Urban economic development best practice is not found in DC

According to the Washington Post, "Legalized blackjack and poker among D.C. mayor’s proposals to boost economy."

Bowser said her proposal to legalize commercial poker and blackjack in the District would create new revenue streams and draw tourism. The administration does not yet have revenue projections; Nina Albert, deputy mayor of planning and economic development, said it would depend on how many poker and blackjack tournaments or events the city hosts, something they’re still working out.

“But even if we just had one or two marquee national tournaments here, that is another attraction that brings both national and international visitors to D.C., which is always the platform that we wanted to create for our entertainment ecosystem,” Albert said.

Talk about unimaginative.  When I first got involved in revitalization, I thought the city's economic development planners were good.  Over time, I felt that I continued to learn and they didn't.

I've written a bunch about ways the city could better develop its economy:

-- "Could bringing premier regionally headquartered business enterprises to the Pennsylvania Avenue Corridor be key to its renewal and revitalization?," 2014
-- "DC, Transformational Projects Action Planning, and the Baltimore-Washington Maglev project," 2021
-- "Ordinary versus Extraordinary Planning around the rebuilding of the United Medical Center in Southeast Washington DC | Part Two: Creating a graduate health education and biotechnology research initiative on the St. Elizabeths campus," 2018
-- "Naturally occurring innovation districts | Technology districts and the tech sector," 2014
-- "Better leveraging higher education institutions in cities and counties: Greensboro; Spokane; Mesa; Phoenix; Montgomery County, Maryland; Washington, DC," 2016.  Also, "Universities and ancillary economic development," (2025) versus "Straws and puffery: USC's DC "campus" as a lever for downtown revival," (2024)
-- "I wonder if Mayor Fenty hadn't dissolved the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative in 2007, merging it into another city agency, if development would have happened faster?," 2024

Even my suggesting an economic revitalization program for the city's poorest areas:

-- "Social urbanism and equity planning as a way to address crime, violence, and persistent poverty: (not in) DC," 2021

Or addressing the height limit as a way to expand heavy rail service in the city:

-- "Another attempt to raise discussion about the DC Height Limit," 2023

would be a step forward.

Poker is not it.  And I don't see how it communicates that "DC is open for business."  From the article:

“These investments and much-needed legislative changes send a clear message: D.C. is open for business,” Bowser said, standing in the offices of an investment consulting firm that received a D.C. business grant to expand and create jobs. “It is so important, especially now, with the changing footprint of the federal government, that we are creating good-paying jobs for D.C. residents.”

The proposed Commanders District looks a bit like an update of the Watergate.

P.S. WRT a new stadium for the Washington Commanders football team and the related "sports and entertainment district" ("Transformative $3.7 billion Commanders stadium deal passes D.C. Council," Washington Post), the economic impact studies for a similar development by the Chicago Bears returns less than one dollar for every dollar spent--and that includes a study by the Bears ("Arlington Heights weighs Bears' stadium economic impact pitch," Crain's Chicago Business).  Although to be fair, the DC proposed development is larger than that for Chicago.  From the Post:

Supporters say the public investment — more than $1 billion in taxpayer funds and more than $1 billion in tax breaks and other incentives for the Commanders — is worth it for the generational economic opportunity, while skeptics of publicly financed stadiums have questioned the return on investment and argue that the taxpayer contribution is overly generous to the team’s wealthy owners.

Although it's probably a better return than on video poker.

DC's Wharf District.  AP photo.

Note that the Washington Monthly, "To Create Abundant Housing, Ignore the YIMBY Playbook," does believe that DC is best practice on large scale infill development mostly of multiunit housing.  

A lot of that was due to a change in residential choice preferences in favor of urban living.  Not necessarily the city government being proactive. 

 Although, the NoMA district was stoked by transferable development rights from Downtown historic buildings ("NoMA, the neighborhood transit built," Urban Land).

And that redevelopment of The Wharf district is a positive ("The Wharf: DC’s most ambitious development project set to open," WTOP, Case Study, Perkins Eastman).  

Maybe even Walter Reed, although I personally think there could have been a better ROI from a different direction.

=======

Also see:

-- "The North-South Divide | Baltimore vs. Washington regional economic development | Still more industry in Greater Baltimore," 2021
-- "The East-West Divide | DC area regional economic development: anchors and where they are placed matter + airports | But military spending matters the most," 2021