Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is making an emergency request to demolish more than a dozen historic buildings in Washington, DC, citing a “risk to life and property” that she says puts federal agents at risk.
The proposal, first reported by The Washington Postwould destroy 17 buildings from St. Elizabeths West Campus, drawing outrage and opposition from conservatives who are already fighting Donald Trump’s administration over the demolition of the White House to make way for the president’s ballroom.
The federal government wants to redevelop the 176-acre campus to build more than 5 million square feet of office space for the rapidly expanding Homeland Security, along with enough parking space for 14,000 employees, according to the General Services Administration.
In a letter to the agency seen by The Independentconservation groups raised “strong objections” to the proposed demolition of the properties, some of which are more than 100 years old, arguing that there was no such evidence of an “urgency” beyond Noem’s “unilateral declaration”.
“A unilateral declaration like this is problematic because it circumvents procedural safeguards designed to ensure stability, legitimacy and fairness,” according to a letter from National Trust for Historic Preservation General Counsel Elizabeth Merritt and DC Preservation League Director Rebecca Miller.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem made an “emergency” request to raze more than a dozen buildings on an iconic Washington, DC property to make way for her agency, citing threats from “malicious insiders” (AP)
DHS has “the highest security classification for a government facility,” and the potential threats “involve a fundamental flaw in the security of the facility as a whole,” not the vacant buildings, they argued.
Four of the 17 buildings DHS wants to destroy have been approved for demolition by the National Capital Planning Commission and the Fine Arts Commission, according to Miller.
“This is about safety,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement The Independent.
“DHS safety and security assessments have determined that these dilapidated, vacant buildings on the DHS campus pose unacceptable safety, security and emergency response risks,” she added.
The campus was first established by Congress in 1855 at a site known as the “Government Hospital for the Insane,” according to the GSA.
It has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places since 1979. It was recognized as a National Historic Landmark in 1990.
The Department of Health and Human Services listed the campus as “surplus property” in 2001.
In a recent security assessment, DHS officials claim that vacant campus buildings could be “exploited by malicious insiders who have legitimate access, familiarity with the campus, or detailed knowledge of security procedures.”
The report suggests that those “insiders” could be federal employees and contractors who could abuse their access “to plan, organize or execute harmful activities.”
This could include targeting officials and “disrupting essential operations and compromising sensitive information or infrastructure,” the report said.
Multiple buildings “cannot be cleared by law enforcement or first responders, creating security blind spots adjacent to senior management and critical operations,” McLaughlin said. The Independent. “Demolition is the only permanent corrective action that removes them.”
Conservatives argue that DHS has provided no evidence to support those claims that would require “emergency” demolitions.
Conservationists are launching a potential legal battle to stop DHS from destroying more iconic properties as they sue the Trump administration over the demolition of the East Wing of the White House (REUTERS)
The proposed demolitions follow Trump’s razing of the East Wing of the White House to build a ballroom, a project that has ballooned to $400 million at no cost to taxpayers.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued the Trump administration earlier this month to block the project until it at least receives congressional approval, a comprehensive design review, an environmental assessment and public comment.
“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review — not President Trump, not President Biden, not anyone else,” the federal lawsuit says. “And no president is legally allowed to build a ballroom on public property without giving the public an opportunity to intervene.”
Trump told reporters Monday that he wants future presidential investitures to be hosted there.
“I’m doing a magnificent, big, beautiful ballroom that the country has wanted for the White House for 150 years,” Trump said from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. “It’s bigger than we told you…after we realized we were going to be inaugurating in that building. It has bulletproof glass…They call it the drone-free roof. Drones won’t touch it.”