[Senate Report 112-154]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


112th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     112-154
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 352

 
TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT IN THE DISTRICT 
                  OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                   COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND

                          GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                               H.R. 2297

TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT IN THE DISTRICT 
                  OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES




                 March 29, 2012.--Ordered to be printed
        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

               JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan                 SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii              TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri           ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana                  RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska                  JERRY MORAN, Kansas

                  Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
       Beth M. Grossman, Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
             Elyse F. Greenwald, Professional Staff Member
               Nickolas A. Rossi, Minority Staff Director
                Mark B. LeDuc, Minority General Counsel
         Daniel F. Jenkins, Minority Legislative Correspondent
                  Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk


                                                       Calendar No. 352
112th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     112-154

======================================================================




TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT IN THE DISTRICT 
                  OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                 March 29, 2012.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Lieberman, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
                    Affairs, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 2297]

    The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (H.R. 2297) to promote 
the development of the Southwest waterfront in the District of 
Columbia, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that 
the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
  I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
 II. Background and Need..............................................2
III. Legislative History..............................................3
 IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................4
  V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................4
 VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................5
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............5

                         I. Purpose and Summary

    The Southwest Waterfront is a 27 acre plot of land within 
the District of Columbia which was transferred from the federal 
government to the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land 
Agency in 1960. The legislation which transferred this land 
delineated the boundaries of the Southwest Waterfront, but 
those boundaries have since shifted, which means a few parcels 
of land are not clearly owned by the District in statute. In 
addition, the legislation restricted D.C.'s ability to use the 
Southwest Waterfront. The District of Columbia now seeks to 
develop this property through a new public-private partnership. 
To facilitate such development, H.R. 2297 clarifies the 
ownership of those parcels not included in the original 
legislation and grants D.C. greater flexibility on the 
disposition of the land.

                II. Background and Need for Legislation

    In 1956, the National Capital Planning Commission finalized 
an urban renewal plan for the redevelopment of the Southwest 
Waterfront in the District of Columbia. In order to execute the 
plan, in 1960 Congress passed, and President Eisenhower signed 
into law, a bill to transfer all right, title and interest of 
the United States with regard to the Southwest Waterfront to 
the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency. 
Technically, the land was conveyed from the federal government 
to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, the three-
person federal board overseeing 
the District prior to the enactment of the Home Rule Act. The 
legislation, P.L. 86-736, delineated the boundaries of the 
transferred land as:

          . . . the area bounded by the east line of Fourteenth 
        Street Southwest, the existing southerly (or westerly) 
        building line of Maine Avenue Southwest, the northerly 
        line of Fort Lesley J. McNair at P Street Southwest, 
        and the bulkhead line established pursuant to the 
        Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (30 Stat. 1151), as 
        amended, together with any land area extending 
        channelward from said bulkhead line.

