw out the prosecution.

Hearn’s lawyers said in their initial letter to the watchdogs that the evidence that established their client’s innocence had been in the Justice Department’s possession for weeks and was “simply ignored.” They asked the inspectors general to investigate why prosecutors “rushed to indict” under what they said was pressure from Republican President Donald Trump, who had launched a massive renovation project of the Reflecting Pool for the celebration in Washington of America's 250th anniversary.

In renewing their request for an inspector general investigation, Hearn's team argues that the watchdog is uniquely positioned — both in terms of tools and independence — to dig into allegations of misconduct against the government officials involved in the case.

They note that unlike the inspector general's office, the Office of Professional Responsibility, which also investigates some categories of professional misconduct, reports to the deputy attorney general and attorney general and has no obligation to publicize its work or report its findings to Congress.

Hearn's lawyers also say the inspector general is the right office to investigate the potential criminal misconduct they believe they have identified within the government, asserting that prosecutors elicited false testimony from a witness who testified before the grand jury and violated Hearn's civil rights by proceeding with a flawed criminal case. They say the inspector general should investigate whether U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, whose office handled the case, violated ethical rules in a news conference when she announced charges against Hearn.

The U.S. attorney's office did not respond to a request seeking comment when Hearn's attorneys raised the allegations earlier this month.

Among Hearn's attorneys is Michael Bromwich, a Justice Department inspector general during the Clinton administration.

“In a case such as this one, when some of the allegations directly involve the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, there is substantial reason to question whether any meaningful independent review would occur,” the lawyers' letter says. “Your decision not to investigate would be consigning these serious allegations to oblivion despite the enormous public interest in the matter and the absence thus far of any accountability for the individuals involved.”]]> He’s Adapted to a Wheelchair. He Wishes D.C. Would, Too. https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-wheelchair-accessibility-hearing-metro-uber Zara Norman Alex Graf and other disability advocates are supporting a bill that would improve their access to rideshares. Wed, 21 Oct 2026 09:20:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-wheelchair-accessibility-hearing-metro-uber Alex Graf and his wife Nina
Alex Graf and his wife Nina, right, take the Red Line downtown to testify before the D.C. Council. (Kainaz Amaria/The Washington Sun)
Alex Graf is getting used to the idea that he’s no longer a punctual guy.

The rapid onset of a disorder affecting his spinal cord last summer forced the 36-year-old to transition from walking and running around his Takoma Park neighborhood to using a 400-pound powerchair. Now, Graf can expect to be late — late to work meetings, late to physical therapy appointments, late getting home to his wife and two toddlers.

“Being disabled is hard, but it’s mostly on other people,” he said. “You're ceding the control of your own time, and you're ceding it to people who don't care, honestly. And not people, but systems.”

There’s one elevator at the Takoma Station Metro. Until last year, Graf could count on a reliable commute to Gallery Place each morning on the Red Line. Metro is still the best way to get around D.C., he said — indeed, the system is often lauded as one of the world’s most accessible for wheelchair users.

“It is accessible when functional,” he said. “If that elevator goes down, you're out of luck.”
When that happens, there’s no good solution. Either Graf tracks down the station manager and arranges for a Metro Access ride to the next closest station — which typically takes an hour — or he orders a wheelchair-accessible Uber (Lyft doesn’t offer accessible rides in D.C.).
AlexGraf_wheelchair_101926_0116.jpg (8192x5464, AR: 1.50)“It's barely a service,” he said of Uber. “The last 20 times I've tried to take rideshare, I've had five successful trips, which renders it useless. If you'[ve] got 25% odds of being able to go somewhere, you may not get there, but are you really going to chance it to get back?”

Those frustrations drove Graf and his wife, Nina, to testify before the D.C. Council on Monday on a bill that would require rideshare platforms to ensure wheelchair-accessible rides arrive in no more than 110% of the average wait for standard rides, ban drivers from refusing service to disabled people, and pay 10 cents per non-accessible ride for a fund that would purchase more wheelchair-accessible vehicles, or WAVs.

“Seeing his time not respected, and frankly, our kids having to wait on him, has been horrible. It’s just straight up unfair,” said Nina. “They need to make a change. I think this bill is a great step in the right direction.”

***
Alex and Nina, who both work on health care policy issues, met in 2015 on OkCupid. The dating website rated them as an almost 100% compatibility match. They both attended the University of Wisconsin as undergraduates but had never met. They individually moved to D.C. more than a decade ago. After meeting and dating for three years, they moved to Takoma Park together in 2018 and got married the following year. They now have a 1-year-old daughter and a 3-year-old son.

