U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

39–998 PDF 2007

THE NEW DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS 

AT ST. ELIZABETHS: LOCAL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES 

(110–90) 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

DECEMBER 12, 2007 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

( 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman 

NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Vice 

Chair 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

JULIA CARSON, Indiana 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

NICK LAMPSON, Texas 

ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

MICHAEL A. ACURI, New York 

HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

TED POE, Texas 

DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JOHN R. ‘RANDY’ KUHL, JR., New York 

LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

THELMA D. DRAKE, Virginia 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

(II) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of Columbia, Chairwoman 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania, 

Vice Chair 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota 

(Ex Officio) 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

JOHN R. ‘RANDY’ KUHL, JR., New York 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

(Ex Officio) 

(III) 

(V) 

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... vi 

TESTIMONY 

Abdur-Rahman, Dawud, Director, Portfolio Management Division, National 

Capital Region, General Services Administration ............................................. 4 

Gay, Rear Admiral Earl, U.S. Navy, Commandant, Naval District Washington, Washington Navy Yard ........................................................................... 4 

Hopkins, Jr., Albert, President and CEO, Anacostia Economic Development 

Corporation ........................................................................................................... 23 

Imperato, John, Director, Corporate Information Management, Washington 

Navy Yard ............................................................................................................. 4 

James, Robert, President, Ward 8 Business Council ............................................ 23 

Lang, Barbara, CEO, D.C. Chamber of Commerce ............................................... 23 

Pannell, Philip, Executive Director, Anacostia Coordinating Council ................ 23 

Voudrie, Stan, Principal, Four Points, LLC .......................................................... 23 

Winstead, David, Commissioner, Public Buildings Service, General Services 

Administration ..................................................................................................... 4 

PREPARED STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Graves, Hon. Sam, of Missouri ............................................................................... 42 

Norton, Hon. Eleanor Holmes, of the District of Columbia ................................. 46 

Oberstar, Hon. James L., of Minnesota ................................................................. 51 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES 

Abdur-Rahman, Dawud ........................................................................................... 52 

Gay, Rear Admiral Earl L. ...................................................................................... 56 

Hopkins Jr., Albert R. ............................................................................................. 60 

James, Robert .......................................................................................................... 71 

Lang, Barbara B. ..................................................................................................... 73 

Pannell, Philip E. ..................................................................................................... 77 

Voudrie, Stan ........................................................................................................... 79 

Winstead, David L. .................................................................................................. 80 

vi 


39998.001
vii 


39998.002
viii 


39998.003
ix 


39998.004
x 


39998.005
(1) 

HEARING ON THE NEW DEPARTMENT OF 

HOMELAND SECURITY HEADQUARTERS AT 

ST. ELIZABETH’S: LOCAL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES 

Wednesday, December 12, 2007 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC

BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room 

2167, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Eleanor 

Holmes Norton [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Ms. NORTON. We want to welcome you to today’s hearing entitled 

the New Federal Headquarters at St. Elizabeth’s: Local Business 

Opportunities, concerning an unprecedented Federal development 

to be located on the federally-owned West Campus of St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in Anacostia in Southeast Washington. The property is the only significant Federal site in the District available for 

Federal development. This construction will mark the first decision 

by the Federal Government to place a Federal agency east of the 

Anacostia River since the District was established. 

In 1984, Congress authorized the transfer of the St. Elizabeth’s 

East Campus to the District of Columbia in Public Law 98-621, and 

the transfer occurred in 1987. However, the Federal Government 

has insisted on retaining the West Campus because of the savings 

from building on its own land, because of the presence of two Metro 

stations and other public transportation, and because of the accessibility and proximity of the site to other Federal agencies in the 

District. 

The Federal Government will break ground next year on its 176 

acre West Campus site. The components identified for consolidation 

are the DHS Headquarters, Transportation and Security Administration, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement, the Federal Emergency Management Administration 

and the United States Coast Guard. 

An addendum for inclusion in the record follows my written 

statement, describing the evolution of the Federal land from the establishment of St. Elizabeth’s as an state of the art mental institution in 1855, when local government here was in the exclusive control of the Federal Government, to today. 

The General Services Administration and I have always worked 

closely with the community and the District Government conVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:40 Apr 28, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\39998 JASON
2 

cerning planned Federal development here. This cooperation has 

been beneficial to local communities. It has been as beneficial to 

local communities as to the Federal Government because Federal 

construction that brings Federal employees and Federal business to 

an area has unfailingly sparked local retail and commercial development. 

For example, the development of the M Street Southeast neighborhood was an almost exact parallel of Martin Luther King Jr. 

Avenue, the main commercial thoroughfare that borders St. Elizabeth’s. Blocks of abandoned federally-owned and blighted land in 

the M Street community deterred development for decades in the 

adjacent communities. Change could not and did not occur as long 

as two vast Federal properties responsible for the decay, the 66 

acre Navy Yard remained an empty relic, an almost empty relic, 

and the 57 acre Southeast Federal Center continued as an unsightly and abandoned brownfield. 

When we were able to get a government agency, the Naval Sea 

Systems Command, to come to the Navy Yard, M Street almost 

spontaneously developed. With the assistance of the Great Streets 

Initiative developed by the Williams Administration and help from 

officials at the Navy Yard, 5,000 new Federal employees helped 

spur retail. 

Structural changes and improvements were made to the 8th 

Street corridor which had been largely moribund. New restaurants 

and amenities that serve local residents and Federal employees 

alike resulted from the Federal partnership with the city, local 

businesses and residents. 

Nevertheless, the adjacent abandoned Southeast Federal Center 

property continued to stunt full development until Congress passed 

our Southeast Federal Center Act. We have tried to replicate this 

Act to benefit other communities here and elsewhere, but Federal 

scoring procedures stand in the way. 

This hearing continues the process we began shortly after the 

Federal Government funded the new DHS headquarters. 

In 2006, we held a town meeting where top GSA, Coast Guard 

and District officials participated in the standing room only meeting, taking questions from residents. The GSA has continued to assure community participation in countless meetings, working with 

Ward 8 residents by informing them of developments and getting 

feedback to assist Federal authorities in making decisions. 

The project has been well received by community residents who 

are sick of decades of blight and decay from the huge abandoned 

Federal property in their midst and are hopeful that the new headquarters will help spur retail and other efforts underway to secure 

increased commercial development. 

A few months ago, GSA and I and one of our witnesses today cosponsored a small business forum on opportunities that will become 

available because of the new headquarters project. 

This is the first Congressional hearing on the new headquarters 

development aside from the prescribed authorizing and appropriation proceedings. This hearing is intentionally devoted to local interests and concerns in light of the challenges that must be carefully thought through by all concerned regarding the unprecedented nature of this project. 

3 

Witnesses representing Ward 8 and local business leaders will 

testify. Mayor Fenty was invited, but he was unavailable. 

The Federal Government is crossing the Anacostia with one of its 

most prestigious and important agencies at a time when Wards 7 

and 8 are seeking to become destination points like the rest of the 

District. The city is looking at the option of building a soccer stadium for D.C.’s champion soccer team, D.C. United, on the Poplar 

Point site, authorized for transfer to the District last year by our 

bill, Public Law 109-396. 

Last Friday, Giant opened the largest supermarket in the region 

in the Camp Simms section of Ward 8, using Federal new market 

tax credits. 

The new headquarters carries significant promise if local residents and businesses and the Federal and local governments work 

and plan closely together. We focus particularly on local concerns 

today because D.C. residents and businesses, particularly those in 

Ward 8, alone will have to live with the headquarters 24-7. 

A continuing complaint of Ward 8 residents has long been that 

despite hosting the greatest number of housing starts in the District, even the most basic retail has not followed the ward’s growing population. 

We cannot afford to assume that the retail and commercial development that the community most needs and desires will arrive 

spontaneously in part because prime parts of the headquarters 

property will be enclosed by a long wall that must be preserved because of its historic significance. Consequently, large portions of 

Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue will continue to be unavailable for 

the local retail activity that usually follows Federal workers. 

It is important for all concerned to begin assessing now where 

development is likely to occur and what sort of development should 

be most encouraged. Special attention to the long-neglected community concerns and close cooperation between D.C. and the Federal Government will be needed to assure that the needed high 

quality retail and other businesses are attracted in a manner consistent with maximizing the potential generated by the presence of 

14,000 Federal employees. 

There is no magic formula for success, but the pieces appear to 

be aligned: a community that has thought long and hard about economic development in the ward, a major Federal headquarters 

coming to the neighborhood at St. Elizabeth’s, development opportunities from the Federal land transfer of the Poplar Point site and 

a long tradition of Federal and local collaboration to assure mutual 

benefit. If all roll up their collective sleeves to get the job done together, we will not fail. 

However, an indispensable step for all concerned should be to 

look to the community for advice and counsel. We continue that 

process with today’s hearing. 

Congressman Kuhl, do you have any statement you would like to 

make? 

Thank you very much. 

Now, let us move to our first panel of witnesses. Would you 

begin? Let’s go from Mr. Winstead by identifying yourself and the 

next witness identify himself and so forth. 

4 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID WINSTEAD, COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC 

BUILDINGS SERVICE, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; DAWUD ABDUR-RAHMAN, DIRECTOR, PORTFOLIO 

MANAGEMENT DIVISION, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; REAR ADMIRAL EARL 

GAY, U.S. NAVY, COMMANDANT, NAVAL DISTRICT WASHINGTON, WASHINGTON NAVY YARD; JOHN IMPERATO, DIRECTOR, CORPORATE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, WASHINGTON NAVY YARD 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Madam Chairman, I am David Winstead, Commissioner of the Public Buildings Service at GSA. 

Congressman Dent and Members of the Committee, I am very, 

very pleased to be here today. 

I think, Madam Chair, your overview on the partnership which 

GSA has had with the National Capital Region and with many 

communities where a lot of our development projects have impacted is very, very important, and I look forward to listening to 

the witnesses here today, the leadership that we have with the 

community and the Navy and other clients. 

I am also joined today with, as you know, Dawud, who is our Development Director for the project as well as Bart Bush, the Assistant Regional Administrator, and Tony Costa, my Deputy Administrator. 

In my testimony today, Madam Chair, I also want to thank you 

for your leadership in the September 18th business forum that I 

understand went very, very well, and I think it is indicative of your 

engagement in projects that are very important for Federal tenants 

in the National Capital Region as well as communities that you 

represent. 

I would like to address several issues today: the project itself, 

GSA’s, I think, excellent track record in encouraging economic development of neighborhoods and under-served neighborhoods across 

this Country and locally here in the District, the economic impact 

of Federal spending which we know is substantial in the National 

Capital Region as well as my personal commitment and that of the 

Administrator and the Regional Administrator here at NCR and 

ARA in terms of this project at St. Elizabeth’s. 

First, the project itself: GSA is now preparing, as you know, a 

master plan for the development of a headquarters facility for DHS 

at St. Elizabeth’s West Campus. Creating such a headquarters 

helps continue consolidation of this large, diverse Federal agency 

into one increasingly effective and cohesive cabinet department. 

DHS is proposing to locate, as you mentioned, up to 14,000 of its 

employees at St. Elizabeth’s, bringing together these components of 

the Department that must be assembled to respond quickly to national emergencies. At 175 acres, the St. Elizabeth’s West Campus 

is large enough to accommodate DHS’ needs as well as to provide 

100 foot setback for the entire campus, a very difficult requirement 

to fulfill for any agency of this size in any urban setting. 

Consolidation of the agency components on Government-owned 

land will offer a substantial savings to the American people and 

taxpayers over the alternative of consolidating in leased space and 

replacing currently leased space in over 22 locations around the 

National Capital Region. 

5 

Finally, St. Elizabeth’s is a National Historic Landmark and the 

development of DHS headquarters there offers a unique opportunity to restore many of the historic features of the campus that 

have badly deteriorated over time. So, making this project a success is important for our Nation as well as for the National Capital 

Region. 

Regarding the National Historic Landmark, just as a reference, 

I am meeting tomorrow afternoon with Dick Moe, who is President 

of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, to further dialogue 

with the leadership of the historic preservation community. 

I would like to share with you today, based on discussions with 

the Committee and counsel, some examples of GSA’s success in 

working with local communities on a large scale like St. Elizabeth’s 

and the economic benefit that accrues to areas. 

You talked at great length about the Southeast Federal Center 

and your leadership in that legislation. 

Through GSA’s Public Buildings Service’s Good Neighbor Program, we seek to basically conduct our real estate activities and decisions to, number one, obviously, meet our client agency’s needs, 

and we are doing a lot more in terms of long term planning about 

space consolidation and efficiency of housing of those clients but 

also to support, which is the topic of this panel, the communities 

that we serve and the communities in which these jobs are located 

and the economic impact and other impositions such as transportation are felt. 