    The urban renewal plan took nearly ten years to implement. 
During construction, the streets and bulkhead line which served 
as the boundary lines of the Southwest Waterfront in P.L. 86-
736 changed slightly. For example, by 1966, a straight bulkhead 
had been built along the Washington Channel, replacing the 
irregular bulkhead which had been the previous boundary. In the 
construction of this bulkhead, land was created that did not 
previously exist, and therefore was not clearly transferred to 
D.C. in P.L. 86-736. The District has functionally owned the 
land since its construction. Maine Avenue Southwest, another 
boundary line, has also shifted. It no longer turns southerly 
to follow the shoreline, but remains on an east to west course. 
D.C. has since acquired 
the land between the previous Maine Avenue Southwest route and 
the present path, though that is not represented in current 
statute. The District has also functionally owned this land 
since its acquisition.
    The District government now has new plans to revitalize the 
Southwest Waterfront. In December 2008, the District entered 
into a public-private partnership with Hoffman-Struever 
Waterfront L.L.C. (now Hoffman-Madison Waterfront L.L.C.) to 
develop the land.\1\ D.C. also passed legislation in 2008 to 
provide $198 million in public financing for the project.\2\ 
The planned development would create approximately 3 million 
square feet of mixed use facilities along the Washington 
Channel.\3\ Once complete, the project is estimated to generate 
$32 million in annual taxes for D.C. and bring 1,800 permanent 
new jobs based on conservative estimates.\4\ The planning 
behind this project is well underway and construction is 
estimated to begin in the first quarter of 2013.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\``Southwest Waterfront Disposition Third Revised Emergency 
Approval Resolution of 2008'' (D.C. Resolution 17-955).
    \2\``Southwest Waterfront Bond Financing Act of 2008'' (DC Law 17-
252; DC Official Code Sec. 2-1217.131 through Sec. 2-1217.143).
    \3\D.C. Zoning Commission Order No. 11-03; http://dcoz.dc.gov/
orders/11-03.pdf, p. 33.
    \4\http://dcclims1.dccouncil.us/images/00001/20090807122433.pdf, p. 
5.
    \5\ http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/blog/2011/02/dcs-sw-
waterfront-application-filed.html ?page=all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To facilitate this planned development, the District seeks 
to clarify its ownership of the parcels in question. As 
explained above, due to the changes in the boundary lines of 
the Southwest Waterfront since the passage of P.L. 86-736 in 
1960, a few parcels of land lack clear ownership in statute 
even though they have always been used by the District and are 
commonly understood to be part of its Southwest Waterfront 
holdings.
    Therefore, Section 1 of H.R. 2297 would change the legal 
description of the area consistent with the description of the 
Southwest Waterfront Project Site as filed with the District of 
Columbia Recorder of Deeds on October 27, 2009, as Instrument 
Number 2009116776. The bill would also permit D.C. to 
relinquish all right, title and interest of the United States 
of America (including any federal agency or department) in the 
Southwest Waterfront as described by the Recorder of Deeds in 
Instrument Number 2009116776. Section 1 of the bill also 
removes certain provisions of the original transfer legislation 
that are no longer applicable, and it replaces the outdated 
``urban renewal plan'' with the term ``master plan.'' The bill 
also allows D.C. to sell parts of the Southwest Waterfront, 
which will allow the public-private partnership to sell the 
relevant air rights related to certain planned condominium 
developments.
    Although the original transfer statute was incorporated as 
part of the D.C. Code, the city is not free to amend it without 
Congressional approval due to the restrictions in the original 
legislation.

                        III. Legislative History

    H.R. 2297 was introduced by D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes 
Norton on June 22, 2011. Versions of this bill had been 
introduced previously as parts of larger bills in the 111th 
Congress. Both H.R. 4207, the 2009 District of Columbia Omnibus 
Authorization Act, and H.R. 5103, the 2010 District of Columbia 
Omnibus Authorization Act, contained sections with similar 
intent and language to H.R. 2297. In addition, on June 16, 
2010, Delegate Norton introduced a freestanding bill, H.R. 
5544, that closely resembles H.R. 2297. It was referred to the 
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's 
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office and the District 
of Columbia, but did not advance.
    This Congress, H.R. 2297 was also referred to the House 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The Committee 
subsequently referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Health 
Care, District of Columbia, Census and the National Archives. 
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee discharged the bill and 
the full House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 
adopted H.R. 2297 by voice vote with a substitute amendment 
offered by Delegate Norton. The amendment added Section 3 to 
the bill and made technical corrections. On December 6, 2011, 
H.R. 2297 as amended by the Committee passed the House of 
Representatives under suspension of the rules.
    On December 7, 2011, H.R. 2297 was referred to the Senate 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The 
Committee considered the bill on December 14, 2011, and ordered 
the bill favorably reported to the full Senate by voice vote. 
The Senators present were Senators Lieberman, Levin, Akaka, 
Begich, Collins, Coburn, Brown, Johnson and Portman.

                    IV. Section-by-Section Analysis


Section 1: Promoting development of the Southwest Waterfront

    Subsection (a) of Section 1 would update the description of 
the property by striking part of D.C. Code Section 6-321.01 and 
inserting language to define the Southwest Waterfront as 
described in Instrument Number 2009116776 as filed with the 
District of Columbia Recorder of Deeds on October 27, 2009.
    Subsection (b) of Section 1 would also amend D.C. Code 
Section 6-321.01 and transfer the land by one or more quitclaim 
deed, ensuring that all parcels--including those that did not 
exist at the time of the original transfer legislation--are 
clearly transferred to the District of Columbia.
    Subsection (c) of Section 1 updates D.C. Code Section 6-
321.02 to reference a ``master plan'' instead of an urban 
renewal plan for the Southwest Waterfront that has expired.
    Subsection (d) of Section 1 would expand permissible 
disposition and uses of the property and strikes the existing 
D.C. Code Section 6-321.04, which contains provisions from the 
expired urban renewal plan.
    Subsection (e) of Section 1 would strike D.C. Code Section 
6-321.05 which contains provisions from the previous Urban 
Renewal Plan.
    Subsection (f) of Section 1 would update Section 6-321.08 
of the D.C. Code, to clarify that the District of Columbia is 
the successor in interest to the abolished District of Columbia 
Redevelopment Land Agency.