Life is much the same for the couple as it was before Alex began using a wheelchair. They still have the same jobs, home, kids and commute. The same hobbies and interests.

“A lot of people say something along the lines of, ‘Man, I can't imagine being you, having young kids and a disabled husband.’ It's like, we have a lot of fun! We are adapting,” Nina said. “There's things that are really hard, but we're the same people. It's not the disability itself, it's the systems that are the most painful for us to adapt to.”

Take Monday, when the couple tried to access the Wilson Building to testify on the rideshare bill. Unable to scale the grand stairs at the building’s main entrance, Alex entered via a ramp at a side entrance. There, a security guard waved a wand over Alex’s powerchair to clear him for entry but told Nina she’d have to leave her husband and go through the main entrance.
AlexGraf_wheelchair_101926_0863.jpg (7685x5123, AR: 1.50)“That's a great example of just what it's been like to adapt. We have to separate,” said Nina, striding toward the steps at the entrance.

She waited for him on the fifth floor, outside the hearing room.

“It just feels sad,” she said. “I just want to be with my husband.”

***
Alex has lived in the D.C. area since 2012, but in the last year, he’s come to see it with new eyes. Or, perhaps, to see it for what it always was.

“I just had no idea any of this was a problem,” he said. “And then, you're living it.”

He began sharing his frustrations on an Instagram page, but he wants to convert that anger into action. One of his ideas is to have Metro announce when an upcoming station has an elevator outage. WMATA tracks them online and supplies email updates, but those aren’t always up to date. Alex has been left stranded on the platform many times — particularly at Gallery Place, the station closest to his work, where multiple elevators need to be functioning in order for him to both cross the platform and exit. WMATA did not respond to a request for comment on whether it could implement such announcements.

His other idea: improve door-to-door wheelchair-accessible transit options including rideshares, taxicabs and city paratransit. As Alex discovered on Monday, plenty of people share his view.

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

He and Nina stopped at the Pret A Manger on F Street ahead of the 9:30 a.m. hearing to pick up coffees. They found three disabled women enjoying their beverages at a long, communal table — also gearing up to testify.

They swapped horror stories. One woman had waited for hours for Metro Access to pick her up after Sunday church service just the day before. Another, Heidi Case, encouraged Alex to give the council as much data as he could on how many rides had canceled on him.

“That is one of the big pushes in our testimony: data,” said Case. “It sells to government, and it creates lawsuits.”
AlexGraf_wheelchair_101926_0715.jpg (8192x5464, AR: 1.50)It was fun to be around other people with disabilities, Alex said. Especially this group: smart, supportive, self-assured. When they reached the hearing room, Case had council aides clear a couple rows of chairs for them. They deserved to be up front. As the hearing got underway, and wheelchair users took the microphone to testify, Alex and Nina continued to swap looks, share nods, drop jaws. They weren’t alone.

When one person testified about the mental load of needing to constantly monitor web pages and apps for Metro elevator outages, they weren’t alone. When another laughed off Uber and Lyft’s argument that they are technology, not transportation, companies, and so don’t need to offer accessible rides, they weren’t alone.

“How do you respond to industry concerns that it would not be possible to provide 100% equal service?” asked Ward 1 D.C. Council member Brianne Nadeau, who introduced the bill, to one group of people testifying.

“I would like to ask them, why? Because other places do, and I don't think they're in a different universe or have different financial systems or physics,” responded Kelly Mack, a wheelchair user and accessibility advocate.

“What do you think is an appropriate timeline for WAV compliance?” the council member asked.

“I kind of think 20 years ago?” Mack quipped.

They laughed; they weren’t alone.
AlexGraf_wheelchair_101926_1067.jpg (8192x5464, AR: 1.50)AlexGraf_wheelchair_101926_1188.jpg (8192x5464, AR: 1.50)When Alex testified, he led with the data. He talked about how in the parallel universe that was 15 months ago, he could easily get picked up by these same Ubers in three or four minutes. He could book rides ahead, which is an impossibility when requesting WAVs.

“We should not allow companies to operate in the District while offering one service to people who walk, and a lesser one to people who roll,” he testified. “These are some of the largest, most sophisticated companies in the world. They can solve this. They have done it in other cities, but only when they have been required to do so. Equal access is not a stretch goal. It should be the cost of doing business here.”