We engaged with local communities early in the process, soliciting public input—this panel today will help in that regard—select 

locations and utilizing designs that engage community goals and 

priorities and support community economic development goals. 

GSA has been particularly active in working across the Country 

and with the District Government to find opportunities to build or 

lease space in under-served communities. Towards this end, GSA 

is currently engaged in developing several new projects. 

The Denver Federal Center in Colorado is a great case of almost 

3.9 million square feet that will be housed in Denver and served 

by a new transit line that has been routed to serve that Federal 

installation. It will be a first class Federal campus. 

In addition, obviously, here in the National Capital Region, as 

you well know, Madam Chair, the FDA is under a huge three million square foot expansion to a campus in White Oak, Maryland. 

Again, in that regard, as in the case of St. Elizabeth’s, our engagement with the community through their community liaison group, 

Labquest, has been substantial over the last five to ten years, and 

we have sought their support both in economic development as well 

as housing needs for new FDA employees coming to the White Oak 

campus. 

GSA, as you know, donated a portion of White Oak to the Maryland Department of Transportation for transportation improvements along New York Avenue, very similar to what we are doing 

with the Southeast Federal Center. 

In addition, NOMA is another great case where we have now 

opened a new headquarters for the Bureau of Tobacco and Firearms, located on a site purchased from the District of Columbia, 

6 

and this project includes 8,000 square feet of retail and other 

amenities to serve those Federal tenants at ATF headquarters. 

The Southeast area of Washington, as you also know, redeveloping the Southeast Federal Center, has been greatly assisted by 

the legislation you advanced and also coupled with the District and 

the private sector through Forest City in both the headquarters of 

the Department of Transportation that we have now opened as well 

as a mixed use project of almost two million square feet and almost 

2,800 dwelling units with 400,000 square feet of retail to serve not 

only DOT employees but all the other Federal tenants and private 

sector uses in that area. 

All of these projects are occurring in areas that had not experienced economic prosperity in this region prior to GSA’s engagement, the Federal need to really spark things and to provide, obviously, Federal tenancy to meet housing needs of our clients, and 

now GSA is poised to do that in Ward 8. 

But the economic benefits conveyed by the Federal Government 

on urban areas of the District go way beyond just direct employment. As you know, George Mason University’s Stephen Fuller 

often articulates the impact of our investments, Federal investments in the District in terms of employment. Federal procurement 

spending has grown from $12 billion in 1990 to $28 billion in the 

year 2000. 

This study of Dr. Fuller’s points out that more procurement dollars are going to be spent each year in the National Capital Region 

than any other single State in the Nation. It is calculated that this 

investment generates 21 percent aggregately in the Metropolitan 

Washington economy, the GNP for the National Capital Region. So, 

procurement spending is responsible directly, Federal spending, for 

almost 170,000 jobs in the District of Columbia. 

In 2004, GSA joined with the National Trust for Historic Preservation in a similar partnership to St. Elizabeth’s in a project in 

Baltimore, in which the net result has been almost $50 million of 

impact to the Baltimore regional economy. So it is an important 

point to keep in mind, when we consider the possible economic benefits, these other projects as examples in terms of development of 

the St. Elizabeth’s West Campus. 

For firms doing business with DHS, they will want to locate 

nearby. For DHS workers and employees on the campus, they will 

want to shop nearby. There will be further development in neighborhoods. 

Our National Capital Region is involved closely. I have talked to 

Harriet Tregoning and others. They have engaged closely with the 

planning leadership of the District in this regard. 

We will continue to move forward on our plans to relocate new 

housing for DHS in Ward 8 and working with the District as well 

on adjacency in terms of impact on the East Campus where they 

are looking at their zoning authority to encourage office and residential development on that adjacent campus to ours. 

Before I close, I would like to comment just briefly on my personal commitment to this project. Madam Chair, in about June of 

2006, you and I went up to the Ward 8 neighborhood for a town 

hall meeting, and this was just one example of the many meetings 

that have been held since, over a dozen that GSA has held in AnaVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:40 Apr 28, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\39998 JASON
7 

costia and Congress Heights neighborhoods, as well as our project 

director who you will hear from next has been very, very involved 

in this effort and will give you more detail. 

Recently, I had an opportunity to talk to Charlene Jarvis who I 

knew very well, who is the head of Southeastern University, and 

people like that are constantly getting involved and looking at 

maybe career training opportunities for jobs as result of St. Elizabeth’s. 

So my message is very, very simple, Madam Chair. GSA, as you 

noted, as a very important role to serve DHS with this consolidation, and the result of it will have very profound impact on the 

community and the economic interest of Ward 8. 

Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. I would like to note that the Ranking Member, Mr. 

Graves, has come. I know he is going to have leave a markup later 

and can’t stay throughout this hearing. I want to welcome him and 

ask him if he has anything he would like to say at this point. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity. 

I am very interested in this project and actually a couple of different projects. We were just talking up here too about the Navy 

Yard, but I will turn my statement in for the record. 

I look forward to hearing what I can from the witnesses and appreciate you all being here. I am going to pop out for a markup and 

then be back, but thank you all for being here today. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Graves. 

Next witness, Mr. Abdur-Rahman. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Madam Chair, Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Dawud Abdur-Rahman. I serve as Development Director in the General Services Administration National 

Capital Region, and I am working on the preparation of a master 

plan for the Department of Homeland Security headquarters complex at the St. Elizabeth’s West Campus. 

I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before you to supplement the remarks made by Commissioner Winstead regarding 

the economic benefits that our project will have for Washington, 

D.C. and the Ward 8 neighborhood. 

GSA is currently preparing a master plan for this project. We 

propose to develop up to 4.5 million square feet of space and up to 

1.8 million square feet of structured parking on the 176 acre St. 

Elizabeth’s West Campus. This development will include new construction along with the restoration and modernization of the majority of the existing campus. When completed, the facility will 

house up to 14,000 employees. 

In my remarks today, I would like to summarize the action GSA 

has taken and will take to make St. Elizabeth’s West Campus a 

valuable and important neighbor in Ward 8. 

First, we stopped the rampant and progressive deterioration of 

this National Historic Landmark. When GSA assumed custody and 

control of the West Campus in 2004, the buildings and landscape 

were in deplorable condition. 

Holes in the roofs had to be patched. The most historic building 

on campus, the Center Building, and the beautiful Beaux Arts style 

Hitchcock Hall had both suffered extensive damage from the leaks 

8 

in the steam distribution systems. All of the floors had collapsed 

in one wing of the Center Building. 

Anticipating the ultimate redevelopment of the campus, GSA in- vested $13 million in a stabilization program. This work, most of 

which was done by Section 8(a) small business contractors, includes 

construction, landscaping, security services and building management. 

A total of 40 percent of all contracts issued since late 2004 have been awarded to D.C.-based firms and 60 percent of the $4 million 

of work currently underway is being performed by D.C.-based 

firms. 

Now we are preparing a master plan for the phased development 

of the headquarters facility. Congress has already appropriated 

funding for the preparation of this document, the design of the first 

phase of the project, a headquarters for the United States Coast 

Guard and initiating the repair and replacement of the infrastructure for the entire site. 

This fiscal year, 2008, the Administration is requesting $346 million to fund GSA construction of the Coast Guard headquarters 

building and further infrastructure as well as to begin design work 

for phase two. 

The construction of the DHS headquarters complex will convey 

considerable economic benefits to the local community. Construction costs alone are expected to exceed $3 billion, and that means 

a lot of construction jobs and construction site support services. 

Federal acquisition regulations require all Federal agencies to 

create as many opportunities as possible for small businesses to 

compete as prime contractors on Federal projects and for large contractors on Federal projects to establish subcontracting goals for 

small businesses. In fiscal year 2007, GSA’s Public Buildings Service entered into $240 million in contracts in this region with small 

businesses. 

We also encourage our construction contractors to participate in 

an approved apprenticeship program so that residents of Ward 8 

and other parts of the District will have the opportunity to be 

trained for careers in construction trades. 

With up to 14,000 employees on the site, there is a sizeable potential market for the businesses located nearby. In addition, contractors doing business with DHS will be tempted to locate in office 

space within a short distance of the campus to facilitate frequent 

contacts with their client. 

In an effort to calculate the potential economic benefits that this 

project will generate, GSA utilized a computer model called the Regional Input-Output Multiplier System, otherwise known as RIMS 

II, developed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. It is used extensively by both the public and private sectors for such projects as 

estimating the impacts of military base closures, airport construction and the development of shopping malls and sports stadiums. 

Using this model, GSA projects that development of St. Elizabeth’s West Campus will generate 26,000 jobs and $931 million in 

payroll during construction alone. It is also expected to produce $18 

million per year in sales and use taxes after occupancy occurs. 

Some of these benefits are regional in scope. Commissioner 

Winstead has already described the significant role that the DisVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:40 Apr 28, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\39998 JASON
9 

trict of Columbia can and must play if this project will generate 

maximum benefits for the immediate neighborhood. GSA is working closely with the District Government and with the neighborhood to push such a coordinated approach forward. 

In September, we worked closely with you, Madam Chair, and 

the Anacostia Economic Development Corporation to conduct a 

business opportunities forum at Matthews Memorial Baptist 

Church to explain opportunities that could be generated by our development. We are already using Ward 8 firms to provide services 

for these events. 

In November, we briefed Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development Neil Albert and Planning Director Harriet 

Tregoning on our project, and later that month we provided a tour 

of the site for Deputy Mayor Albert and City Administrator Dan 

Tangherlini. We discussed ways that the St. Elizabeth’s East Campus can be developed to take advantage of the opportunities posed 

by the development of the West Campus. 

This past Monday, December 10th, we met with James Bunn, 

Executive Director of the Ward 8 Business Council, in Councilman 

Barry’s constituent office to explore how our project can generate 

business opportunities for the community. We are encouraged by 

the neighborhood’s support for our project, and we look forward to 

continuing to work with them. 

GSA stands ready to continue working with you, Madam Chair, 

with the District Government and with the Ward 8 community to 

make this project a success. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much. 

We will move on to Rear Admiral Gay. 

Admiral GAY. Good morning, ma’am. Good morning, Madam 

Chair Norton and other distinguished Members of the Committee. 

I am Rear Admiral Earl Gay, Commandant of the Naval District 

Washington, and I am responsible for 18 installations with the National Capital Region including the Washington Navy Yard and its 

Anacostia Annex. 

Thank you this morning for this opportunity to discuss the 

Washington Navy’s Yard’s role in community development along 

the M Street corridor in Southeast Washington, DC. 

For a historical perspective, I brought with me Mr. John 

Imperato. Mr. Imperato is my Community Relations Director and 

has served in this capacity for the past 16 years. He will provide 

you with a broad perspective of BRAC development and the influence of the Washington Navy Yard on business development on M 

Street Southeast, the 8th Street corridor and Barracks Row. 

We look forward to maintaining our close ties within the community and continuing to support the growth and revitalization of this 

great capital city and surrounding neighborhoods. 

Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Imperato, are you going to answer questions or do you have 

separate testimony? 

Mr. IMPERATO. I have submitted testimony for the record, and I 

am prepared to answer questions. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, if you would like to say something before we 

proceed. 

10 

Mr. IMPERATO. Just basically, an overview is, in the nineties, we 

moved about 5,000 Navy employees to the Navy Yard, and an additional 5,000 contract personnel came along with them and brought 

our population up to about 12,000. The additional 5,000 people provided quite a customer base in the community. We felt that we 

should partner with the community to provide services to these 

people and benefit the community as a whole. 

I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much. 

We brought you both together and had you testify together because the Navy Yard is perhaps the most recent example of what 

the coming of Federal employees can do if you work closely with 

the agency. 

Now, what we are most interested in, of course, is the agency’s 

policy. For example, Mr. Winstead or Mr. Abdur-Rahman, do you 

have a development policy quite apart from the policy to build the 

agency that incorporates the community? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Madam Chair, GSA policy is to work very, very 

closely with all the communities around our major projects, and we 

are responsible for pursuing that in ways that include both our 

housing needs as well as local goals. In the short term, these directives acknowledge collaboration needs with local officials, where to 

locate, how to design and operate facilities. 

The principals of this neighborhood development program that 

we have are basically to locate new lease facilities in places that 

support local planning, economic development and master planning 

goals as well as to design them to meet workplace needs and support overall urban design. So we are focused on the St. Elizabeth’s 

neighborhood in that regard. 

Also, renovating Federal properties and the custodianship we 

have for over 400 Federal buildings and 2 dozen national landmarks similar to St. Elizabeth’s is a part of that neighborhood policy. 

We are also driven by law under the Federal Urban Land Use 

Act of 1949 in that regard to both look at the impact we have and 

to guard on the Cooperative Use Act of 1976 as well as the Public 

Buildings Amendment Act of 1988. So there are a number. There 

are about five or seven laws. 

