White House ballroom vote delayed amid deluge of angry public comments

A vote on President Donald Trump’s plans for a $400 million White House ballroom is being re-scheduled, as a commission in charge of deciding the project has been deluged with over 35,000 written comments and 104 people wanting to testify at a March 5 public hearing.

The National Capital Planning Commission, the overseer of federal property development and site designs, says that it will still hold an online public hearing today to hear from droves of people – mostly negative – that signed up to speak or reached out via email to share their ballroom views.

“Given the large amount of public input on the project, both from witnesses and written comments, the Commission is not expected to deliberate and vote on the project (March 5,) but instead to hold the deliberation and vote at a later date,” NCPC spokesperson Stephen Staudigl told USA TODAY.

Staudigl said the vast majority of responses received via email have expressed negative opinions about the ballroom, and a USA TODAY cursory review found many angry responses, calling the ballroom idea gaudy, expensive, aggrandizing, and unnecessary.

The commission’s public meeting promises to offer a window into the public’s view of the project, which led to the demolition of the East Wing. The 12-member NCPC board is chaired by Trump appointee Will Scharf, the White House staff secretary, and includes two other White House officials.

People from across the nation sent written comments by email to the NCPC after the commission solicited comments. An online portal, which opened on Feb. 12, also allowed people to register to speak.

Since Trump’s ballroom project was first announced by the White House in July, it has undergone numerous changes on financing, seating capacity and cost. The price tag jumped from $200 million to $400 million, and the ballroom is now expected to accommodate 1,000 people.

Many citizens object to the ballroom

“How could he just ‘do that’ without consent from you or Congress? PLEASE don’t let him get away with him building this addition, gold plated monstrosity as it will be a replica of his “gold plated lifestyle” which is disgusting,” wrote Penny Jarret.

The project was “initiated without the proper authorization, permits, or design review. It is not a modernization project but rather a complete razing of American history. I want this project canceled, and the East Wing rebuilt and restored to its former design,” wrote Patricia Abrego.

“The East Wing ballroom is unnecessary beyond the pale,” wrote Tim Cobb. “This President’s insecurity and insatiable narcissism is nakedly apparent in this project, to say nothing of his absurd Arch de Trump. I could not disagree more with this boondoggle.”

Last month, the Commission of Fine Arts, a panel whose members were all appointed in January by Trump, unanimously approved a plan for a 90,000-square-foot White House ballroom. The NCPC and the CFA are the only two agencies charged with reviewing the construction of the controversial project.

The CFA Secretary Thomas Luebke said that 99% of the 2,000 comments they received had been negative.

Similarly, the NCPC “received a substantial number of public comments on the project, the majority in opposition to the project,” Staudigl told USA TODAY.

Finding positive comments in the reams of paper was the equivalent of searching for a needle in a haystack. But they do exist.

Anne Nieman, a supporter of the project, wrote that her father had been a prominent preservation architect in Alabama.

“A grand ballroom for the White House has been a vision of many past administrations. It is, frankly, an embarrassment that world leaders come to the greatest country on earth only to be welcomed in a giant wedding tent with porta-potties, no matter how fancily they may be outfitted,” she wrote. “Taxpayers should be grateful that private contributors who have been very successful in America are willing to donate the funds to bring this much needed addition to our capital complex. It will provide enhanced security and comfort for our leaders and guests and show them the dignity deserved in grand American style.”

Greg Sullivan, a landscape architect, wrote in favor of the president’s project.

“I voted for our president and what he is bringing to the White House,” wrote Sullivan. “He will do an awesome job on this much needed addition useful by all subsequent administrations.”

After the East Wing was demolished in October, without any warning and leading to huge public outcry, the White House argued that under federal law the 12-member panel of the NCPC only reviews construction projects, not demolitions of existing buildings.

Most Americans oppose Trump’s plans to construct a 90,000 square-foot ballroom, according to a poll conducted the week after the demolition of the East Wing.

A Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll found 56% of Americans oppose the demolition and ballroom project ‒ including 45% who said they “strongly oppose” it. Meanwhile, 28% of respondents said they support the plans.

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requires reviews of projects that affect most historic buildings, but the White House, Supreme Court building and U.S. Capitol are exempt.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a federal lawsuit aimed at stopping the construction of the project, saying the project needs Congressional approval and that the project’s size would “overwhelm the White House itself.”

The case was rejected by a federal judge saying the organization did not sufficiently prove the president was exceeding his powers. Rather, it based its challenge “on a ragtag group of theories” under federal law and the Constitution. Still, he said the court would consider additional efforts if the group decided to amend its complaint.

The preservation group has followed up by filing an amended lawsuit alleging the administration violated federal laws by proceeding without not obtaining the required approvals.

Trump’s team countered in court that the president did not need approval from lawmakers because the project is not using taxpayer dollars and instead is being funded by private donation.

Democratic lawmakers have raised alarm about accepting funds from companies with business before the federal government.

“Trump’s gold-encrusted ballroom has become a vehicle for corruption,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts. Donors include Palantir, Lockheed Martin and Meta, according to a list provided by the White House.

Since the project was first announced by the White House in July, including financing, seating capacity and cost. The price tag jumped from $200 million to $400 million, and the ballroom is now expected to accommodate 1,000 people.

Kathleen McCleary of Norther Virginia asked in her written comments: “Why do we the people have no say in this? Why are we concerned with a giant ballroom for lavish parties when the wealth gap in this country is enormous? This project should be STOPPED.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: White House ballroom vote delayed amid deluge of angry public comments