Representatives from both Uber and Lyft testified opposing the bill. Their primary argument is that since drivers are contractors with their own vehicles, the companies can’t be responsible for a lack of WAV service. Instead, the city should work on increasing its supply of WAVs and then contract with their platforms. Waymo and other autonomous vehicle companies made a similar argument in a recent public hearing.

“There needs to be better WAV access; we don’t believe this bill does it,” Briana Gilmore, Uber’s head of global accessibility policy, told The Washington Sun.

If D.C. modernized its taxicabs’ payment platforms, Uber could contract with wheelchair-accessible cabs, Gilmore said. Since 20% of the city’s cab fleets have to be accessible by law, taxis currently offer the most WAVs. The city could also allow paratransit to contract with rideshare services, Gilmore added.

The bill proposes charging rideshare companies 10 cents per non-accessible ride to fund the development of more WAVs. Uber sent emails to customers Tuesday saying that any fee could be passed on to them directly, according to an email reviewed by a Sun reporter.

“The bill would penalize platforms for trips no accessible vehicle is available to take, which won’t add a single WAV to the road. Instead, we should better study the current WAV landscape in the District to best understand riders’ accessibility needs and how providers can better meet them,” a Lyft spokesperson said in a statement shared with The Sun.

Advocates, on the other hand, want to strengthen the bill and even increase that fee. Nina pushed for real enforcement — something that would ensure disabled riders get picked up quickly and are not discriminated against — and a timeline to roll these initiatives out.

Until then, she and Alex will be waiting.

“In July, Alex waited two hours for an Uber to get home from work. [My son] asked when his dad would finally be home. I explained his dad was still waiting for a ride home, and my son asked why,” she said, in testimony that moved Nadeau to tears. “How do you explain discrimination and that level of unfairness to my 3-year-old?”
AlexGraf_wheelchair_101926_0583.jpg (7564x5042, AR: 1.50)The kids miss their dad when he has to go through separate security screenings or building entrances, or when he comes home late, but ultimately, Nina said, the chair doesn’t make much of a difference to them. They ride in Alex’s lap to day care each morning. Last Halloween, just a couple months after Alex began using his powerchair, their 3-year-old dressed as a wheelchair-accessible van to go trick-or-treating — a cardboard box with a wheelchair symbol and Maryland plates.

“You see things from the perspective of kids, and it really changes you, too. Kids adapt,” Nina said. “They see joy.”]]> Five Takeaways From the D.C. Council’s Big Hearing on New Taxes https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-council-possible-tax-increases Martin Austermuhle Lawmakers and experts are split on whether the answer to D.C.’s challenging economic situation is asking the wealthy to pay a bigger share or limiting spending. Tue, 20 Oct 2026 09:25:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-council-possible-tax-increases Phil Mendelson
D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson. (Francis Chung/POLITICO via AP)
Last Friday, the D.C. Council held a nine-hour hearing on the thing most taxpayers never want to hear about: possible tax increases.

The discussion came amid challenging economic times in the city and ahead of a significant political change in D.C. that will see a new mayor take office in January. A range of experts and advocates made their pitch to the council, some urging lawmakers to make the wealthy pay a bigger share and others countering that now is the time to limit existing spending.

We wouldn’t expect you to sit through the entire hearing yourself, so here are our main takeaways.

There’s no silver bullet — at least not a quick one.

This much was undisputed leading into and during Friday’s hearing: D.C. is facing a deficit next year of anywhere between $600 and $800 million in a roughly $11 billion local budget.

While some lawmakers argued that existing spending needed to be scrutinized, the hearing itself was an indication that a number of council members believe that some type of taxes may have to be raised next year.

But even advocates of the idea likely came away from the hearing understanding there aren’t many workable options that could quickly raise revenue — and the ones that exist would only pull in enough extra cash to fill the expected hole, not fund much else beyond it.

“A word of caution: The reality is the financial proposals on the table … are unlikely to support massive new spending programs,” said Ward 5 Council member Zachary Parker. “We need to continue to do the hard work of improving our procurement systems to deliver better results and cut bloated spending in the budget.”

Of the tax-hike ideas that could bring in substantially more money, aides to D.C. CFO Glen Lee made clear that implementing those wouldn’t happen overnight — in fact, they warned, it could take between 12 and 24 months.

None of this is to say that taxes will be increased next year. On Monday, Chair Phil Mendelson noted that the budget for the current fiscal year was $1 billion leaner than the year prior. “We were able to move forward without a major tax increase,” he said.

Whether to raise taxes next year, he added, will be a political choice, not an undeniable necessity. But with anywhere from two to four new lawmakers joining the council between January and early summer, Mendelson may well find himself in the minority.

There was a lot of talk about taxing law firms and lobbyists — but it’s complicated.

There’s not a ton of political sympathy out there for lawyers or lobbyists, so it’s easy to understand how a tax proposal targeting them would seem like an easy sell. The reality, of course, is much more complicated.

For years, some advocates in D.C. have called on the city to impose what’s known as a Business Activity Tax, or a new levy that would hit law firms, lobbying shops and consultancies owned by nonresidents who can claim all the profit as personal income, thus allowing them to avoid paying the city’s usual business taxes. Proponents say it’s a matter of simple fairness: If a normal business operating in D.C. has to pay business taxes, why should a law firm owned by someone who lives in Maryland get to skip out? (Layered on top of this is another unfair reality, they add: Congress has prohibited D.C. from taxing the income of nonresidents.)

“This moment isn’t about maintaining the status quo or kicking the can down the road. It means taking a hard look at who contributes to [government] services and who our tax code lets off the hook,” said Ward 4 Council member Janeese Lewis George, who is expected to be D.C.’s next mayor and during her campaign endorsed imposing a Business Activity Tax in order to fund her plan to bring down the cost of child care.

Advocates say a 2% BAT could bring in $500 million a year and broaden the city’s tax base, making it more resistant to periodic economic ups and downs. They also say it’s not an outlandish proposal: New Hampshire has had one for years without apparent negative impacts to the state’s business climate.

Critics, though, warned that any tax that targets lawyers is likely to end up in court, potentially delaying the revenue it promises to bring in. Additionally, past efforts to impose a BAT envisioned it as part of a broader revenue-neutral package, where the new tax could be largely offset by decreases in other business taxes.

Finally, former Mayor Anthony Williams cautioned that as D.C.’s commercial property values continue to fall, taking aim at lawyers and lobbyists who may still have offices in downtown D.C. isn’t a particularly wise move. “I think we’re just making it harder for some firms that are a key component of the office economy to stay in D.C.,” he said. “That’s not a risk worth taking.”

Eat the rich — or not?

While the council could consider any type of tax increase, it’s been clear that the goal is to target D.C.’s wealthiest households.

Ward 1 Council member Brianne Nadeau wants to impose a 3% surcharge on capital gains, piggybacking on an existing federal tax. The tax would target individuals making more than $400,000 a year, or couples pulling in north of $500,000. The total take: an estimated $200 million a year in new revenue. And Ward 3 Council member Matt Frumin has proposed a pied-à-terre tax, essentially a higher property tax rate on homes worth more than $2.5 million that aren’t occupied by their owner year-round.

“The goal is simple: Protect ordinary wages and ensure that those who receive substantial returns from accumulated wealth contribute fairly to the city we all depend on,” said Nadeau.

Lee, the city’s CFO, said that D.C.’s wealthiest residents already shoulder a significant share of the city’s tax burden. Just over 12,000 people — 3.5% of all taxpayers — contributed more than $1.4 billion to the city’s tax coffers in 2024, or 42% of the city’s total take that year. They’re also positioned to find clever ways to avoid higher taxes if any new ones are imposed.

Opinions were split on whether higher taxes would push wealthy residents to leave D.C., especially since lower-tax Virginia is just over the Potomac River. Some experts said research suggested that was likely to happen, while others said tax flight would be minimal or nonexistent.

But Williams said that by increasing taxes, whether on wealthy individuals or some businesses, lawmakers would be sending the wrong signal to people it should be looking to keep, as well as people it could be looking to attract. Instead, he said, the council and new mayor should develop some type of “grand compromise” that focuses on a combination of spending cuts, some tax breaks for businesses and incremental tax increases that are broadly applied.

“Everyone is coming to the table and giving up something for the greater good,” he said. “The council can send a powerful signal that will trigger economic growth.”

Raising the sales tax or property taxes will be a tougher sell.

While taxing law firms and wealthy homeowners got the most attention, lawmakers have also been considering broader tax hikes, including by raising the city’s existing sales tax by a percentage point or imposing an across-the-board increase on property taxes.

“We are going to have to do something courageous in the next budget,” said Elissa Silverman, an at-large council member.

Many of her colleagues said they’d want to avoid across-the-board tax increases, largely because they could disproportionately impact lower-income residents. That’s especially the case with the D.C. sales tax, which Mayor Muriel Bowser has pushed to increase to 7% from the current 6%.

Still, Mendelson said on Monday that the council should think about tax hikes that would affect everyone, not just the wealthy. And that could start with increasing the city’s sales tax, since the underlying rationale would be to create a more reliable funding stream for the Metro. “I do think that some of the negatives have been overstated,” he said of a sales tax increase.

There was one point of agreement: D.C. needs a better way.

While lawmakers and others who spoke at the hearing differed on the particulars of various tax hikes — and whether tax increases were even necessary — there was something of a consensus that D.C.’s current process for digging into spending and raising revenue isn’t working.

Consider: Friday’s hearing was the council’s first dedicated deep dive into tax policy in as long as anyone could remember, and every time lawmakers have increased taxes in recent years, it’s happened at the last-minute during the budget process, with little chance for residents to explore benefits and drawbacks.

“There’s a better way to do this,” said Nadeau.

Some lawmakers are pushing for the council to create a new commission that would be empowered to dig into city spending and tax proposals; others simply want Mendelson to revive the council’s finance and revenue committee, which he disbanded six years ago.

“It may be worth us looking at a neutral body that can look at government spending and produce recommendations,” said Parker.

D.C. did have the Tax Revision Commission, which was supposed to meet once a decade and produce recommendations for making the city’s tax code more equitable and competitive, but it imploded in 2024 over disagreements about implementing a Business Activity Tax.

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.]]> D.C. General Election Guide: What to Know Before Nov. 3 https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-general-election-guide Michael Brice-Saddler On the heels of a crowded June primary, voters still have plenty left to decide. Mon, 19 Oct 2026 09:10:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-general-election-guide electionday_dc_edits/_C0A3769 copy.jpg
Even after a competitive June primary, D.C. voters have plenty to decide in the general election. (Kainaz Amaria/The Washington Sun)
On the heels of a crowded June primary, D.C. voters might assume the city’s biggest political decisions are already in the books.

With Democrats holding a decisive registration advantage across the District, nominees Janeese Lewis George for mayor and Robert White for congressional delegate enter the Nov. 3 election as heavy favorites. Yet even frontrunners facing nominal competition say they are taking nothing for granted, routinely reminding supporters that they must still win the general election to secure victory.

The main event is the fight for two available at-large council seats.

That contest will work differently this year thanks to the general-election debut of ranked-choice voting — a structural shift that fundamentally alters how ballots are cast and counted.

Add a citywide measure on restaurant menus to the mix, and D.C. voters still have plenty left to decide.

Here is your guide to what’s on the Nov. 3 ballot, how the new math functions and what you need to know before marking your grid.

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

The At-Large Race and the New Math

The pick-two era is officially over. District voters have long been able to make two selections on their ballot for the two open at-large D.C. council seats. Under the city’s new ranked-choice voting system, voters now face a grid prompting them to rank candidates from first to fifth choice.

This shift has created a unique mathematical quirk in the general election.

To determine the two winners, election officials eliminate candidates with the lowest vote totals round by round until two remain. But because each ballot carries only one active vote at a time, a ballot locked on a winning frontrunner stays frozen — meaning your secondary rankings are never used to help select a second winner.

The dynamic stems from the District’s 1973 Home Rule Act, which reserves two of the council’s four at-large seats for non-majority party members. Combining those two seats into a single ranked race means a vote locked on a frontrunner swallows down-ballot influence for the second seat.

In deep-blue Washington, Democratic nominee Oye Owolewa is expected to draw a significant share of first-choice rankings. But Democrats whose votes stay locked with Owolewa effectively surrender their say in deciding which candidate claims the reserved non-majority seat.

That reality has altered traditional campaign strategies.

Independent incumbent Elissa Silverman — who won a June special election to fill the seat vacated by Kenyan McDuffie — has urged her supporters to rank her number one, explicitly warning that ranking a Democrat first impacts her chances.

Owolewa is countering by asking Democrats to lock in his victory as their top pick. Meanwhile, Republican Darrell Green and Statehood Green candidate Darryl Moch are competing for those same top-tier rankings in hopes of pulling off an upset.

Confusion caused by this change has been compounded by delays in voter education materials from the D.C. Board of Elections, which told The Washington Sun it faced procurement delays at the start of the fiscal year.

Janeese Lewis George (7619x5080, AR: 1.50)
The Top of the Ticket

Other races on the general election ballot follow more traditional dynamics. In the mayoral contest, Lewis George is heavily favored to succeed retiring Mayor Muriel Bowser. She faces Independent Rhonda Hamilton and Statehood Green candidate Robert L. Gross.

In the race to succeed Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton as D.C.’s nonvoting voice in Congress, White faces Republican Denise Rosado and Statehood Green candidate Kymone Freeman.

Further down the ballot, two Democratic incumbents in citywide seats are seeking another term: Council Chairman Phil Mendelson faces Republican challenger Abi-Ananiah Prudent, while Attorney General Brian Schwalb defends his seat against Republican Manuel Rivera.

In the ward-level council races, three Democratic incumbents are defending their seats alongside one open-seat race:

  • Ward 1: Democratic nominee Aparna Raj faces Republican Jett James Jasper, independent Ryan Prince and Statehood Green candidate Jude Crannitch. 
  • Ward 3: Incumbent Matthew Frumin is running unopposed. 
  • Ward 5: Incumbent Zachary Parker faces Republican Jeffrey Kihien-Palza and Statehood Green candidate Joyce Robinson-Paul. 
  • Ward 6: Three-term incumbent Charles Allen faces Republican Jorge Rice
Voters will also weigh in on the city’s nonvoting shadow U.S. senator and representative seats, as well as several distinct ward-level seats on the State Board of Education.

A Ballot Measure on Foie Gras

Voters will also decide on Initiative No. 86, officially titled the Prohibiting Force-Feeding of Birds Act of 2026. A “yes” vote supports banning the force-feeding of poultry to produce foie gras and prohibits sale or distribution of those products in the District.

How and When to Vote 

Ballots were mailed to all registered D.C. voters in late September. You can return yours by mail — as long as it is postmarked by Election Day — or drop it into one of the city’s secure 24/7 ballot drop boxes.

  • Early Voting: Runs daily from Monday, Oct. 26 through Sunday, Nov. 1 between 8:30 a.m. and 7 p.m.
  • Election Day: Vote centers are open Tuesday, Nov. 3 from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
  • Same-Day Registration: Available at any early voting center or Election Day polling place with proof of D.C. residence. 
Polling locations and drop box sites can be found on the D.C. Board of Elections website.
]]> With Budget Gap Looming, D.C. Council Starts Talking About Tax Increases https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-council-tax-increase Martin Austermuhle The revenue is tempting, but critics say the last thing the city’s weak economy needs right now is tax hikes. Fri, 16 Oct 2026 09:20:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/dc-council-tax-increase Wilson Building
The D.C. Council will start debating a range of possible tax increases Friday. (Francis Chung/POLITICO/AP)
In what could be viewed as either a necessary attempt to correct D.C.’s historic economic inequalities or a foolhardy push to soak the rich amidst a downturn in the city, on Friday the D.C. Council will start debating a range of possible tax increases that could hit everything from investment income and second homes to law firms’ and lobbyists’ currently untaxed proceeds.

The hearing represents the first time in years that lawmakers have dived into the details of whether — and how — to raise more revenue and make the tax code fairer. It also comes at a time of profound change for D.C., with a new mayor set to take office in January but already facing a likely $600 million budget deficit and slowing economic growth.

“The city faces a big shortfall and we’re going to have to solve it either by cuts or revenue increases or a combination of the two,” said Ward 3 council member Matt Frumin. “The track record of the city has been to come forward with a revenue raiser at the last minute in the budget process with no deliberation around it. What this hearing is is a constructive conversation about what are our options.”

While there are differences of opinion on the wisdom of raising taxes — and how D.C. could do it — this much is uncontested: The city’s economy and the growing revenue streams it long provided lawmakers are down, in part because of a return to normality that never happened after the pandemic and also the more recent cuts to the federal workforce that have cost the city more than 36,000 jobs in the last year.

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

The council has already had to deal with two difficult budget cycles that saw increasing fights over smaller pots of money for social services that have gotten more expensive — even as the need for them has remained steady.

“For the past several years we’ve said, ‘Maybe we need to wait until everyone is back in the office and DOGE is done and tourists are back.’ So we’ve been doing a lot of one-time things, and we’re coming to the end of these measures,” said Joe Bishop-Henchman, vice president of the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, an Advisory Neighborhood Commission member in Ward 5 and one of the 23 invited witnesses who will be testifying at Friday’s hearing.

“That only leaves hard decisions on spending and revenue,” he adds.

That’s especially the case now, as D.C. faces an estimated 2028 budget deficit of $600 million to $800 million that the new mayor — expected to be Ward 4 council member Janeese Lewis George — will be saddled with.

A number of tax-increase ideas have already been floated by lawmakers and hinted at by Lewis George, and those will serve as a foundation of today’s discussion. One, proposed by Ward 1 council member Brianne Nadeau, would take an existing federal tax on investment income and apply it locally to wealthy residents. The tax would produce an estimated $200 million in revenue the first year and $100 million a year after.