Ms. NORTON. What I am trying to find out is whether you have 

a policy or goal when you build a Federal facility like this to open 

or to encourage public business objectives. We know that the district has to do with the zoning and the master plan and the like. 

But to encourage businesses to locate around the Federal development where Federal employees will be, is there a written policy? 

Are there goals connected with the GSA’s responsibility to see that 

the Federal employees are served with some kind of retail or business in the local neighborhood? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. We do, and this neighborhood development and 

these policies and the acts that I mentioned require that we do so. 

So, in the case of St. Elizabeth’s, not only the business forum you 

had, but our close working with the D.C. zoning, with Harriet 

Tregoning and others are actually targeted to do that. It is to make 

sure that the redevelopment of Martin Luther King, the great 

streetscape efforts and to look at densities being planned for the 

11 

corridors between the East and West Campuses, that we look at 

that in terms of its ability to handle growth as well as retail, restaurants and other amenities to serve the employees, the 14,000 

employees at build-out. 

Ms. NORTON. In my opening statement, I indicated that both the 

District and the GSA face a major structural problem that we did 

not find in NOMA where all that property has been bought up and 

we expect Federal agencies and private business to come. Amenities are being developed. But there was no wall and, here, we have 

an agency that could be walled in. 

Now, Federal Law requires, always requires some amenities in 

the agency. So you will not find an agency which does not have 

amenities. But when you have a wall and you have amenities provided on the inside, have you considered that if you provided every 

amenity you can think of on the inside, there would be no reason 

for these 14,000 employees to venture into the community the way 

they venture into the downtown community, the way they venture 

into NOMA? 

Have you considered the structural problem with carrying out 

your normal policy of encouraging Federal employees to do some 

retail in the neighborhood and therefore retail comes to the neighborhood because they know there will be this large number of Federal employees in addition to the residents? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Do you want to add a comment? 

Ms. NORTON. Yes, Mr. Abdur-Rahman, you are the one that has 

been working the project. You are the face of GSA in the community. If you have thought about this, I would appreciate anything 

you would have to say. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Sure. Congresswoman Norton, we have 

thought about this on several fronts. 

I will start with the issue of the wall. One of the things that we 

remind a lot of the planning agencies and even the community is 

that DHS is a high security agency, and GSA and DHS and other 

agencies follow the interagency security criteria. 

If you have a concentration of Federal agencies, whether it be 

FDA or St. Elizabeth’s West Campus, there is going to be some security infrastructure to provide for the protection of that Federal 

population. So there would always be this issue of some level of security. 

Ms. NORTON. But I haven’t even raised the security issue. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Right. 

Ms. NORTON. We just put that aside. Let me just say this for the 

record, so everyone understands what the Department of Homeland 

Security has done to us all. If you want to get into Federal agency 

today, this has nothing to do with the Department of Homeland Security. It is area-wide. 

Whereas you used to just have to go through whatever is the contraption that makes sure you are not carrying any bombs, you now 

have to show an identification. Now, that is not the Department of 

Homeland Security. That is new policy everywhere. I am going to 

have a hearing myself on whether that is necessary. 

I had someone from the local B.I.D. on M Street tell me that he 

wanted to go to the cafeteria in the new Department of Transportation. That is a headquarters that we worked, what is it, well, 

12 

even before I came to Congress. I have spent a good deal of my 

time in Congress, trying to get that headquarters. 

Here comes a local resident who runs the bid, and he tells me 

that he wanted to have a meeting. Sorry. He wanted to use the cafeteria. He had to call someone in the Department of Transportation 

to come downstairs and get him so that he could get in to use the 

cafeteria. 

You know this is madness, but this doesn’t have to do with the 

Department of Homeland Security. This is madness from their policy. 

So I said when I met with him because the B.I.D. is going to 

have a forum that we are sponsoring with GSA. I said, well, suppose I am a taxpayer, and let’s say I am taxpayer either from the 

District of Columbia or from podunk. 

I said, oh, my goodness, thank goodness there is a Federal building, and I really need to go to the lavatory. Sorry. 

I don’t know what showing identification means, but I don’t want 

to hear anything about security and Homeland Security. The reason I don’t want to hear it is that I can’t imagine your security will 

be any steeper than in the Department of Transportation. 

I said to myself, well, that is interesting. Who is going to blow 

up the Department of Transportation? I mean if al Qaeda is down 

to the Department of Transportation, then I think they must have 

blown up everything else. 

But, again, my question was very specifically about the isolation 

of Federal employees from the community where retail has sprung 

automatically, and my question here has to do with the wall and 

whether or not any of you have taken into account the difficulties 

raised by having that wall there in the first place and therefore the 

need to somehow encourage people that there is something on the 

outside, that there is retail on the outside. 

Or, do you plan amenities on the inside and what amenities do 

you plan on the inside? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. The next thing that we are trying to do in 

that area is, one, as we said in our opening testimony, as we conducted events, we have sought out local businesses and contracted 

with local businesses to provide services for the events that we 

have had and in discussion with the Department of Homeland Security. 

I would like to note that the business economic opportunity 

forum that we conducted with you in September, the DHS small 

business officer was also there also. WE are also talking with DHS 

about making available opportunities for local businesses to provide services into the campus through catering or dry cleaning or 

those types of things. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, this is a very important point, and that is a 

very important point for the community to know. Of course, there 

are two points of retail interest here. The important point for the 

community to know is GSA’s very successful policy. 

I will cite the ATF. The ATF has amenities in it, and there is 

a small, it turns out, African American woman-owned business that 

runs many of the amenities. That, I think, is very important because we must have these amenities within the agency or the Federal Government won’t move and it shouldn’t. 

13 

You shouldn’t have a huge Federal agency where you can’t get 

a cup of coffee and some other things and some other things, to be 

sure, in there so you don’t have to go outside. 

That leaves open what happens in every other Federal agency. 

They have those amenities, at least if they were built recently or 

if they were leased recently. That is to say in recent decades. 

But people are on the streets, and I have no indication that the 

District has taken this into account because the master plan talks 

about retail very generally. 

I need to know what the GSA is going to do since it is control 

what amenities are on the inside and what kinds of amenities or 

retail—and I use that word broadly—one would expect from your 

point of view, knowing Federal employees as you do, to be on the 

outside. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Two more points: We are also looking at 

ways, working with DHS, even though we have a campus there, 

making parts of the campus available and open to the community 

on some kind of a regular basis. Specifically, Hitchcock Hall, which 

we mentioned earlier, was in very deplorable condition but is very 

conducive for adaptive reuse as a confidant training facility. We 

think that that is a facility that could be available for the community to use and have access to the community. 

In addition to that, there will be amenities on campus like any 

other campus of this population, but we do expect and we are hoping in our discussion with the city, that on the East Campus, that 

there will be additional amenities available because we don’t anticipate that all the services that a population of 14,000 employees will 

need will be able to be supported on our campus. We are really 

looking for partnership with the District on the East Campus just 

across the street for Federal employees to take advantage of that. 

No Federal employee eats in their cafeteria every day, and we 

are really hoping that as the neighborhood develops, as the phase 

two program evolves and the East Campus develops, as we talk to 

them, that there will be opportunities for Federal employees to 

leave the campus. 

Ms. NORTON. It is interesting. You had indication from the District that they are going to put something on there? 

The only thing on the East Campus now is Government-type facilities. It would be very important if some of those amenities could 

be on the East Campus. They will have some of the same security 

problems, but they don’t have some of the problems that the Department of Homeland Security. 

Have you had discussions with the District? I know you are having some discussions about parking. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Yes, in our preliminary discussion with the 

District, their planning is in a preliminary stage, but it does envision mixed use including retail. 

Ms. NORTON. Has the District indicated when? They have had 

this property for 25 years, and they only began to build on it fairly 

recently when Mayor Williams came. It would be very important 

for the District to jump start its part of this, given the issues presented here. 

But let’s turn to either Admiral Gay or Mr. Imperato because 8th 

Street. M Street, of course, was on the other side. Where all these 

14 

buildings are now was barren. We understand the contractors 

came. 

But, in a real sense, you have a parallel situation. People don’t 

go into the Navy Yard, although I must say I am very grateful that 

people really do go into use this new marvelous facility that you 

have built, a facility that people can use for events, for dinners and 

the like. But, essentially, they don’t go into the Navy Yard for 

lunch and for other retail amenities from the community because 

that is also a secure agency. 

Eighth Street, and I can speak from personal experience because 

I am a Capitol Hill resident, the fact that Capitol Hill has been 

gentrified for 25 years didn’t matter. Eighth Street was moribund, 

nothing happening there. I couldn’t understand it. 

There have been plenty of people in Capitol Hill since the beginning of time, but 8th Street is a kind of main drag that had gone 

downhill. Now look at 8th Street. If you want to see what is happening, you go to Eighth Street. A lot of it is restaurants, but there 

also are other amenities that weren’t there before. 

You were not here, Admiral Gay, at the time. I know Mr. 

Imperato was because I have worked closely with him. Would you 

describe what kind of a relationship developed with the residents, 

with the city, with local businesses so that we have a brand new 

look and a brand new set of amenities on 8th Street that had not 

been there before? 

Admiral GAY. Well, ma’am, from the outset, the collaborative 

plan was always to look at the capacity we had at the Navy Yard 

with 14,000 people, including contractors. We were set to provide 

the basic amenities and, through collaboration with the community’s business association, the community would provide the balance. 

John, you could comment further on that process. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, I am interested in the blossoming of restaurants, of places where you can go out and buy something, a card 

or something if you need one. That is really what I am interested 

in, and I see that with my very eyes. 

Mr. IMPERATO. Yes, ma’am. Basically, the most important thing 

was to communicate to the community what we were doing. We 

worked very closely with the local council member, with business 

associations, the resident associations. 

The city responded with a great deal of investment on 8th Street 

and M Street as far as the infrastructure, the street lights, street 

repavings, sidewalk repairs, landscaping, signage, and the businesses were able to feel that there was some potential business, 

and the marketing basically came from the community to draw the 

people out to the community for these amenities. 

While we had, as the Admiral pointed out, some limited basic 

amenities, food service, most like to not eat the same thing every 

single day. The variety on 8th Street that developed is what draws 

them out. A lot of the facilities that we don’t provide were out there 

in the community. 

So our job was to educate and encourage the community that if 

they built it, the people would come. 

Ms. NORTON. You advised them on the kind of retail you thought 

people might be interested in? 

15 

Mr. IMPERATO. I felt it was very I had to be very careful not to 

tell a business what they should do. It was their expertise that we 

were relying on to build what our people would like. 

Ms. NORTON. In other words, the market will always educate 

you. 

Mr. IMPERATO. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Dent, have you any questions for this witness, 

these witnesses? 

Mr. DENT. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I do have 

a few questions and comments. 

Mr. Winstead, I will refer to your testimony in a moment but, as 

you know, DHS is about 22 disparate agencies within DHS, and 

you are trying to house as many of the critical components of DHS 

in the one location over there at St. Elizabeth’s. It is my understanding that you are trying to consolidate TSA, CBP, ICE, FEMA 

and the Coast Guard. 

In your testimony, you said that DHS is scattered across the 

D.C. metro area, more than 70 buildings, occupying almost 7 million square feet of space to house 22,000 employees. You point out 

too that this geographical and organizational dispersion hinders 

the consolidation of these 22 separate agencies into a unified, effective organization within a common culture. 

You also estimate that the present value savings over a 30 year 

period of locating to Government-owned space versus leased is 

more than $743 million. 

I guess my main question to you is this: Once this building is 

completed, this project is completed at St. Elizabeth’s and you do 

consolidate some of those component parts, how much lease space 

will DHS still be needing? Do you have any idea, once you move 

those key points? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Generally, I don’t have the exact numbers, 

but I can answer the question. The lease to own ratio for the DHS 

housing in the metropolitan area is about a 70-30, percent leased 

and 30 percent owned. 

If we are successful in consolidating DHS in a manner that they 

believe they can effectively operate, that ratio will split from 70 

percent owned to 30 percent leased. I just don’t have the exact 

numbers. 

Mr. DENT. So you are saying, if I understand you correctly, that 

once you move the component parts that I just mentioned over to 

St. Elizabeth’s, you will be at 70 percent owned versus 30 percent 

leased. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Correct. 

Mr. DENT. So it just flips. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. It will flip. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Congressman, the figure that was cited in the 

testimony, the three quarters of a billion over 30 years is the difference between essentially that ratio being housed in federallyowned space at St. Elizabeth’s versus it continuing to be in leased 

space. So that is a net savings to the taxpayer from the standpoint 

of the consolidation. 

Mr. DENT. Understood. Okay. So you still need at least 30 percent of DHS’ needs after the project is complete. 