Section 2: Clarification of permitted activities at Municipal Fish 
        Market

    This section amends Section 37-205.01 of the D.C. Code to 
allow the Mayor to determine the appropriate uses for the 
Municipal Fish Market.

Section 3: Maine Lobsterman Memorial

    This section prohibits the removal, destruction or 
obstruction of the Maine Lobsterman Memorial, but does allow 
the memorial to be moved to another location on the Southwest 
Waterfront if that location meets certain criteria.

                   V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

    Pursuant to the requirement of paragraph 11(b)(1) of rule 
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has 
considered the regulatory impact of this bill and has 
determined that the bill would have no regulatory impact. 
Moreover, CBO states that the bill contains no 
intergovernmental or private sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on 
state, local, or tribal governments.

                   VI. Estimated Cost of Legislation

                                                 December 20, 2011.
Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. 
        Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2297, an act to 
promote the development of the Southwest waterfront in the 
District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew 
Pickford.
            Sincerely,
                                              Douglas W. Elmendorf.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 2297--An act to promote the development of the Southwest 
        waterfront in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes

    H.R. 2297 would amend the District of Columbia Official 
Code to transfer all federal right, title, and interest in the 
Southwest waterfront area to the District of Columbia. The 
legislation would authorize the District of Columbia to lease 
or sell the site, expand the District's authority to manage the 
Maine Avenue Fish Market, and allow the Maine Lobsterman 
Memorial to be moved to another location.
    Information from the National Park Service and the National 
Capital Planning Commission indicates that the property that 
would be transferred is not being used by the federal 
government, and no income is generated from it under current 
law. Thus, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2297 would have 
no significant effect on the federal budget. Enacting the 
legislation would not affect revenues or direct spending; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    H.R. 2297 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    On November 17, 2011, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
H.R. 2297 as ordered reported by the House Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform on November 3, 2011. The two 
versions of the legislation are identical, and the CBO cost 
estimates are the same.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew 
Pickford. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

       VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the following changes in existing 
law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows: 
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

                       DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE

                   DIVISION I--GOVERNMENT OF DISTRICT

       TITLE 6--HOUSING AND BUILDING RESTRICTIONS AND REGULATIONS

                    CHAPTER 3--HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT


   Subchapter III--Transfer to Agency of Certain Property Near Maine 
                                 Avenue


Sec. 6-321.01.

    Subject to the provisions of Sec. Sec. 6-301.20, 6-311.01, 
and this subchapter, the Council of the District of Columbia is 
authorized on behalf of the United States to transfer by one or 
more quitclaim deeds to the District of Columbia Redevelopment 
Land Agency established by Sec. 6-301.03, all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to part or all of certain 
property in the said District, as follows: [The area bounded by 
the east line of 14th Street Southwest, the existing southerly 
(or westerly) building line of Maine Avenue Southwest, the 
northerly line of Fort Lesley J. McNair at P Street Southwest, 
and the bulkhead line established pursuant to the Rivers and 
Harbors Act of 1899 (30 Stat. 1151), as amended, together with 
any land area extending channelward from said bulkhead line.] 
The property located within the bounds of the legal description 
of which is the Southwest Waterfront Project Site (dated 
October 8, 2009) under Exhibit A of the document titled 
``Intent to Clarify the Legal Description in Furtherance of 
Land Disposition Agreement'', as filed with the District of 
Columbia Recorder of Deeds on October 27, 2009 as Instrument 
Number 2009116776.

Sec. 6-321.02.

    The Council of the District of Columbia shall, prior to 
transferring to the Agency right, title, and interest in and to 
any of the said property described in Sec. 6-321.01, determine 
whether such property is necessary to the redevelopment of the 
southwest section of the District of Columbia in accordance 
with [an urban renewal plan] a master plan approved by it, and, 
if it so finds, it shall, acting on behalf of the United 
States, transfer and donate to the Agency all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to so much of said 
property as it determines is necessary to carry out such master 
plan[ such urban renewal plan].

Sec. 6-321.03.