“The discussion around the Wealth Proceeds Tax comes down to the fact that we tax 100% of other types of income, so why aren’t we taxing these other sources of income? It’s just a matter of fairness,” Nadeau told The Sun. “People at the very top are doing very well, and it’s not an onerous tax.”

This isn’t the first time Nadeau has proposed raising taxes on wealthy households. In 2021 she led a successful charge — joined by Lewis George — to increase marginal tax rates on residents who make over $250,000 a year, with the revenue directed to cover pay increases for child care workers, more housing vouchers for homeless residents and expanded tax credits for low-income families.

But for Yesim Sayin, executive director of the D.C. Policy Center, that Nadeau’s new tax would target capital gains is risky. “This is all great when we have capital gains doing so well. But this could all go bust in a bad year. It’s very volatile,” she said. (Glen Lee, D.C.’s chief financial officer, has pointed out that one of the city’s few bright revenue spots is capital gains revenue because the stock market has been growing, though he has agreed it’s a source that is “subject to wild and sudden swings.”)

Frumin has taken a different approach, proposing his own version of New York City’s pied-à-terre tax, which targets secondary homes where the owner isn’t living on a full-time basis.

“The idea behind it is there are people who have a tax strategy which is to live in the District for one day less than six months, establish residence in a low- or no-tax state, and so they pay their property tax there and they’re here for half a year but they don’t pay income tax here. They’re employing a tax strategy, but we too have the right to employ a tax strategy to respond,” he said.

Bishop-Henchman is skeptical. “The proposal exempts members of Congress. Once you subtract those, who really is left? I would be skeptical that it would be a cash cow like NYC,” he said. Per Frumin’s office, the tax would target only 600 homeowners in D.C. and bring in an estimated $130 million over four years.

Probably the highest-profile, most lucrative and most controversial idea is a Business Activity Tax, which Lewis George has said she supports. It would take aim at law firms, consultancies and lobbying shops that are owned by nonresidents but don’t pay the city’s normal business tax because profits are treated as revenue for the owner — and Congress has prohibited D.C. from taxing nonresident income.

“The purpose of the BAT is to make sure all businesses are contributing to our shared resources, and right now there are many that are not because of the federal limitation on us,” said Erica Williams, executive director of the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute, which favors tax increases. “A BAT helps us to broaden our tax base. That’s a good thing. That builds strength and resilience.”

Bishop-Henchman, who recently wrote an analysis of the proposed tax, questions whether it’s even legal — and notes that it would likely spur litigation. “This will be a big tax on out-of-state lawyers,” he said. In 2021, Maryland imposed a new tax on digital ads, but it was struck down this year and the state was ordered to pay refunds to those who paid the tax over the last five years.

Another challenge would be implementing a BAT. In July, the council asked the CFO to produce a report by January outlining what it would take to adopt the new tax.

Sayin believes lawmakers should focus on addressing how D.C. spends money, looking at “what drives costs, whether programs achieve their goals and which services the District can sustain.” That’s something Ward 5 council member Zachary Parker said he agrees with.

“I’ve been working to caution advocates to say that even if we were to raise taxes significantly and generated hundreds of millions of dollars, it would only keep us at pace with where we are now,” he said. “The only way we’re only going to be able to raise taxes and advance investments is by cutting our current spending. There are ways we can look at our bloated budget, look at agency spending and overspending and cut there while also making sure we fairly tax wealth.”

Still, Frumin said he appreciates the chances to broadly discuss and debate the merits and drawbacks of a number of ideas without the expectation that they will become reality soon. There’s little expectation the council would approve any tax increase this year, but it could tee something up to align with budget-writing season next spring.

Frumin also wants to proceed carefully, considering the city’s weak economy. “I will be sensitive to the possibility of different proposals driving away businesses or high-income people,” he said. “You do have to be careful of straws that break camels’ backs.”]]> How Metro Turned L’Enfant Plaza Into a ‘Laboratory’ https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/metro-signs-lenfant-plaza Will Hofmann Metro uses the station as a testing ground for new wayfinding tools. Are they working? Fri, 16 Oct 2026 09:15:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/metro/metro-signs-lenfant-plaza L'Enfant Plaza
At L’Enfant Plaza, signs hanging above the third rail have more negative space, an updated medium-weight Helvetica font and exits labeled by letters. (Torrie Herrington/The Washington Sun)
The Bond family had only been in D.C. for five days, but public transit had already become a reliable resource.