16 

The other question I have is the facilities up on Nebraska Avenue, those are Federally-owned. Is that correct? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Yes, that is correct. That continues to be federally-owned, and actually we are continuing to invest in that facility. The Nebraska Avenue complex currently has about 22 buildings on it, and our investments in that are to stabilize basically the 

electrical service systems for that current compound. So there still 

would be either occupancy of DHS there or some other Federal tenant. 

Mr. DENT. Is anybody else up there currently besides DHS? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. No. 

Mr. DENT. It is all DHS. So DHS would continue to maintain 

presence at Nebraska Avenue plus St. Elizabeth’s once this project 

is complete. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Well, the bulk of the tenancy at Nebraska Avenue is going to be because the Secretary is there. 

Mr. DENT. Right. They will move to St. Elizabeth’s. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. There could be some residual tenants there, correct. 

Mr. DENT. Okay. 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. The basic idea is that, as you noted in Commissioner Winstead’s testimony, DHS is in over 70 buildings in 

over 50 locations, and the end state is 6 to 7 locations which includes St. Elizabeth’s, the Nebraska Avenue complex and several 

other mini campuses to consolidate their D.C. housing. 

Mr. DENT. How many locations will DHS have once you consolidate? 

Okay, we will back to a 70 percent owned versus 30 percent 

leased. How many of those sites will you be able to eliminate? 

You said how many sites is DHS in around? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. They are in 50 locations. 

Mr. DENT. How many locations will they be in once this project 

is complete? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Somewhere between six and seven. 

Mr. DENT. Six and seven, that is making progress, okay. 

At this time, I have no further questions. Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much. Those were important questions. We will not be able to consolidate this entire agency in any 

one place the way it has been constructed. 

Mr. Winstead, in your testimony, I am reading from a page that 

is not numbered. I am sorry. You talk about the Federal procurement in the D.C. metro area, $12.5 billion in 1990 to $28.4 billion 

in 2000, and you talk about how much greater it is than regions 

that are even larger in population than ours. 

In your testimony, Mr. Abdur-Rahman, you indicate that there 

will be, and again I am quoting from your testimony, ‘‘as many opportunities as possible’’ on Federal projects and for contractors on 

Federal projects to establish subcontracting goals. No. I am sorry; 

Federal acquisition regulations. 

Let me just read the entire thing: ‘‘Federal acquisition regulations require all Federal agencies to create as many opportunities 

as possible for small businesses to compete as prime contractors on 

Federal projects and for large contractors on Federal projects to establish subcontracting goals for small businesses.’’ 

17 

Then you go on to speak about $240 million in contracts in the 

region for small businesses. 

I wonder if any of you have figures, Mr. Winstead’s figures on 

procurement and Mr. Abdur-Rahman figures on contractors for the 

District of Columbia, broken out. If you know the region, there 

must be a way to know how many of these are in the District of 

Columbia. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Madam Chair, I will ask Abdur to chat, but we 

basically already spent $13 million to stabilize the site and maintain the site, which our historic preservation part. 

Ms. NORTON. But you spent $13 million to stabilize the site. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. The current site. 

Ms. NORTON. That doesn’t tell me where the contractors are 

from. I am not suggesting. I understand the competitive nature of 

Federal regulations, and I am not suggesting that all contractors 

have to come from this community. 

I know you have spent money. In fact, I am going to have a question on the historic sites. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Right. 

Ms. NORTON. I am trying to find out how much of the, let’s say, 

$28.4 billion in Federal procurement went to residents or businesses in the District of Columbia. That $13 million, I am sure, 

didn’t all go to the District. 

In fact, I would imagine, given how much larger the region is, 

that most of it went to businesses outside of the District of Columbia. I hope they were in the region. I know you have to take the 

lowest B.I.D. and all the rest of it. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. I think that from the standpoint of Steve Fuller’s 

statistics I am sure there is a way we could probably break it down 

between suburban Maryland and the District. 

Ms. NORTON. Could I ask you to do that so that we have some 

sense? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. I will. 

But, Madam Chair, I will tell you that for that, as I was starting, 

the $13 million on stabilization, we do know that the bulk of that 

went to 8(a) sub-business contractors and 40 percent of the 8(a) 

contracts for the $13 million, which is only the beginning of $3 billion on St. Elizabeth’s, 40 percent went to District contractors. Of 

that $4 million still underway, we think that 60 percent are going 

to be performed by District businesses. 

So we are seeing a huge percentage of the 8(a) work that has already been done that has gone to D.C. firms. 

Ms. NORTON. Those are impressive figures. I wish you would provide for the record who those contractors. 

This is procurement or are these contractors? These are contractors? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Yes, those are the 8(a) contractors that have done 

the stabilization work on St. Elizabeth’s. 

Ms. NORTON. Yes, would you please provide that? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Sure. 

Ms. NORTON. That information along with the breakdown of how 

much of the work was provided by each. 

18 

I would like to ask about the so-called multiplier system. You use 

these words, Mr. Abdur-Rahman, which may tell us more about the 

economic benefits. 

You say in your testimony that the West Campus will generate 26,000 jobs and $931 million in payroll during construction alone. 

Whether those jobs are mostly filled by people, some of them live 

in the District, some don’t. I am pleased to have them. 

We know that the closer an agency is to the District the more 

District residents are likely to work in the agency. 

My question really goes to the next sentence: It is also expected to produce $18 million per year in sales and use taxes after occupancy occurs. What does that mean, $18 million in sales and use taxes in the 

District of Columbia, right? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Correct, in the region. This is a regional 

model, and this is after occupancy for the follow-on services and 

just the basic business of having 14,000 employees on the campus 

and buying services and staying in the District. There is an economy that is supported as a result of that activity. 

Ms. NORTON. So this $18 million also is region? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Yes. 

Ms. NORTON. Sales and use taxes is also region? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Yes, all these. All the data from the RIMS 

model is regional. 

Ms. NORTON. I am asking you both to break that out from your 

multiplier systems in your case to let me at least what the lay of 

the land is now. 

You indicated something. I think it was in your testimony, Mr. 

Abdur-Rahman, that you anticipate that, and I am looking for it 

in the testimony. It has to do with contractors and office space. 

In your testimony, you said, in addition, contractors doing business with DHS will be tempted to locate in office space within a 

short distance of the campus to facilitate frequent contacts with 

their client. This was certainly the case with the Navy. You anticipate, therefore, the need for some office space close by the DHS facility? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Yes. 

Ms. NORTON. I think under the District’s planning rules and regulations, there would have to be some retail connected with that 

as well. 

So, construction opportunities, when one considers what happened to M Street, it is important to note here. Again, we have the 

wall. We have a good part of the main thoroughfare, Ward 8, taken 

out by a wall. That means there is going to have to be a lot of creative thinking about how to make sure that needed retail that Federal employees will want and that the local community will want 

takes place. 

Let me suggest. Well, first, let me ask if this has ever occurred. 

I agree with Mr. Imperato, that essentially we are in a market 

economy and you are going to put out there what somebody can 

make some money doing, but the District’s planning operation does 

control to some extent what goes out in our neighborhoods. 

People get very upset when they find certain things, fast food 

things, for example, dotting their neighborhoods and don’t have a 

19 

sit-down restaurant. That is particularly true of Ward 8. It is true 

all over the city, though. 

Has the Federal Government ever surveyed its own employees 

before you move to an area to inform the market of the kinds of 

things employees are likely to look for? 

For example, the kinds of things that, oh, my goodness, I can’t 

to downtown. I won’t go to the Mall or I would like to get out of 

this wall in order to do what on the outside and buy what. Have 

you ever done a survey just to find out? 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Well, Madam Chair, we do a very thorough in the 

case of DHS in terms, and obviously this is personnel confidential. 

But we look at demographics of where people are living and when 

they come, and we also are well aware the kind of amenities they 

are looking for. 

Dawud can talk about the efforts at St. Elizabeth’s with that 

community and sensing through this program in September and 

the other meetings we have had over 12 up there with the community in terms of what they are expecting. 

But, in the case of the FDA, we have had a very active involvement with the employee group and the citizen group and community groups around the new White Oak campus. I can tell you how 

active it is. Quarterly, citizens get together with employees as well 

as the director of facilities at the FDA campus and talk about, as 

they migrate from basically south Rockville, the Twinbrook area, 

over to White Oak, what are the needs they need in terms of dry 

cleaning off campus or other amenities. 

That is something that this group, Labquest, which is similar to 

the economic development Anacostia effort and the neighborhood 

effort has been very active in. I would think that we would be taking and already are taking a similar protocol in dealing with St. 

Elizabeth’s. 

It is understanding what our employees will need, what in fact, 

by security requirements and mix of use on the campus, will be 

available versus obviously the benefits of having the D.C. zoning 

and density and future neighborhood plans in Anacostia account 

for higher density and mixed use, both residential and obviously retail and amenities. So we would commit to doing the same thing. 

I think the thing I am mostly aligned with or know about is this 

FDA experience. They have incredibly good communications going 

back between what the employees need or expect as they migrate 

from Twinbrook to White Oak and what the community can offer. 

I think that model, as the Southeast Federal Center was, can be 

a good model for St. Elizabeth’s. 

Ms. NORTON. That kind of collaboration seems to be very important because to get something that one wants and the other doesn’t 

might affect whether or not somebody comes. 

One of the things that occurs to me is no matter what kind of 

food you have on the inside, you might find that there are certain 

kinds of sit-down restaurants and food that you get on the outside 

that people want to come out to have, to actually go to lunch outside of the wall. 

Mr. Imperato, what has been the experience on 8th Street with 

that kind of communication? 

20 

Mr. IMPERATO. Well, basically, we just kept the information flowing and the market, as you said, developed to respond to what people were seeking. 

You know what we had on the Navy Yard was minimal—as you 

say, fast food, very small facilities, enough in the case of bad 

weather to take care of people’s basic needs. But they want more, 

and they went out to get it, and the community responded by building it. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Abdur-Rahman, you mentioned the historic 

preservation. There were some considerable resources that the 

GSA, once it took control, had to put into it just to preserve the 

historic qualities of this building. Do you, you and perhaps Mr. 

Winstead, anticipate reuse of most of these buildings? 

Here, I preface this by saying the Federal Government is the 

only entity I know in the United States that will put money into 

preserving a building if it is a historic building. The reason the developers are not interested in sites which have historic buildings is 

that they obviously can’t afford to do that because it raises the cost. 

So the Federal Government usually partners with a developer so 

that that whole cost doesn’t go onto the developer. 

What kind of reuse do you anticipate at St. Elizabeth’s? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. For this project, it was mentioned in my 

testimony that we do, with the alternatives that we have in our 

preliminary master plan, envision the reuse of the majority of the 

contributing buildings, and that has been acknowledged by the Advisory Council and Historic Preservation, all the other preservation 

groups that we do adapt and reuse the majority of the contributing 

buildings to the NHL. 

I wanted to add another comment to the question about the 

things that we are doing at St. Elizabeth’s in terms of trying to 

marry the desire of the employees with the retail in the area. We 

have taken some steps, and we are planning additional steps in 

that area. 

When the project started, GSA and DHS with Coast Guard, DHS 

and Coast Guard assembled an employee group in the Coast Guard 

and then it will be joined by DHS as they come onto the program, 

to really represent the desires and wishes and questions about the 

employees that are going to the area. We began answering questions about planned developed in Ward 8 which, as you know, has 

a lot of new housing starts and other development in the area, so 

that they would be aware of it. 

In our meeting on Monday with the Ward 8 Business Council 

with James Bunn and Brenda Richardson, we talked about and we 

will follow up on the idea of having like a retail roundtable where 

the Ward 8 Business Council will broker a discussion with GSA 

and DHS and Coast Guard and the developers that are thinking 

about bringing services to the community to make sure that we 

have just that type of matching of the demand and the need in the 

area because I think what we all recognize is that even though we 

are going to have, as Navy mentioned, kind of minimal services for 

DHS employees, no one eats in the cafeteria forever. 

The overall issue in that community is that the entire community is under-served right now. So we want to make sure that when 

21 

the 14,000 employees come in, there is a matching of the demand 

and the need with the community and the DHS employees. 

Ms. NORTON. Yes, go ahead. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. I just wanted to comment about a question about 

historic landmark designation. Obviously, we only have a couple 

dozen National Historic Landmarks with St. Elizabeth’s as one. We 

are putting a lot of effort into this both on an NCR level and at 

the commissioner’s office level and working with the historic preservation leadership. 

Our goal is to preserve, the number I have heard is at least 80 

percent—and this has been shared with the historic preservation 

people—of the existing structures to achieve this 4.5 million square 

feet. 

I would not be misrepresenting saying that this is going to be an 

easy task. We are very engaged with these groups. As I mentioned, 

tomorrow Dick Moe is meeting for the second time with me. I have 

toured the site with Dick Moe as well as John Nau who chairs the 

Advisory Council. Our people have hired consultants, historic preservationists, obviously, land planners, space planners, master planners and the like. 

