Summary#
B26-0846, the Poplar Point Economic Development Anchor Disposition Act of 2026, would authorize the Mayor to lease about 15 acres at Poplar Point to Therme DC LLC or an approved successor or affiliate. The land is described as currently owned by the United States and under National Park Service jurisdiction; the bill does not itself transfer the land to the District. Its stated goal is to allow development of a large health and wellness destination.
- After the District acquires the land, the Mayor could enter a 60-year ground lease, with one 20-year extension option. The Mayor’s authority to make the disposition would expire 10 years after the act takes effect.
- The proposed project is a 400,000-to-600,000-square-foot health and wellness facility with related amenities. The developer would have to meet green-building requirements and provide a construction and completion guarantee from a guarantor approved by the District.
- The developer would have to sign agreements covering First Source employment obligations and certified business participation. The bill says certified businesses must receive at least 35% of design and construction contract dollars.
- The initial rent would be $1 a year for 20 years. Later rent would be based on an appraisal, with scheduled rent adjustments; the amount is not yet known.
- The lease and development agreements must be consistent with the submitted term sheet. A substantive change to its business terms would need Council approval.
What it means for you#
- District residents and the public: The bill would allow a long-term lease of public land for this project, but it does not guarantee public access to the facility or set its prices.
- District workers: The developer must enter a First Source Agreement covering certain job-creation and employment obligations. The bill does not spell out the specific hiring results required.
- Certified businesses: The developer must enter an agreement requiring at least 35% of design and construction contract dollars to go to Certified Business Enterprises.
- Local businesses and District residents: The bill also requires compliance with an existing law concerning local, small, and disadvantaged businesses and the hiring of District residents. The parent law was not supplied, so its detailed requirements could not be checked.
- District government: The Mayor could negotiate and sign the lease and related agreements, but only after the District obtains the land and the transaction’s closing conditions are met. The bill does not itself require the federal government to transfer the land.
- Taxpayers: The bill does not directly change taxes, create a public benefit, or require the District to build the facility.
Money#
The bill gives a proposed rent schedule but provides no estimate of public costs or the eventual rent after the initial period.
- Rent would be $1 a year for the first 20 years. Starting in year 21, rent would be based on an appraisal; future rent amounts are unknown.
- From year 26, rent would generally rise every five years by increases tied to the U.S. Consumer Price Index, with a minimum annual increase of 2% and a maximum of 3%, calculated cumulatively but not compounded. Rent would also be reset by appraisal at the start of years 50 and 60.
- The developer would be responsible for constructing the project under the proposed agreements. No construction-cost figure is provided.
- The bill adopts a fiscal impact statement from a committee report, but that report is not included in the supplied material. No publicly available information on the estimated public cost is provided here.
What is unclear#
- Whether and when the federal government will transfer the land, and whether the District has met the federal transfer requirements, are not established in the supplied material.
- The final lease and related agreements are not provided. Closing conditions, the construction covenant’s duration, and other detailed obligations remain to be set out there.
- The term sheet gives estimated construction deadlines, but says they may be changed or extended with approval from the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development.
- The First Source Agreement’s specific employment obligations and the process for enforcing the business-participation requirements are not described.
- The committee report containing the fiscal impact statement was not supplied, so its cost estimate could not be checked.
Case for#
- The bill could give the District a way to put a defined part of Poplar Point to a proposed use after the District acquires the land.
- A long lease could give the developer time to build and operate a large facility, while the District retains ownership of the land.
- The project would be subject to green-building requirements, a completion guarantee, and agreements on employment and local business participation.
- The 35% certified-business contracting requirement sets a specific minimum for design and construction work.
Case against#
- The District would lease public land for $1 a year for the first 20 years, while the later rent depends on future appraisals. The supplied material does not estimate the value of that arrangement.
- The proposed lease could last up to 80 years, but key terms would be settled in later agreements that are not supplied.
- The construction deadlines are estimates that may be extended with agency approval, and the bill does not specify the conditions for those extensions.
- The bill authorizes the lease but does not ensure the federal transfer occurs or guarantee that the project will be completed.