What Happened Yesterday—and What Comes Next
Yesterday the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, now composed largely of presidential appointees aligned with this project, convened to review the proposal to paint the building’s historic granite exterior bright white.
In the 72 hours leading up to the meeting, more than a dozen professional organizations—representing over one million Americans—submitted letters in opposition. In addition, more than 900 individuals provided thoughtful, detailed public comments. The Commission Secretary confirmed that 100% of the public comments opposed the plan. Not a single submission supported it.
You can watch the powerful testimony from legal counsel Greg and Marion Werkheiser here (~12 mins) and the full EEOB discussion here (~1 hour) (Source: The Hill).
What We Heard from the Administration Was Striking
- Their central claim: that routine grime—soot and bird droppings accumulated over roughly 20 years—has so weakened the granite that painting it is the only way to save it.
- They have not identified a paint that would avoid harming the building. One official suggested testing paint on EEOB granite in the courtyard; another immediately clarified that the only planned “testing” was on a small, unrelated piece of granite in his personal office.
- When a commissioner suggested allowing independent observation or testing, the administration appeared unreceptive.
- One commissioner argued that painting the building white would address morale, so staff working in the EEOB would not feel “inferior” to those in the White House. This point was treated as persuasive by Commission leadership.
- The Vice Chairman offered mutually inconsistent rationales, claiming that painting the EEOB would diminish its prominence relative to the existing White House but also enhance its prominence relative to the proposed new ballroom (which he designed) such that the ballroom would appear less overwhelming to the existing White House.
- No commissioner addressed the fact that every single public comment opposed the proposal.
Outcome
The Commission voted unanimously to endorse the concept—conditioned on future “testing” to identify a paint that would not damage the building, and a return presentation to share those results.
Why This Matters
The Commission is advisory. But the record created in this process matters. The hearing laid bare the factual gaps and legal shortcomings in the proposal, which is critical for our case before the DC District Court. Its failures indicate why it is so critical to challenge the idea that the General Services Administration had the authority to delegate the project to the Executive Office of the President, which does not comply with historic preservation and environmental laws, and which lacks the deep historic buildings expertise of the GSA.