Our biggest challenge is this density around these historic properties, but we are confident that with the advisory role of ACHP 

and the 106 process, that we are going to achieve a balance between what DHS needs in housing their critical components to be 

an increasingly effective agency and preserving this campus. 

It is very interesting to me that in my tour over a year ago with 

Dick Moe, he turned to me at one point and said, you know 1.5 million square feet seems a lot of space for this historic campus. That 

was his first comment. 

His second comment was, David, we do understand that we are 

so much better off having GSA look at this with the resources it 

has and its ability to balance both historic preservation and the 

needs for making this a live campus. 

I think that is the way both we are approaching it at GSA and 

the historic preservation people are. I would also mention we are 

engaged, obviously, with the Department of Interior and input that 

we are getting from all of those groups. 

Ms. NORTON. Could I ask you about access? 

As I said, most people are not much interested in going into a 

Federal building when most Federal buildings don’t have an extraordinary view from which one can just look at Washington and 

the so-called Point and access to the Point we have discussed. 

Again, I am assuming that the access to the Point is going to be 

preserved. Could you elaborate on that? 

Mr. ABDUR-RAHMAN. Yes. As a part of the master plan process 

and as a part of all the discussions that I have conducted with the 

Advisory Neighborhood Commission, we have talked about providing what we call regularly scheduled access to the Point. To the 

degree that there is some negotiated way with the community to 

provide access, that seems to be acceptable. 

I do want to point out that we have also received comments from 

Bolling Air Force Base and the White House Security Office that 

they are concerned that we not provide unscheduled open access at 

all times. So there is a balance here to try to strike between the 

22 

security of DHS and our Federal neighbors and the desire of the 

community. 

The community, some of the ANC leaders have mentioned that 

around certain holidays or other events, as long as there is a procedure, they understand they can gain access to the site. That might 

be acceptable, similar to the way they have access to Bolling Air 

Force Base right now. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, you now what? This is not an Air Force base, 

and this is in the middle of a community. It is not a highway. 

I can just tell you right now, I would be willing to sit with the 

agencies involved. I think I am going to have to do that. If they 

are talking about holidays, first of all, this facility is guarded 24- 

7. 

The Federal Government is going to have to understand that 

when you are located in a community, there are certain things that 

you have to do to be a good neighbor, and one thing you don’t do 

is to say you can’t get to the highest point in the city to survey the 

entire city and region except on the Fourth of July. You don’t do 

that. 

You say to the community, this is the kind of thing we will do, 

but that is something that as a Member of the Homeland Security 

Committee, I am most aware of the difficulty you are having. That 

is not something you can do by yourself. I will call in GSA along 

with the appropriate agencies and see what we can work out. 

I want to say, finally, that what you just said, Mr. AbdurRahman, about collaboration between the employees and the community makes me very hopeful. To establish that kind of collaboration as early as possible so that everybody is on the same page in 

a number of ways and retail, I suppose, would be only one of them. 

But it does seem to me that that would be a very important thing 

to do, particularly given the concerns, at least I have, about the 

wall seeming to indicate to employees there is no outside world 

there. 

I encourage you to continue with that effort, and I am very 

pleased that the Ward 8 Business Council is already involve din 

that effort. I think that is very hopeful and can be very fruitful for 

the kinds of issues we are discussing here today. 

I want to thank each and every one of you for coming. 

Well, Mr. Winstead has something. 

Mr. WINSTEAD. Madam Chair, you mentioned earlier this issue 

of security and your concern for it and personally being involved 

with community, our planning and DHS’ interest. 

You mentioned you may be looking at the security question in 

another hearing format. We would welcome that. 

The Office of Chief Architect, which I will submit to the Committee, just finished a new security design guide. Our attempt here 

is to obviously uphold the Federal Protection Service requirements, 

ISS standards for a Level 5 facility, which this will probably be, the 

top level of security. We do have a new approach which we will be 

implementing within the master plan to make sure that our security requirements and some of the designs are as palatable for 

both, obviously, protection as well as community. 

Ms. NORTON. You say a new approach. When you say a new approach, what do you mean? 

23 

Mr. WINSTEAD. In terms of the design of our buildings and campuses. If you are going to have another hearing, we can get into 

this in detail, but I would like to submit this to the Committee at 

this time. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, I suppose my experience representing the 

District of Columbia after 9/11 was that if Federal officials, particularly Members of Congress, don’t watch, security officials just have 

at it and they will overreact. I have to tell you that people let them 

do it because they don’t take any note of it. 

Right after 9/11, it was all I could do to get any other work done 

to keep them from closing down the District of Columbia. These 

checkpoints where cars go by, this was make work. 

Well, I am very concerned about not being able to get into a Federal building to use the cafeteria. I really am. I don’t know what 

it means to show your ID. If all you have to do is to show your ID, 

then it is useless, isn’t it? 

Then we want to be clear that anybody can come. But I tell you 

this gentleman who is head of the B.I.D. had to call somebody to 

come and vouch for him. That is the kind of thing that if my colleagues know about it, I think we can eliminate and, if we work 

closely with GSA, I think we can show that we need as much security as is useful and not so much as keeps taxpayers out of buildings, not to mention visitors and others who have business. 

Again, I thank each of you for testimony that we have found very 

helpful. 

I would like to call the next panel: Robert James from the Ward 

8 Business Counsel; Albert Hopkins, Jr., President and CEO, Anacostia Economic Development Corporation; Philip Pannell, Executive Director, Anacostia Coordinating Council; Stan Voudrie, Principal, Four Points, LLC; and Barbara Lang, CEO of the D.C. 

Chamber of Commerce. 

We will just proceed from left to right. Would you, please, as you 

testify, give your name and your organization? 

Mr. James? 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT JAMES, PRESIDENT, WARD 8 BUSINESS COUNCIL; ALBERT HOPKINS, JR., PRESIDENT AND 

CEO, ANACOSTIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; 

PHILIP PANNELL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANACOSTIA COORDINATING COUNCIL; STAN VOUDRIE, PRINCIPAL, FOUR 

POINTS, LLC; BARBARA LANG, CEO, D.C. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 

Mr. JAMES. Good morning, Committee Chair and Members of the 

Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and 

Emergency Management. 

My name is Robert James. I am Chairman of the Ward 8 Business Council. I am here today to testify about the New DHS Headquarters at St. Elizabeth’s: Local Business Opportunities. 

First, let me start off by saying it is indeed a pleasure and an 

honor to come before you today as a resident of the District of Columbia. The Ward 8 community is very pleased to be a part of the 

process of planning and implementation of General Services Administration’s new site on the West Campus of St. Elizabeth’s Hospital. 

24 

However, there are some issues we would like to express to you. 

There are eight of them in particular: 

Number one, engaging in CBEs, Certified Business Enterprises, 

and getting them on your schedule; 

Number two, identifying prospective job opportunities for Ward 

8 residents; 

Number three, ensuring historic preservation; 

Number four, ensuring public access to the Point; 

Number five, conducting an impact statement on transportation 

and jobs; 

Number six, encouraging your employees to patronize businesses 

on the MLK Jr. corridor; 

Number seven, absorbing additional costs for infrastructure; 

Number eight, encouraging the use of public transportation to 

protect the air quality in Ward 8. 

We understand that the Coast Guard headquarters as well as 

Homeland Security will occupy some of the space on the West Campus of St. Elizabeth’s. We have some concerns with the accessibility 

of how this project will be incorporated into our community. 

As you know, we already have Bolling Air Force Base and the 

community has very little access. Clearly, with the structure of the 

Coast Guard and Homeland Security, access will be limited. Hence, 

we need to find some means of cooperation with the 14,000 employees to be an asset to the rest of the ward, and the ward will benefit 

from the facilities being there. 

Also, there is a greater likelihood for more retail, sit-down restaurants, et cetera. We are also interested in exploring the needs 

of the employees to get a better picture of their shopping and housing needs. The Ward 8 Business Council envisions a downtown 

Anacostia that is likened to the 7th Street corridor on Capitol Hill. 

We hope that GSA will encourage the employees to use the amenities on MLK Jr. Avenue, Southeast. 

Anther issue is changing traffic patterns. We assume that the 

flow of traffic will increase tremendously on MLK Jr. Avenue, Malcolm X and Good Hope Road, Southeast. We have two subway stops 

that will be used as well, Alabama Avenue and Anacostia Metro 

stations. You can see how important it is for GSA, the Ward 8 

Business Council and Council Member Marion Barry to work together to meet the needs of the additional employees who will be 

traveling those corridors. 

As you look around the new Ward 8, there is plenty of affordable 

and upscale housing. We would hope that some of those 14,000 employees would be residents of our community. 

The Ward 8 Business Council has been mandated by Council 

Member Marion Barry to make sure that whatever is built in the 

new Ward 8 ensures that employment or contractual opportunities 

are available to residents or Certified Business Enterprises, CBEs. 

We also work very closely with Erik Moses who head the D.C. Office of Small and Disadvantaged Businesses. The Ward 8 Business 

Council has a list of all the CBEs in Ward 8 that are qualified to 

participate in the building of the project from beginning to end. 

Additionally, we are concerned about the historic buildings on 

the west side. We attend Council Member Barry’s monthly Ward 

8 History-Heritage Council meetings to discuss historic sites in the 

25 

community. We encourage GSA to be mindful of the historic significance of St. Elizabeth’s and the community. 

As Chairman of the Ward 8 Business Council, I would extend an 

invitation to GSA to work with us very closely so that we all come 

to a mutual agreement about the project being built on the West 

Campus. We are very excited about having new neighbors. We will 

do everything in our power to ensure that the transition between 

the community and GSA is as smooth as possible. 

Let me close by saying there are many other concerns that I 

have, but I am certain that between the planning and community 

meetings, we will be able to work out any differences we have. 

Again, I am delighted that GSA will be our new neighbors. 

Please feel free to call on the Ward 8 Business Council for any assistance we can provide. 

Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. James. 

Mr. Hopkins. 

Mr. HOPKINS. Good morning, Chairperson Holmes Norton and 

Committee Members. 

My name is Albert R. Hopkins, Jr., and I am President and CEO 

of the Anacostia Economic Development Corporation located in 

Ward 8 in Washington, D.C. I appreciate the opportunity to provide 

testimony before this Subcommittee on the proposed Department of 

Homeland Security headquarters to be located at St. Elizabeth’s 

West Campus and associated opportunities for local businesses. 

I must first inform you, for the purposes of full disclosure, that 

the AEDC is a member of the one of the teams that has submitted 

a proposal to provide construction management services to the GSA 

to manage the construction of the Department of Homeland Security headquarters facility. 

By way of background, AEDC is a non-profit organization that 

has operated in the Anacostia-Far Southeast area of Washington, 

D.C. for over 37 years. It is AEDC’s mission to provide affordable 

housing opportunities for District of Columbia residents, enhance 

the economic viability of the east of the river communities and provide support to local and small businesses located in this area. 

AEDC is also a participant in the Washington, D.c. Small Business Development Center Network. Under contract with Howard 

University and the U.S. Small Business Administration, we operate 

one of four centers located in the District of Columbia that provides 

a wide variety of technical and managerial assistance to small businesses located through the District. During the course of the current year, the Small Business Development Center at AEDC provided technical assistance to over 240 District-based clients and 

provides instruction and training to over 375 workshop and seminar participants. 

The development of the DHS headquarters at St. Elizabeth’s 

West Campus represents one of the most unique opportunities associated with the resurgence and redevelopment of the AnacostiaFar Southeast community. This major Federal department will be 

located within the immediate proximity of resurging commercial 

corridors and in close proximity to several new and existing quality 

residential communities. 

26 

The DHS facility will also be located within the boundaries of the 

planned Anacostia Business Improvement District which will be 

able to provide services such as street cleaning, shuttle service to 

and from Metro stops, and safety ambassadors for the DHS headquarters’ personnel. 

Research compiled by AEDC staff, the Washington, D.C. Economic Partnership and others indicates that Anacostia-Far Southeast neighborhoods are undergoing an economic resurgence never 

before experienced. 

The planning, construction and development of the DHS headquarters facility, with its scheduled multi-year build-out, should be 

one of several economic engines that will guide and drive small 

business opportunities in this area. However, as has been seen in 

the past, this will not happen without the aggressive and affirmative planning and implementation of strategies that improve the 

small business utilization performance of both the District and 

Federal governments. 

I would remind the Subcommittee Chairperson of the September 

18th, 2007 forum presented by the U.S. General Services Administration’s National Capital Region, in collaboration with the AEDC, 

entitled St. Elizabeth’s West Campus Business Opportunities 

Forum held in Ward 8 at Matthews Memorial Baptist Church. 