    [Subject to the provisions of Sec. 6-321.05,] The Council 
of the District of Columbia shall, at the time of transferring 
to the Agency right, title, and interest in and to any of the 
property described in Sec. 6-321.01, also transfer to the 
Agency the Mayor's jurisdiction as provided by Sec. 10-501.01 
over so much of the said property as may be so transferred.

Sec. 6-321.04.

    [(a)] The Agency is hereby authorized, in accordance with 
[subchapter I of Chapter 1 of this title, to lease to a 
redevelopment company or other lessee] the District of Columbia 
Redevelopment Act of 1945 and section 1, to lease or sell to a 
redevelopment company or other lessee or purchaser such real 
property as may be transferred to the Agency under the 
authority of this Act. [subchapter but may not otherwise 
dispose of such property except to the United States or any 
department or agency thereof, or to the District of Columbia, 
in accordance with Sec. 6-321.05. In the event that real 
property acquired by the Agency from the United States pursuant 
to this subchapter is transferred to the District of Columbia 
or to any department or agency of the United States pursuant to 
this section, such transfer shall be without reimbursement or 
transfer of funds.]
    [(b) In connection with the leasing of the real property 
transferred to the Agency under the authority of this 
subchapter, together with the leasing of any real property 
lying between such real property so transferred and the 
southerly or westerly line of Maine Avenue as the same may be 
relocated in connection with carrying out an urban renewal 
plan, the Agency is authorized and directed to provide to the 
owner or owners of any business concern displaced from the area 
described in Sec. 6-321.01, a priority of opportunity to lease, 
either individually or as a redevelopment company solely owned 
by the owner or owners of 1 or more such business concerns, so 
much of such real property lying channelward of the southerly 
or westerly line of Maine Avenue as so relocated, at a rental 
based on the use-value of the real property so leased 
determined in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 6-301.09, 
and Sec. 1460(c)(4) of Title 42, United States Code, as may be 
required for the construction of commercial facilities at least 
substantially equal to the facilities from which such business 
concern was so displaced. The priority of opportunity created 
by this section is a personal right of the owners of businesses 
displaced. In the event of the death of any such owner of any 
such displaced business, the spouse of such owner, or, if there 
is no spouse, the children of such owner shall be entitled to 
exercise the priority of such owner in accordance with the 
provisions of this section, but in no event shall any such 
priority be otherwise transferable; provided, however, that the 
spouse or the children, as the case may be, shall have no 
greater priority than the priority holder would have had if 
living. For the purposes of exercising such priority, the 
spouse or children, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be 
owner of such business concern so displaced. When the real 
property affected by the provisions of this subsection becomes 
available for leasing by the Agency, the Agency shall notify, 
in writing, the owners of the business concerns displaced, as 
to the availability of such real property for leasing to such 
owners in accordance with the provisions of this subsection. 
The Agency shall give such owners so notified a period of 180 
days to notify the Agency, in writing, of their intention to 
proceed in accordance with the general development plan of the 
Agency for the area lying channelward of Maine Avenue, as so 
relocated, and to demonstrate to the Agency their ability to 
carry out so much of such plan as may be embraced within the 
area which they desire to lease. If at the end of such period 
of 180 days, such owners have failed to make a demonstration to 
that effect which is satisfactory to the Agency, the priority 
of opportunity provided by this subsection shall no longer 
continue to be available to such owners, except that if after 
the end of such 180-day period the Agency shall change the 
terms under which real property is to be leased, or the 
redevelopment plan for the area described in Sec. 6-321.01 is 
changed so as to affect the economic value of the leasehold, 
the Agency shall in writing notify each such owner of the 
change or changes so made and give to such owner so notified a 
period of 60 days within which to advise the Agency in writing 
of his intention and to demonstrate his ability to proceed as 
aforesaid.
    [(c)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
whenever, pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, the 
Agency offers leaseholds to persons entitled to a priority of 
opportunity to lease under the provisions of this section, the 
annual rent prescribed in such lease shall not exceed an amount 
which is the greater of:
          [(A) An amount equal to 6% of the residual value of 
        the land for the prescribed use to which any owner of a 
        displaced business concern shall put such land under 
        such lease;
          [(B) The annual amount which the Agency shall be 
        required to pay in principal and interest on a 40-year 
        loan of an amount equal to the residual value of the 
        land under such lease which value is the residual value 
        of the land which was determined by the Agency, in 
        accordance with this subsection, and on the basis of 
        which such land was initially leased under this 
        section; or
          [(C) The sum of: (i) the amount determined under 
        subparagraph (A) or (B) of this paragraph, whichever is 
        greater; and (ii) 50% of the product of the occupancy 
        cost factor for the class and character of the business 
        of such lessee times the amount by which the lessee's 
        actual annual gross sales income exceeds the estimated 
        gross sales income (for the class and character of the 
        displaced business) used by the Agency in determining 
        the residual value of the land leased to such lessee.
    [(2) In the case of any land which the Agency leases under 
this section, the annual rent prescribed by the Agency in the 
lease of such land shall not, during the 43-year period 
beginning on the date such land was first leased by the Agency 
under this section, be less than the amount determined under 
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of this subsection. In the 
case of any land which the Agency leases under this section to 
a displaced business, the residual value of such land:
          [(A) May be redetermined by the Agency after the 
        expiration of 25 years from the date such land was 
        first leased by the Agency and at the end of each 10-
        year period thereafter; or
          [(B) Shall be redetermined by the Agency if at the 
        end of the 25-year period from the date such land was 
        first leased by the Agency or at the end of each 10-
        year period thereafter, the lessee requests the Agency 
        to redetermine such residual value.
    [(3) The residual value of such land shall make due 
allowance for the cost to the owner of the displaced business 
of all improvements and public charges on such land, and shall 
not exceed the maximum fair use value economically feasible to 
permit the reestablishment of a business of the class and 
character of such displaced business.
    [(4) Each business holding a lease under this subchapter 
shall furnish annually to the Agency (on such date as the 
Agency may by regulation prescribe) a copy of the sales tax 
return filed by such business under the District of Columbia 
Sales Tax Act, which copy was furnished to the business under 
Sec. 47-2018(a).

