A nonprofit organization long dedicated to the preservation of America’s most hallowed public grounds now finds itself at the center of a political maelstrom over President Donald Trump’s ambitious White House expansion project.
The Trust for the National Mall, established in 2007 as a nonpartisan steward of the nation’s iconic monuments and green spaces, has been enlisted to manage what the President has described as more than $350 million in private donations for a massive new ballroom at the White House. The development marks a significant departure from the organization’s traditional mission of caring for cherry trees along the Tidal Basin and maintaining facilities such as the U.S. Park Police stables.
The facts of the arrangement are straightforward. Donors contributing to the ballroom project have been directed to send their money through the trust, which operates as a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. This structure allows individual and corporate donors to deduct their contributions from federal income taxes. Fundraisers working on the project have reportedly solicited donations ranging from $2.5 million to $5 million, with the tax deduction cited as an incentive for participation.
The White House has indicated that donors may remain anonymous if they choose, a provision that has drawn sharp criticism from members of Congress. Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut characterized the arrangement as potentially ensnaring the trust in what he termed “the very perilous quicksand of Donald Trump’s donation scheme.”
The construction itself represents a substantial transformation of the White House complex. Crews have demolished the East Wing to make way for a 90,000-square-foot ballroom capable of seating nearly 1,000 guests. This development stands in contrast to statements the President made last July, when he indicated the addition would not affect the White House structure itself.
Trust officials have maintained that their role remains narrowly defined. They emphasize that the organization serves merely as a financial conduit, with no authority over the ballroom’s design or construction. The trust operates as an official partner of the National Park Service, the federal agency responsible for maintaining White House grounds. Historically, the organization has raised private funds to support Park Service projects, thereby reducing the burden on taxpayers.
According to a trust staff member, the National Park Service approached the organization during the summer months and requested its assistance in managing the private donations for the ballroom project. The trust’s fourteen-member board deliberated on the request and voted to participate. Board member Eric Hoplin, who serves as chief executive of the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, confirmed the board’s decision in a recent interview.
What remains unclear is whether the trust possessed the option to decline the Park Service’s request. Neither Hoplin nor other trust representatives would address this question directly, leaving observers to wonder about the degree of autonomy the organization maintains in its relationship with the federal government.
The controversy surrounding the trust’s involvement underscores broader questions about transparency, the use of tax-exempt organizations for government projects, and the appropriate boundaries between public and private funding for official facilities. As senators demand answers about the trust’s knowledge of donors and the timeline of its involvement, the organization faces scrutiny unlike any it has encountered in its seventeen-year history.
Related: California Voters Back Newsom Redistricting Plan Despite Concerns Over Democratic Process