This well attended event represented the first formal introduction of the plans for the West Campus to the small business community of the District of Columbia and Ward 8. The event also featured GSA contracting officers as well as prime contractors and 

tenant agencies. We were honored to have the Congresswoman address the participants. 

However, efforts must go beyond our current emphasis to help 

small and local businesses apply for and receive LSDBE, SBA 8(a) 

and CCR, Central Contracting Registration, certifications. Methodologies should be put in place before, during and after the construction of the DHS facility to enhance participation by small and 

local businesses in every facet of the planning, development and 

operation of the facility. 

The formulation of joint ventures and collaborations should be 

further explored as a means by which small and local businesses 

might be significantly involved in this development process. Each 

and every solicitation associated with the project should require the 

respondent to address provisions for significant small and local 

business utilization. 

Regarding my views on the question of what types of retail opportunities are needed in Anacostia, my response turns on a very 

simple analysis. The retail needs of the Anacostia-Far Southeast 

neighborhood mirror those of all areas of the District that have experienced rising value in their commercial and residential real estate markets and significant positive changes in their demographics and work populations. 

The Anacostia-Far Southeast area is increasing in population as 

a result of the many new residential developments completed, 

under development and in the production pipeline. In addition, it 

is projected that the new DHS headquarters at St. Elizabeth’s will 

add approximately 14,000 new full-time employees to the commuVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:40 Apr 28, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\39998 JASON
27 

nity. The estimated population increase will result in increased demand for first class retail goods and services. 

However, if the GSA allows substantial retail establishments 

such as restaurants, cleaners, drugstores, fast food establishments, 

bookstores, coffee houses, et cetera, to locate within the St. Elizabeth’s West Campus, there will be no net benefit to the Ward 8 

community since the West Campus of St. Elizabeth’s will, in all 

probability, be off limits to non-DHS or other unauthorized persons. 

It, therefore, becomes imperative for the GSA and the District of 

Columbia Government to mutually decide how to bring these retail 

goods and services to the area so that both the Ward 8 community 

and the DHS community benefit therefrom. 

One obvious solution would be for the District of Columbia Government to put in place a development plan which would allow for 

the establishment of retail zones along the east side of Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue on the East Campus of St. Elizabeth’s. The 

GSA could assist the District in this regard by conducting a survey 

of existing DHS personnel to ascertain their retail needs and desires, provide same to the District and refrain from placing those 

types of retailers on the West Campus. 

The District Government, in turn, can provide parking space for 

DHS personnel on the East Campus. This would ensure that DHS 

personnel will frequent the East Campus on a daily basis and be 

exposed to the many new retail establishments on that campus. 

If necessary, the District of Columbia and the GSA can mutually 

decide where new traffic signals and crosswalks should be located 

along the Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue corridor to safely facilitate the movement of DHS personnel to and from the West Campus to the East Campus. 

From the Ward 8 community’s perspective, there is great concern 

that the DHS headquarters on the West Campus will be an isolated facility which will provide no economic or aesthetically pleasing benefit to it. 

To be an asset to the Ward 8 community and to simultaneously 

address the security needs of the DHS, the District of Columbia 

and DHS-GSA officials should realistically consider where operations of the DHS which require less security can be placed on the 

West Campus. For example, at the Southern End of the West Campus near Milwaukee Place, perhaps less secure operations could be 

situated, thereby allowing some retail outlets to be placed at that 

location which then could be accessed by the general Ward 8 community. 

The objective is to make maximum use of this major economic 

development so that it not only serves and meets the needs of GSA 

and DHS but also provides economic spinoff benefits to the Ward 

8 community in which it is located. 

In order to further facilitate the acceptance of the DHS headquarters within the Ward 8 community and to increase the opportunity for Ward 8 and District of Columbia-based Local, Small and 

Disadvantaged Business Enterprises—or what are now referred to 

as Certified Business Enterprises—to secure contracts, to participate in the planning and construction of the facility, AEDC feels 

28 

strongly that the following services be availed to the DHS development process: 

One, provide a community liaison between the GSA, DHS, District of Columbia Government and the Ward 8 business and residential community during the planning and development of the facility. 

Two, create a means to work with Ward 8 and District-based 

LSDBE-CBE firms to prepare them for the contracting opportunities that will be made available at the DHS St. Elizabeth’s site. 

Three, establish a working relationship with employment training providers, such as Opportunities Industrialization Center, to 

prepare Ward 8 residents for the employment opportunities that 

will be made available as a result of the new DHS development. 

It is important to note that we will only have one shot at this 

wonderful opportunity that will bring approximately 4.5 million 

square feet of commercial development to the Ward 8 community. 

We need to go about this task as if it is what it is, a land use development opportunity that seeks to address the needs of three entities: the District of Columbia Government, the Federal Government 

and the Ward 8 community. The three entities obviously need to 

work in concert and determine how best to meet each other’s needs 

through the creation of a holistic economic development project. 

AEDC is appreciative to have the opportunity to offer its assistance in reaching this objective. 

Thank you, Madam Chairperson, for providing this occasion for 

AEDC to share its views on these subjects with you and the Committee. I would be pleased to attempt to respond to any questions 

that you may have. 

Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Hopkins. 

Mr. Pannell. 

Mr. PANNELL. Good morning, Madam Chairwoman. 

My name is Philip Pannell, and I am the Executive Director of 

the Anacostia Coordinating Council, also know as ACC, which is in 

its 24th year as a non-profit, volunteer consortium of individuals 

and organizations concerned and involved with the revitalization of 

Anacostia and its adjacent neighborhoods. The ACC engages in information gathering and sharing, networking, advocacy and community organization. 

For the past 13 years, ACC has been chaired by Arrington Dixon. 

The community is excited about plans to move the new Department of Homeland Security to the West Campus of St. Elizabeth’s 

Hospital and the local business opportunities that will be available. 

For the purposes of the DHS development, ACC defines local businesses as those that are located east of the Anacostia River and 

particularly those that are in Ward 8. 

The ACC recommends that the local businesses be involved in 

the planning, construction and operations in all appropriate aspects 

of the DHS headquarters development and all ongoing contractual 

work. 

ACC recommends that the General Services Administration and 

the District of Columbia Government engage in the nurturing of 

the current local businesses and encourage businesses to locate 

east of Anacostia River. 

29 

It would be ideal if the DHS would require contractors and vendors to set up offices in close proximity to the Anacostia Metro station. Also, the ACC recommends that the businesses that are established on the campus be locally-owned. 

The development that occurred on and around the Navy Yard is 

an example of the opportunities that are available to those east of 

the Anacostia River with DHS. The Navy Yard development has 

had a cascading impact on that community and enhanced the vibrant 8th Street business corridor from Pennsylvania Avenue to M 

Street. Because of the dearth of eclectic businesses on Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, ACC encourages the establishment of retail 

businesses of all kinds such as food, clothing, hardware, informational technology, entertainment, et cetera. 

Over the years, the ACC has been acknowledged for its outreach 

strategies and its success in organizing large meetings to engage 

community conversation and involvement. It is more than willing 

and able to be an outreach vehicle for the GSA and the District of 

Columbia Government and welcomes the opportunity to forge a 

contractual relationship. 

In the August 31st, 2007 preliminary draft to the National Capital Planning Commission for comment, the GSA’s master plan for 

the DHS headquarters consolidation at St. Elizabeth’s West Campus cites in its Community Involvement Summary the meetings 

that GSA representatives have had with the ACC dating back to 

2005. ACC stands ready to continue that constructive engagement. 

Madam Chair, with your permission, I would like mention two 

things that are not in my testimony, particularly since the issue of 

the historical aspects of the West Campus have been alluded to 

several times this morning. 

There used to be a wonderful museum that was on the West 

Campus in the Center Building. It was there for decades, and people quite literally came from all over the world, which was documented in the sign-in registry there, to see that museum, and the 

museum’s focus was on the history of psychology as well as the history of psychiatric treatment of the mentally ill. It actually had artifacts such as some of the original beds when St. Elizabeth’s 

opened and some Dorothea Dix’s personal memorabilia. As a matter of fact, it had a wonderful visual chronology of psychiatry, 

starting with Freud. 

This museum, first of all, was one of the best kept secrets not 

only in Ward 8 but throughout the city because it did not have the 

money for outreach to promote the museum. 

The artifacts were dispersed to places unknown or, at your meeting that you had the Petey Green Center, someone from GSA said 

that well, some of the artifacts may be at Howard University. Some 

of them may be at Walter Reed. 

Wherever they are, they need to come back together because that 

was such an incredibly historical jewel in the rough, and that 

would be quite beneficial to the community in so many ways to actually reestablish that museum. 

Also, on the grounds of the West Campus is a Civil War cemetery 

which is unique in the aspect that it actually has the bodies of both 

African American and white Civil War soldiers buried there, which 

was unheard of to have an integrated cemetery. I would hope that 

30 

the community will have access to that very historical site because 

it is extremely important in terms of the history of Ward 8 and the 

Civil War. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, that is a very interesting anecdote about this 

historic site. I will have staff look to see where these artifacts have 

been dispersed. We know that the cemetery hasn’t been dispersed, 

and we know there is an obligation to, in fact, maintain it. 

But this notion of access, it comes up again, and this is something we are going to have to assure. I am going to have to work 

with a whole lot more than GSA on that because I have to contend 

with the people who think they run things. Those are the security 

people. They run things until there is some intervention, and then 

we are always able to get some relaxation. 

So, thank you for that. 

Mr. PANNELL. Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Voudrie. 

Mr. VOUDRIE. Good morning and thank you, Madam Chair, for 

the opportunity to appear before you today. 

My name is Stan Voudrie. I am a Principal with Four Points, 

LLC, a D.C.-based real estate development company. 

I second the comments of my fellow panelists regarding access to 

the site and development of the St. E’s campus, but I would like 

to take a few moments in the opportunity to make this body aware 

of some of the planned new development in the historic Anacostia 

neighborhood. 

Four Points has formed a joint venture with the Curtis Family, 

a landowner and business owner in historic Anacostia for over 80 

years. We have been working together with the various community 

stakeholders, the D.C. Office of Planning and others over the last 

two years to formulate a development plan for approximately 9.5 

acres of land that we own along Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. 

The site plan of the proposed development is attached to my 

written testimony for your reference. 

The plan covers an area bounded by Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue on the east, U Street, Southeast on the north end of the site, 

Chicago Place to the south and then 295 to the west. Our plan calls 

for the development of approximately 500 new residential units, 

165,000 square feet of new retail space and 855,000 square feet of 

new office. 

We are concluding the preliminary planning and intend to submit the project to the D.C. Zoning Commission for approval in the 

first quarter of 2008 which would allow us to get approval in late 

2008 and begin construction in 2009 for a first phase ready to be 

occupied in 2011. 

It is our opinion that this neighborhood is currently under-served 

across almost every retail category even before the addition of the 

14,000 new Federal employees in the neighborhood. As such, our 

plan calls for development that will bring neighborhood-serving retail to historic Anacostia. We have included space for a grocery 

store and have begun preliminary discussions with potential operators for that store. We also have space for a full service pharmacy, 

a drugstore, restaurant spaces as well as opportunity for an urban 

cinema with eight to ten screens. 

31 

Additionally, we now have several smaller retail spaces that are 

not part of this new development but that are available for lease. 

We have recently leased one of those to a local entrepreneur that 

is starting a coffee shop, and the other spaces are being toured by 

art gallery owners, restaurant operators, but to date we don’t have 

any additional leases signed for that space. 

Again, I thank you for this opportunity. 

We look forward to DHS moving to our neighborhood. We believe 

that with proper planning and coordination, that they can be a 

very positive addition to the community, and I welcome the opportunity to work with this body and GSA to make sure that that happens. 

Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Voudrie. 

Ms. Lang. 

Ms. LANG. Good morning, Madam Chair. 

I am Barbara Lang. I am President and CEO of the District of 

Columbia Chamber of Commerce, and I am pleased to testify before 

the Subcommittee on Economic Development as it considers the 

community bordering the St. Elizabeth’s campus. As the largest 

business organization in this region, the Chamber works hard to 

make living, working, playing and, of course, doing business in the 

District of Columbia a much better proposition for everyone. 

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the invitation to testify on behalf 

of our 2000 plus members and the 200,000 residents that employ 

them about how GSA can best use its resources to aid the economic 

development of the areas adjacent to the St. Elizabeth’s campus. 

Let me begin by saying I was delighted to hear some of the earlier testimony from GSA. The community adjoining St. Elizabeth’s 

has been overlooked for many years, and we are pleased to learn 

that the Department of Homeland Security and 14,000 of its employees will be relocating to the campus. 

This move creates an opportunity for economic development in 

Congress Heights that has not existed for decades. Because the 

local neighborhood economy of Congress Heights stagnated long 

ago, its residents have been largely excluded from the city’s economic resurgence. 