[Sec. 6-321.05.

    [Notwithstanding Sec. Sec. 6-321.01 to 6-321.04, if any of 
the real property transferred to the Agency under the authority 
of this subchapter is not leased by the Agency in accordance 
with an urban renewal plan approved by the Council of the 
District of Columbia or otherwise disposed of, on or before the 
date the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development makes the 
final federal capital grant payment to the Agency for the 
project pursuant to title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as 
amended, then the right, title, and interest in and to so much 
of the said real property as is not so leased or otherwise 
disposed of by such date shall revert to the United States, 
subject to the exclusive control and jurisdiction of the Mayor 
of the District of Columbia, and subject to the provisions of 
Sec. Sec. 10-111 and 10-112.]

Sec. 6-321.06.

    Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed as 
requiring the said Council of the District of Columbia to 
transfer the right, title, and interest in and to so much of 
the property described in Sec. 6-321.01 as the Council may 
determine, in its discretion, is required for municipal 
purposes or is to continue to be owned by the United States 
under the jurisdiction of the Mayor, for the benefit of the 
District of Columbia.

Sec. 6-321.07.

    No transfer or donation of any interest in real property 
under the authority of this subchapter shall constitute a local 
grant-in-aid in connection with any urban renewal project being 
undertaken with federal assistance under title I of the Housing 
Act of 1949, as amended.

Sec. 6-321.08.

    As used in this subchapter, any reference to the ``Agency'' 
shall be deemed to be the District of Columbia as the successor 
interest to the Agency. [the terms ``Agency,'' ``lessee,'' 
``real property,'' ``redevelopment,'' and ``redevelopment 
company'' shall have the respective meanings provided for such 
terms by Sec. 6-301.02.]

                       DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE

                   DIVISION V--LOCAL BUSINESS AFFAIRS

                TITLE 37--WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND MARKETS

          CHAPTER 2--WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND MARKETS GENERALLY


                   Subchapter III--Markets Generally


Section 37-205.01.

    The Mayor of the District of Columbia is authorized and 
directed in the name of the District of Columbia to exclusively 
control, regulate, and [operate as a municipal fish wharf and 
market] operate as a market and for such other uses as the 
Mayor determines to be appropriate, the water frontage on the 
Potomac River lying south of Water Street, between 11th and 
12th Streets, including the buildings and wharves thereon[, and 
said wharf shall constitute the sole wharf for the landing of 
fish and oysters for sale in the District of Columbia]; and 
said Mayor shall have power to make leases, fix and determine 
rentals, wharfage and dockage fees, and to collect and pay the 
same into the treasury of the United States to the credit of 
the General Fund of the District of Columbia; and said Mayor to 
make and amend, from time to time, all such regulations as it 
may deem proper for the control, regulation, and [operation of 
said municipal fish wharf and market] operation of said market.

                                  
