White House ballroom vote delayed
Commission flooded with public comments
By: Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy
USA Today
..... A vote on President Donald Trump's plans for a 4400 million White House ballroom was rescheduled, as a commission in charge of deciding the project has been deluged with more than 35,000 written comments and 104 people who wanted to testify at a March 5 [2026] public hearing.
.....
The National Capitol Planning Commission, the overseer of federal property development and site designs, said it still planned the Online public hearing to hear the views of droves of people - mostly negative - that signed up to speak or erased out via email to share their ballroom views.
..... "Given the large amount of public input on the project, both form witnesses and written comments, the Commission is not expected to deliberate and vote on the project (March 5), [2026] but instead to hold the deliberation and vote at a later date," NCPC spokesperson Stephen Staudigl told USA today.
..... Saudigl 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 promised to offer a window into the public's view of the project, which led to the demolitions of the East Wing. The 12-member NCPC board is chaired by Trump appointee Will Scharf, the White House state secretary, and includes tow other White House officials.
..... People from across the nation sent written comments by email after the commission solicited comments. an Online portal also allowed people to register to speak.
..... Since Trump's ballroom project was first announce din July, [2025] it had undergone numinous 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.
..... "How could he just 'do that' without consent from you or Congress? PLEASE don't just let him get away with him building the 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," rote 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."
.....
In February, [2026] the Commission of Fine Arts, a panel whose members were appointed in January [2026] by Trump, unanimously approved a plan for a 90,000-squaer-foot White House ballroom. The agencies charged with reviewing the construction.
..... CFA Secretary Thomas Kuebke said 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 was the equivalent of searching for a needle in a haystack. but they do exist.
..... Anne Nieman wrote that her father had been a prominent preservation architect in Alabama.
.....
"A grand ballroom for the White House ash been a visions of many past administrations. It is, frankly, an embarrassment that world leaders come to the greatest coronary on earth only to be welcomed in a giant wedding tent with prota-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 need 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 awesomeness on this much needed addition useful by all subsequent administrations."
..... After the East Wing was demolished in October, [2025] 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, 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 1996 requires reviews of projects that affect most historic buildings, but the White House, Supreme Court building and U.S. Capitol are exempt.
..... In December, [2025] the National Trust for Historic Preservation field a federal lawsuit aimed at stopping the construction of the project, saying the project made 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 filed in amended lawsuit alleging the administration violated federal law by proceeding without obtaining the required approvals.
..... Trump's team countered in court that the president did not need approval from lawmakers because the project is being funded by private donations.
.....Democratic lawmakers have raised alarm about accepting funds from companies with business before the federal government.