Developing the St. E’s campus and sharing its economic benefit 

with the community should be a foremost concern as GSA and DHS 

move forward and, to be clear, the economic benefits DHS brings 

as a new neighbor in Anacostia, must be felt outside St. Elizabeth’s 

historic gate and fortified walls. 

DHS must not and cannot create an oasis of services walled off, 

withheld and withdrawn from the residents of Ward 8. Some residents have expressed concern that this will be a secure compound 

impervious to the community and unwilling to interact with its 

surroundings. 

We all know that an optimal environment is one in which the 

community and DHS benefit from symbiotic economic interaction. 

They must be an anchor of economic stability and a catalyst for development that creates jobs, encourages economic investment and 

patronizes neighborhood businesses. DHS can be a catalyst for 

change that is long overdue. 

32 

What does this change look like? It takes the form of a robust 

economic activity, and the best example I can provide is the renaissance we have seen in downtown Washington such as Gallery 

Place. Over the last 10 years, it has evolved from an area where 

people came to work and left at the end of the day to a place where 

people work during the day, play and dine at night and enjoy at 

all times. 

It takes time, however, and change will happen in stages, but 

GSA can begin laying the foundation now for a similar economic rebirth east of the river. 

You are beginning to see several of the economic and community 

factors necessary for growth emerge. First and foremost, preparations are being made for construction of a complex that will house 

a cabinet level agency. In the short term, that means constructionrelated jobs. In the long term, it means a daily influx of employees 

who will demand certain services during the workday. 

You also have a Metro station and I-295 nearby to help ferry 

workers to work. The importance of these very basic infrastructural 

assets should not be overlooked. 

Once you get employees to work, they are going to demand food 

and other small retail services. These small retailers need to be patronized by DHS employees during work hours and be available to 

serve the community at all times. Examples that comes to mind are 

a diverse mix of food establishments, a CVS or some sort of pharmacy, a bookstore, a gift shop and perhaps dry cleaner. 

The vision should be to grow the economy from daytime establishments in the beginning and then broaden to serve the entire 

community with a mall and wider range of shops. Eventually, there 

should be sit-down dining establishments and a theater for 

nightlife. The ultimate goal should be mixed use development serving the needs of the people and the businesses upon which they 

rely. 

The downtown area is the best example of this model. There are 

many small businesses and vendors that cater to workers during 

the day. There is also fine dining and nightlife for after work. This 

business model of serving the office worker and layering economic 

activity to serve and coincide with them will be a winning strategy 

in the areas surrounding St. E’s. 

We ask that you look to the lessons of our city’s success downtown, along U Street, on H Street but also the Pentagon and Pentagon City model as you consider how to attract new businesses to 

Congress Heights. 

The final question is how to incentivize companies to relocate in 

areas around the St. E’s complex. We encourage you to consider tax 

and other incentives that might include DHS devoting a significant 

percentage of their contracts to neighborhood businesses. Such arrangements would link DHS to the community and would offer new 

business a stable customer base from the outset when they are 

most, most vulnerable. 

The government might also consider guaranteeing small business 

loans and offering low-cost financing for vendors in the neighborhood. 

In DHS’ move to the St. E’s campus, we see tremendous opportunities for District residents and for DHS. The Chamber is available 

33 

to partner with you, Madam Chair, as you move forward, and we 

look forward to St. Elizabeth’s becoming another Washington success story. 

Thank you very much for having me testify, and I will be available to answer any questions. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, thank you very much, Ms. Lang. 

Could I just ask a threshold question of all you who have experience, business experience in this city and in this region? 

Typically, in the District of Columbia, it has been difficult to get 

the commercial strip developed. I mean you have it all over the 

District. You have the complaints on Georgia Avenue. 

I am not sure I know of a residential area where the strip has 

developed as you would think it would have to serve the people 

who live there. There is money to be made there. Well, the same 

thing, obviously, pertains here. 

I live on Capitol Hill, and 8th Street was hardly. It was essentially moribund and it didn’t matter even that over time it became 

more and more gentrified. Therefore, I don’t approach any of this 

with the notion of spontaneous combustion. Something will happen, 

and I do know that when there is a big market of moving into an 

area and we have always found that Federal employees draw people. 

You have seen me express some skepticism here and not because 

of the community itself but because of the way the wall operates 

and spaces across the street and on either side. 

You have been in the business of trying to attract business to the 

area. Given the large population, given people needing services, 

what has been a major reason that they haven’t come to serve the 

population itself for all these years? 

Why do we see such deterioration on Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue? It is a disgrace. 

Mr. HOPKINS. Well, you have two critical components in order to 

bring the needed retail goods and services that we all desire, and 

those two critical components that are needed are a strong daytime 

consumer base and you need an economic rising residential base 

where the incomes are higher than what have always been historically present east of the river. 

The residential base is coming because of Henson Ridge development and shops at Park Village, et cetera, all of the many housing 

developments on the way. But that daytime consumer base, where 

you have people with disposable income, we don’t have that great 

a population. So, therefore, Homeland Security with 14,000 personnel full-time employees, provides a great opportunity. 

Also, we have been saddled with a long strip of M.L. King that 

has had actually no retail commercial type development. So those 

characteristics that we have been faced with have sort of held us 

back. 

Ms. NORTON. Yes, you have burdens that other neighborhoods 

don’t have in that regard, but I think you make an important point 

here about daytime people, daytime traffic as well, and that may 

explain why other residential neighborhoods have experienced the 

same problem of development along the strip. We hope that, again, 

if the planning is done well, if in fact the kind of collaboration that 

was mentioned in the GSA testimony by Mr. Abdur-Rahman occurs 

34 

with employees and community residents, perhaps we can overcome some of these burdens. 

Mr. James, would you discuss? I understand the Ward 8 Business Council has been working with GSA in order to get some kind 

of collaboration with employees. 

Mr. JAMES. Yes, we do plan to meet with them again to implement that. We do plan to meet with them again. 

Ms. NORTON. You want to start this collaboration with the employees to come on the kinds of services you think people are going 

to need? 

Mr. JAMES. Yes, we will do that, and we will do that very soon. 

Ms. NORTON. Ms. Lang, you mentioned Gallery Place. By the 

way, Gallery Place and all of downtown is the accidental, I should 

say is the accidental, not entirely but large parts of it, beneficiary 

of the D.C. business tax credits that I got in the 1990s. When I got 

the home buyer tax credit, I got these business tax credits which 

make it easier to build. 

What I was doing was bargaining down the poverty rate so that 

we could get because we knew you get tax credits already in very 

poor neighborhoods. So I wanted to bargain down so that we could 

begin to deal with neighborhood strips. 

In fact, what happened was that in bargaining down the rate, it 

is better than the lowest rate that the Federal Government often 

uses, but it turns out that it included students in the District of 

Columbia. So students at Georgetown and George University who, 

believe me, I did not have in mind, got included in this. 

So, Gallery Place, of course it had TIFF. It had some things 

going for it. 

I see this, and again these analogies are very rough, as more like 

U Street. The only U Street had going for it was it got the subway 

stop, and that has been important, and we have seen development 

on U Street. I think we have seen some development we like and 

we are very pleased with on U Street. 

Were there ingredients along U Street, you think, besides the 

subway that encouraged the development there? 

Ms. LANG. I think so, and I will answer that by responding to 

your earlier question. I think two of the big inhibitors that we have 

in D.C. are the lack of a bigger plan and a vision. We do deals. We 

do deals very well, and we had to do it that way to reinvigorate 

and to get things going in the downtown. 

What we have not done particularly well—I was delighted to 

hear all the discussion earlier—is an overall plan for the city or for 

an area. I think we are starting to see that with this project. So 

I think that is very key. 

The other thing, Madam Chair, that we cannot lose sight of and 

the thing that inhibits businesses from coming in, it is very costly 

to do business in the District of Columbia, at least one third more 

than our suburbs. So that is one of the things that we face from 

the very beginning in terms of our tax structure and things that 

you know so very well of not being able to tax non-resident income. 

So that is a big inhibitor for us. 

Going to your question on U Street, I think that we have seen 

certainly the resurgence and I think we have a balance of the large 

national chains coming in. But the thing that I want to make sure 

35 

that we don’t lose in any of the things that we are doing is the local 

business community. 

The larger chains can come in, and they can pay the larger tax 

structure. They can because they can subsidize in other ways and 

that certainly gives them the brand recognition that they need. 

Your smaller businesses don’t have the ability to have their concerns subsidized from another way. So we have to be sure as we 

are doing any planning, that yeah, you need the bigger, the name 

brands coming in, but you also want to make sure the that local 

business community, those local brands, are getting that same 

thing. It becomes a lot more expensive for your local businesses to 

be able to afford that. 

So I think that is part of what we have to make sure we take 

advantage of in our planning and that we are able somehow to 

offer subsidies and tax incentives to encourage those local businesses, whether it is the local coffee shop, the local pharmacy, the 

dry cleaner, whatever that is, and not the national chains across 

the board. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Voudrie, I was very pleased to hear your discussion of what you are about to do. Is it Four Points? Somebody 

has owned that land for some time. 

Why did you decide to develop this office space, retail space and 

housing at this time? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. Well, as Ms. Lang has said, it is expensive for 

businesses to do business in the District comparatively to the suburbs, and we saw an opportunity here where the close proximity 

to the Navy Yard, the close proximity to downtown and the relatively large track of land that we were able to assemble gave us 

the opportunity to build office space in a location that has that incredible proximity to the business core but at a little bit lower price 

because of the reality that the neighborhood has been underserved. 

Ms. NORTON. What business core? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. It is close. It is very close. It is one metro stop 

from the Navy Yard. We had started planning this before DHS announced plans to locate at St. Elizabeth’s. 

But we are one metro stop from the Navy Yard. We are two 

metro stops from L’Enfant Plaza. We are minutes from downtown. 

We have multiple bridge access points. So, Anacostia, while it has 

been under-served, I think now is the time for this type, for a new 

type of development. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Voudrie, let me just inform you there are some 

empty buildings on M Street. So I am not sure that developers are 

going to cross the Anacostia. There are some buildings. There was 

such over-building. 

I think they are going to be filled. Indeed, GSA and the B.I.D. 

and I are having a forum down there. 

You haven’t mentioned DHS. Do you believe DHS contractors 

that we heard testimony are likely to want to be close to DHS 

would want to? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. I believe certainly that there are DHS contractors 

that will want to locate here, and we see that as an added benefit 

to developing in this area. 

36 

1 Changed from 77,000 during editorial process. 2 Changed from $55,000 during editorial process. 

Navy Yard contractors, education users, D.C. Government agencies as well, city agencies as well as Federal agencies have expressed desire to locate here, and we are in discussions with groups 

that will close to fill up our entire first phase of the office space. 

So the demand for office is still strong and is strong in this neighborhood. 

Ms. NORTON. What has been the reaction of the community to 

your proposal? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. The community, as we are hearing today, is very 

concerned about the type of retail that is going to be provided 

there, and the community wants to see a mix of housing, not just 

affordable, for rent housing but for sale housing for people across 

all economic levels. 

But the primary thing that we are hearing is what are the opportunities for retail. People in the neighborhood want to see another 

grocery store. We have gotten a lot of good press about the grocery 

that Giant opened. 

Ms. NORTON. Do you anticipate there will be a grocery store? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. We have. We are in discussions right now with a 

number of grocers. We have a grocery store planned for our first 

phase which we are hoping to have open by 2011. We do have a 

location available for a grocery store as well as the drugstore, 

which Ms. Lang mentioned, that is available not just for people 

commuting to and from DHS but to serve the residents of this community. 

Ms. NORTON. Your notion of office space provides some of the 

daytime traffic Mr. Hopkins was talking about. Mr. Hopkins, would 

you indicate to me what the status of—is this called the Gateway 

Building? 

Mr. HOPKINS. Yes. 

Ms. NORTON. This is the building just as you cross the bridge, 

Martin Luther King and Good Hope Road. 

Mr. HOPKINS. That is correct, 1800 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. Madam Chairperson, the status is we are negotiating with the 

District of Columbia to occupy the two office floors. AEDC is moving its office to the first floor in the rear of the building on sort 

of the northwest corner of the building. The District Government 

should be in the building around August after tenant build-out 

work for them is completed. 

What we really are anxious to see happen is the planned District’s Department of Transportation that is proposed to relocate 

from the Reeves Center on 14th Street and be on the remaining 

space that is located at the site. That building would be approximately 377,0001 square feet. It would have about six floors, and the 

total population workforce is about 600 people and the average income is $50,000.2 So that is $30 million of potential disposal consumer income. 

Ms. NORTON. From whom? I am sorry. What was that tenant 

again? 

Mr. HOPKINS. Department of Transportation, the District’s Department of Transportation. 