The stations had been simple to navigate, Kise Bond said, and her kids had enjoyed riding the Metro. At L’Enfant Plaza, they appreciated the alphabetically coded entrances and exits.

“Just the fact that you have a Metro is amazing,” said Colton Bond, who was holding on to his family’s luggage as they waited for a Silver Line train to be whisked away toward their flight back to Salem, Oregon.

But the Bonds didn’t know they were joining the 14,000 other daily entrants at L’Enfant in one big experiment.

For the last three years, L’Enfant Plaza has been the hub for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s trials and tests on the Metro system’s signage. Officials refer to it as the system’s “live laboratory.”

Sign up for The Washington Sun Metro newsletter for essential coverage of the D.C. region.

Conveniently located next to Metro’s headquarters and just a short walk from the National Mall, the agency has simulated the station in virtual reality, used it to launch numerous sign iterations — ranging from bright, real-time digital station displays to minimalist Helvetica text above the third rail — and recently selected it as the first to receive updates as part of its $37.8 million wayfinding program.

After a 2023 study found that 39% of Metro passengers had used the wrong station exit and 23% had boarded a train headed in the wrong direction, testing at L’Enfant began as a process to consolidate signage across the system and improve accessibility, Brian Anderson, Metro’s acting vice president for customer experience initiatives, told The Washington Sun during a tour of the station. The agency has between 20 and 25 different sign types across its 98 active stations, Anderson said. The hope is to get that number down to just 10 to 15.

But while some of the pilot program’s sign changes were small, even incremental, the rollout of the wayfinding program has created the most customer heartburn so far.

Online, riders have expressed dismay about the new signs, describing them as “not well done” or “Metro enshitification.” The pushback to one proposed change — removing stripes around pylons outside of Metro stops — led WMATA to reverse course.

From old to new, signs on the walls of Metro stations will no longer include route endpoints indicating direction, and some signs, like those on platforms or near exits, will include points of interest like airports or the National Zoo. All signs hanging above third rails have more negative space, a minimalist design choice that has come with an updated medium-weight Helvetica font. Exits will no longer be labeled by street but by letters.
_MG_3957 copy 2.jpg (5710x3807, AR: 1.50)Importantly, no signs will include cardinal directions, a change made to increase accessibility and reflect that not all lines, like the U-shaped Red Line, follow linear directions. Within the next five years, all stations are expected to have the new signage, Metro said.

Cleaning up visual clutter — like reducing the number of names, arrows and colors on signs — will likely decrease the chance that users are confused in stations, said Jihyun Song, a wayfinding researcher who takes the Silver Line on her way to work at George Washington University.

But some changes, particularly the removal of directions from wall signs, may leave customers confused, Song said.

Laura Heatherly, who is visually impaired and uses a mobility cane to navigate, said the removal of directional indicators had actually made determining which train she’s waiting for at L’Enfant more difficult.

“I can normally look at a sign and easily find my way around, but now I can’t tell which one is going north or south. I usually have to ask around,” Heatherly, a frequent L’Enfant user, said while waiting on the Green-Yellow Line platform.

In some ways, the removal of information reflects a return to the ethos of the original design of the Metro and highlights an ongoing “special tension” between the agency’s aesthetics and the public, said Zachary Schrag, the author of “The Great Society Subway: A History of the Washington Metro.”
_MG_3905 copy 2.jpg (5490x3660, AR: 1.50)With fights about signage dating back to 1976, the battle over Metro aesthetics is as old as the system itself, Schrag said. Other battles have taken place over lighting or paint along the vault walls of Metro stops.

“People do get fussy about changes. I think one of the differences with this most recent wayfinding effort is that it was more deliberate and more public,” said Schrag, a professor of U.S. history at George Mason University. Before unveiling the changes, WMATA received over 13,000 comments on Metro signage, and the final product was approved by its Accessibility Advisory Committee, its Riders’ Advisory Committee and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts.

“You cannot always appeal 100% to every single person,” said Anderson, who at one point stopped to offer a customer directions during the tour. “But we are very confident in what we have delivered, and we appreciate the feedback.”

Still, some riders are oblivious to the L’Enfant laboratory.

Just before a recent afternoon rush hour, Leroy Ferguson said he hadn’t noticed the new minimalist text hanging over the third rail. A D.C. resident for 15 years, Ferguson uses the Metro every day. When he sees lost tourists, he offers them simple advice.

“Always follow the signs,” he said. “Always follow the signs.”
]]>