Alley named Matthews Court

Summary#

The Matthews Court Designation Act of 2026 is a District of Columbia bill that would create a standalone law, rather than amend an existing one. It would officially name part of the public alley system in Square 1063, abutting Lots 85, 86, and 817, “Matthews Court.” Its stated goal is to recognize the Matthews family’s generations of service.

  • The Council would designate the specified part of the alley; the bill does not create a new office, program, benefit, or enforcement power.
  • The bill relies on sections of the Street and Alley Closing and Acquisition Procedures Act of 1982. The text does not say that the alley would be closed or transferred.
  • The bill has been introduced and referred to committee. It is not law, and passage is uncertain.

What it means for you#

  • People using or living near the alley: If enacted, the specified portion would officially be called Matthews Court. The bill does not say whether signs would be installed or whether anyone’s address or access would change.
  • District government: The bill would establish the designation, but does not assign an agency a separate implementation duty.
  • The Matthews family: The designation would recognize the family, but the bill does not give family members a legal right or benefit.

Money#

No publicly available information on the cost is included in the supplied material.

  • The bill adopts the fiscal impact statement in a committee report, but that report was not supplied, so its estimate cannot be checked here.

What is unclear#

  • The bill does not say whether the designation would lead to new signs, address changes, or other practical changes for nearby residents or businesses.
  • The supplied material does not include the committee report’s fiscal impact statement.
  • The underlying 1982 Act is not supplied, so its current procedures and how they apply to this designation could not be verified.

Case for#

  • The sponsor’s letter says the designation would recognize a multigenerational family tradition of service in construction, telecommunications, security, and public safety.
  • The letter says Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B voted unanimously in support of the designation.
  • A named alley designation could give formal public recognition to the family without the bill creating a broader program.

Case against#

  • The bill does not explain whether the name would change addresses, require signs, or affect how people find or use the alley.
  • The cost is not stated in the supplied bill material, and the referenced fiscal impact statement is unavailable here.
  • The bill gives no detail about how the designated portion would be marked or how its exact boundaries would be communicated.