37 

Ms. NORTON. I see. 

Mr. HOPKINS. I believe that the city will make an announcement 

either by the end of this month or hopefully during the first couple 

of months of next year as to who the chosen developer is to build 

the building. 

Ms. NORTON. Ms. Lang mentioned a plan. I am not sure the nature of the plan, but we know what the GSA is doing. We know 

what its obligations are. Mr. Hopkins allows as he is already seeking to provide services. We know about the planning operations. 

Mr. Hopkins, when you mention in your testimony that there 

should be ways—you call them methodologies—during construction 

to enhance participation by small and local businesses in every 

facet of the planning. I believe Federal regulations do require that. 

But I want to know what the District should be doing, in your 

view, with GSA or otherwise when we consider that this large 

project is coming. 

Mr. HOPKINS. Well, it is interesting. The District, at one time, 

was planning for proposed future uses on the east side campus of 

St. Elizabeth’s. They had the architectural firm of RTKL and Associates. I joined that planning exercise and then I guess after a few 

years everything stopped, but I am encouraged now because I have 

been told recently by a gentleman from RTKL that the city has 

hired them again to look at how to plan for the east side campus 

revitalization. 

I understand from hearing GSA today that they are in discussions, working closely with the city, and I know they have requested the city to provide space for parking. Well, if the city creates those retail zones on the east side and you have some parking 

opportunities for the west side employees to park and they go back 

and forth, that certainly is going to open up that east side campus, 

especially if it has retail establishments there. Then there is a reason for people to cross the street. 

I really would like to see something done with that wall, but 

again you have to fight the historic nature of the wall. So it probably will remain. 

There are certainly opportunities at the Milwaukee end of the 

west side campus where you could put some less secure facilities 

of DHS and maybe some retail opportunities, so people in the community can frequent the West Campus and it won’t be so secure, 

so to speak. 

So I think the city really has to move fast because you don’t want 

GSA to be so overly concerned with meeting the needs of their employees and, if they cannot see what the city is planning for the opposite side of the street, they will be forced to look and attempt to 

locate retail facilities on the West Campus. We really have to get 

the city out ahead of them. 

I think if GSA did a survey of their personnel, it would be helpful. It also would buttress the retailers’ proposals to do business because they will have access to those types of surveys to justify to 

financiers that they have a good proposal. So we can work together, 

certainly, to make that work. 

Ms. NORTON. It is very important what you say about the East 

Campus and the wall. You are right, Mr. Hopkins. If a mission of 

38 

the GSA is to preserve, is to do historic preservation, that wall is 

not coming down. 

But everybody, look. Look on M Street. That wall didn’t come 

down either. That is a similar wall along M Street, and it just developed on the other side. It is more burdensome, but here is the 

East Campus. 

Now I can understand why you say this began some years ago. 

They were looking at it. But you may have answered your question. 

When they were looking for daytime traffic, they probably didn’t 

find it. Now you have it. 

This is what I fear, and I think I share your fear. If there is not 

a plan—Ms. Lang talked about a plan—beyond your normal master 

plan of we want some retail, and we have a master plan in the District. It deals with transportation and such. We dealt with transportation. We have two subway stops. We are going to have to deal 

with the streets. 

But here you have I can only call it a campus because I don’t see 

it as anything else at this point. One needs to get inside there. 

Some of that is going to have to be preserved. Let’s face it. 

The part that we are all interested in is for daytime traffic so 

that retail of various kinds and commercial businesses will want to 

come, we know where we want it. But I don’t know of any plan, 

and that is what I am asking you. 

Mr. Hopkins has indicated that there were some consultants 

looking at it. 

Mr. HOPKINS. They are back again. The city has again retained 

RTKL and Associates to do that. 

We have to remember that both campuses are historic. 

Ms. NORTON. Exactly. 

Mr. HOPKINS. So we have to find what parcels along the east side 

corridor can be made available for retail and development. 

Ms. NORTON. Do you know whether that has been done? Do you 

know whether a survey of the campus has been done that would 

indicate which parts of the campus are more suited for retail and 

which must be maintained? 

Mr. HOPKINS. I believe RTKL has done that the first time 

around, and the city just kind of gave up on it for whatever reason. 

Ms. NORTON. Yes. Well, I think they gave up because even if you 

did it, the daytime traffic notion comes in. 

Look, this is going to be construction over years. The Coast 

Guard is only the first building. One of the great benefits of this 

construction is you don’t just put up a building and then there it 

all goes. There should be continuing benefits to the community. 

I would say probably 15, 20 years of construction. We don’t like 

construction, but at least it will be going on in the inside, so the 

community won’t be obstructed. But that’s a continuing revenue 

stream, and these people are going to move in as the buildings 

come up. 

Some of them are not going to want to come across the Anacostia. Well, they are coming. If they want their jobs, they are coming. And, they are not going to necessary want to come out. 

So, in a real sense, this is a marketing challenge for the District 

of Columbia and the community, and I am anxious to see the planVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:40 Apr 28, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\39998 JASON
39 

ning proceed afoot because the sooner we have it the less problems 

we will have with the employees. 

We will have some pushback from employees that can’t do anything about it. I have seen how that works. Some surly people who 

are used to being downtown who are now going to find themselves 

in downtown Ward 8, and we have to make sure that that is, in 

fact, the kind of downtown our community, as well as the employees, might want. 

I want to inform all of you that I am having a hearing, especially 

in light of your testimony, Mr. Hopkins, that small businesses and 

so forth. Among the agencies under the jurisdiction of our Committee are three agencies that do a large amount of business with 

small businesses. You heard me ask GSA, I want a breakdown for 

the District of Columbia. 

FEMA, GSA, which is the grand-daddy of them all because it 

does a lot of the procurement for the entire Federal Government, 

DOD and those places. FEMA, GSA, EDA, I am going to have a 

separate hearing on them, asking them to come in and tell me 

where they are now, and I am going to be working with them on 

small business opportunities for the District of Columbia. Considering this large development, I will be particularly focused on this 

development. 

Now we have been able to negotiate an apprenticeship program 

for certified apprenticeships in this region. It is a little different 

from the pre-apprentice opportunities that have been available in 

the District. Have any of those opportunities been used in Ward 8? 

Not the GSA opportunities, because they haven’t been there, but 

the pre-apprenticeship opportunities, have any of those been used 

in Ward 8 to your knowledge? 

Mr. HOPKINS. They have been used where the development has 

occurred either on city-owned land, and/or the development project 

has received benefits from the city, and so it is a requirement of 

the city that the GCs have an approved apprenticeship program. 

But I am not aware of any Federal contracting projects. 

Ms. NORTON. Did the District build that building? 

Mr. HOPKINS. Right. It was on District land. So we had an apprenticeship program, our general contractor did. 

Ms. NORTON. I do want to indicate that we are talking about 

maybe 20 years of construction. We have been talking about business here. Jobs for people is going to be important to do. I think 

part of what happened at the baseball stadium really didn’t have 

to do so much with this. 

I really think there is something to the notion that when people 

haven’t had access to this kind of job—you are talking about people 

going out in the heat and in the cold—very special pre-apprenticeship programs have to be done. We will be very much willing to 

work with the District and with the local community to make sure 

that you don’t come in and see all the jobs there are not going. 

After all, they are real people. The most immediate effect they 

can get would be to get some jobs during construction. They are not 

going to own anything, but they should get some benefit immediately, and the construction is going to be going on. 

I want to ask Mr. Voudrie, have you begun to market? 

40 

I was very impressed with what you said about, goodness, a grocery store. Have you begun to market the office space and found 

tenants that are interested in office space? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. We have begun marketing the office space that is 

going to be in the first phase of our development. 

Ms. NORTON. There is what? 

Mr. VOUDRIE. That will be in the first phase of our development. 

So we are marketing to larger users that would be interesting in 

a built-to-suit type of situation. 

So we are in discussions with predominantly educational users as 

well as a few government contractors at this point but nothing that 

is able to be disclosed at this time. We don’t have any firm commitments yet. We are about two years off. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, I think what you are doing is very groundbreaking and important, and I think it is going to be successful and 

it is going to be ahead of the game. 

Mr. VOUDRIE. Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Because I really do think it is going to happen and 

that it will be important to have some space there and people not 

just start to build when they think something is going to happen 

at St. Elizabeth’s. That is going to take time too. 

So I suppose I am in a rush. I am very pleased with how the 

community has, for years now, thought about what kind of development is needed. 

So you are up and ready. You know a lot. I think the questions 

and suggestions about surveys of Federal employees. I would ask 

that you work with the District to get something more official in 

the way of a survey of the community. I don’t think that that 

should be your mission because somebody should hire a consultant 

to do that. 

This is a community full of residents, full of residents on either 

side of Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. Some of them, as they see 

some development occur, for example, around the Giant, may find, 

well, that is where we would go. Maybe Martin Luther King Avenue isn’t simply a repeat of what is in another part of the ward. 

So I think it would be useful for the Federal Government to have 

some sampling of the kind I am going to ask GSA to get from Federal employees about people would like to see. This generic notion 

is helpful, but if we are talking about Federal employees and the 

community, getting both of those straight together is going to be 

important in light of the fact that both are going to need to do it. 

So we hear it is coming, a grocery store. I know you will hear 

that time and time again. 

Mr. Hopkins said something that I can almost guarantee you is 

the case, that they shouldn’t be doing a coffee house and they 

shouldn’t be doing a bookstore. I love this list of things that they 

shouldn’t be doing, establishments such as—I don’t know—fast 

food. Maybe if you all really want that on the outside, you can have 

it. 

Drugstores, you are not going to find that, and coffee shops, 

bookstores. Those are inappropriate for inside a Federal building. 

Ms. LANG. Madam Chair? 

Ms. NORTON. Yes. 

41 

Ms. LANG. Just a couple of comments, one going back to your 

comment on the local business and ensuring that a good bit of this 

goes to local business, and I am delighted that you are going to 

pursue that further. 

I have not looked at numbers in the past year, but a year ago 

when I looked at the Federal spending into the District of Columbia, there was so little that it would not even register on a graph. 

Now there is a lot going to the region but not to the District of Columbia. So I just urge that we are able to change that direction and 

primarily because local businesses are the ones that will hire District residents first and foremost. 

As you may know I also chair the District’s Workforce Investment Council, and one of the things that we are focused on is a 

workforce strategy for the city that will be ready in March. We 

have done a lot of work in Ward 8 and working with Council Member Barry and his staff because that is where we have a major concentration of unemployed residents. 

So how do we get them prepared for those jobs that will be coming online not just in Ward 8 but all over the District? So I think 

the key to this is making sure that local businesses, at least in the 

District of Columbia, are getting a large percent of the business 

that will be coming out of this development. 

Ms. NORTON. Let me caution everyone particularly since we have 

here those of you who aid small businesses. The Federal Government is competitive. GSA has done a very good job within that 

competitive system of getting minority and women and small business. I know it. I have seen it here in the District of Columbia. 

But it does seem to me that the services you provide are going 

to become more essential than ever, and I would like to work with 

you to make sure that our folks who haven’t had that opportunity 

will know they now have it and can be prepared to participate in 

these competitions. There is no way to get around Federal Law and 

Federal competitions. 

Now you will see the region is the grand master of procurements 

and contracts. They have an extraordinary, highly skilled workforce. The big contracting part of the United States is in our region 

and yes, if you compare that to the District, we will always be miniaturized compared to that. 

But there is no question in my mind that with some indication 

of how to compete, we can take advantage of this extraordinary opportunity. Maybe it will provide us, Ms. Lang, with the opportunity 

to have people understand that they should be competing not only 

for this opportunity but for other opportunities which are massive 

from the grand-daddy of them all. The grand-daddy of contractors 

and procurers is the United States Government. 

Your testimony has been extraordinarily helpful to us in our ongoing work to prepare for the coming of this new headquarters. 

Please continue to be in touch with us and let us know ways in 

which we can be helpful to you. Thank you again. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:27 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

42 


39998.006
43 


39998.007
44 


39998.008
45 


39998.009
46 


39998.043
47 


39998.044
48 


39998.045
49 


39998.046
50 


39998.047
51 


39998.048
52 


39998.010
53 


39998.011
54 


39998.012
55 


39998.013
56 


39998.014
57 


39998.015
58 


39998.016
59 


39998.017
60 


39998.018
61 


39998.019
62 


39998.020
63 


39998.021
64 


39998.022
65 


39998.023
66 


39998.024
67 


39998.025
68 


39998.026
69 


39998.027
70 


39998.028
71 


39998.029
72 


39998.030
73 


39998.031
74 


39998.032
75 


39998.033
76 


39998.034
77 


39998.035
78 


39998.036
79 


39998.037
80 


39998.038
81 


39998.039
82 


39998.040
83 


39998.041
84 

Æ 


39998.042