CONSTRUCTION·TRADE
All stories
News

Senator alleges $257m Kennedy Center renovation in Washington, DC was driven by presidential whims and no-bid contracts

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse alleges the Kennedy Center's $257m federally funded renovation bypassed contracting rules, awarded no-bid deals, and prioritised Trump's aesthetic preferences over sound construction practice.

Generated image

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, has issued an open letter to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, DC, alleging that $257 million in congressionally appropriated federal funds have been mismanaged through rushed, no-bid renovation contracts designed to satisfy President Trump's personal preferences rather than the building's structural needs[1].

The whistleblower allegations

The allegations, laid out in a 9 July 2026 letter from Whitehouse to Kennedy Center executive director Matt Floca, were drawn from whistleblower disclosures submitted by the Government Accountability Project and supported by firsthand accounts from multiple former project managers, along with documents and photographs.

The renovation is being funded by $257 million appropriated by Congress through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law in July 2025. Whitehouse contends that management bypassed the federal contracting controls that have traditionally governed the center because, although it operates as a non-profit, its building is federal property[1].

The specific failures alleged by the whistleblowers include:

  • An $8 million no-bid flooring contract awarded to a South Carolina firm with no concert-hall experience[1]
  • A new bathroom floor torn out because Trump disliked the tile colour[1]
  • Steel columns repainted by a contractor who cut corners, leaving them rusting through fresh paint[1]
  • A reflecting pool that may need to be torn out and rebuilt[1]
  • Management telling staff "we'll deal with the lawsuits later" to hit presidential deadlines[1]
  • Contracting rules rewritten after the fact to justify awards already made[1]

The whistleblower disclosure alleges that the renovations were rushed to meet White House deadlines related to high-profile events at the Kennedy Center, including the FIFA World Cup draw and the Kennedy Center Honors.

The center's response

Kennedy Center officials dispute the senator's allegations, saying key facts have been misrepresented - including the characterisation of the flooring contract - and that the center is not subject to the federal contracting rules cited by critics. Officials say the renovations address decades of deferred maintenance rather than politically motivated cosmetic projects. Officials added that any workmanship concerns remain covered by standard commercial warranties requiring corrective work if necessary.

The broader renovation dispute

The contracting controversy sits inside a larger governance fight. The Trump-appointed board voted unanimously in March 2026 to shutter the center for two years for renovations, with closures beginning after July 4. A federal judge in May 2026 ordered the center to halt those closure plans and to more carefully weigh the need for a long-term shutdown. As of early August 2026, trustees preparing to vote on the matter had received no new assessments of how a two-year closure would affect programming, ticket sales, or the multiyear renovation - a situation Whitehouse described as a "bare-bones agenda" for the 13 August board meeting.

Although the Kennedy Center is run as a non-profit, it has, like Smithsonian museums, traditionally followed federal contracting rules because its building is federal property. Whitehouse, as an ex officio board member, set a deadline of 23 July 2026 for Floca to provide a full accounting of how the $257 million has been spent or obligated, along with communications between center management and the White House on contractor selection[1].

The 13 August board vote on the two-year closure is the immediate pressure point to watch. If trustees proceed without the impact studies a federal judge required, further litigation is likely - and any court-ordered halt would freeze a renovation programme already producing work that whistleblowers say will need to be redone at additional public expense.

Written by Construction Trade News's automated desk from the sources above and reviewed before publication. How we work.

Related