Council postpones vote on 1333 M Street SE tax abatement after members question $61 million estimated foregone revenue
May 06, 2025 | Legislative Meetings, Legislative, District of Columbia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Council on May 6 postponed final action on a proposed real property tax abatement for 1333 M Street Southeast, a multi-phase development in Ward 6, after several members raised questions about the project’s fiscal analysis and long-term benefits.
Chair Phil Mendelson and Councilmember McDuffie described the abatement as a tool to move a long-stalled redevelopment forward. The measure would cap taxes on the property at current levels and provide a tax abatement for amounts in excess of $150,000 per year for 15 years starting in 2029, according to Council discussion on the floor.
Financial questions and debate: Councilmember Mendelson said he had voted against the measure at first reading and reiterated financial concerns, referencing a Chief Financial Officer analysis (TAFA) he said estimated roughly $61 million in foregone revenue over the life of the abatement. Councilmember McDuffie and others argued the abatement was necessary to induce construction and deliver new housing, including more affordable units than required under Inclusionary Zoning, plus public-space improvements along the Anacostia waterfront.
Councilmember Robert White asked for more time to understand the net affordable-unit yield relative to the abatement’s cost; Councilmember Pinto called for clearer standards for abatement decisions across wards. A councilmember on the floor moved to postpone the matter to the next legislative meeting to allow more time to review the TAFA and project details; the motion carried.
What the abatement would fund or deliver: Council discussion identified several project benefits the proponents said motivated the abatement: additional affordable housing beyond IZ requirements, a neighborhood greenway on Water Street Southeast, an arrival plaza and waterfront plaza, reconstructed Virginia Avenue with bio-retention, 52 short-term bicycle spaces, and other public-space amenities.
Vote and next steps: The Council voted to postpone final action to the next legislative meeting to allow members time to review the TAFA and related materials. No final vote on the abatement was taken at this meeting.
Context: Committee testimony and prior approvals (including a PUD) were cited by supporters who said the abatement was necessary to secure financing amid high construction costs and rising interest rates. Opponents or skeptical members emphasised the district’s fiscal constraints and questioned whether the full abatement was justified for the entire multi-phase project.
Chair Phil Mendelson and Councilmember McDuffie described the abatement as a tool to move a long-stalled redevelopment forward. The measure would cap taxes on the property at current levels and provide a tax abatement for amounts in excess of $150,000 per year for 15 years starting in 2029, according to Council discussion on the floor.
Financial questions and debate: Councilmember Mendelson said he had voted against the measure at first reading and reiterated financial concerns, referencing a Chief Financial Officer analysis (TAFA) he said estimated roughly $61 million in foregone revenue over the life of the abatement. Councilmember McDuffie and others argued the abatement was necessary to induce construction and deliver new housing, including more affordable units than required under Inclusionary Zoning, plus public-space improvements along the Anacostia waterfront.
Councilmember Robert White asked for more time to understand the net affordable-unit yield relative to the abatement’s cost; Councilmember Pinto called for clearer standards for abatement decisions across wards. A councilmember on the floor moved to postpone the matter to the next legislative meeting to allow more time to review the TAFA and project details; the motion carried.
What the abatement would fund or deliver: Council discussion identified several project benefits the proponents said motivated the abatement: additional affordable housing beyond IZ requirements, a neighborhood greenway on Water Street Southeast, an arrival plaza and waterfront plaza, reconstructed Virginia Avenue with bio-retention, 52 short-term bicycle spaces, and other public-space amenities.
Vote and next steps: The Council voted to postpone final action to the next legislative meeting to allow members time to review the TAFA and related materials. No final vote on the abatement was taken at this meeting.
Context: Committee testimony and prior approvals (including a PUD) were cited by supporters who said the abatement was necessary to secure financing amid high construction costs and rising interest rates. Opponents or skeptical members emphasised the district’s fiscal constraints and questioned whether the full abatement was justified for the entire multi-phase project.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting