Did trump replace ballroom architect
Executive summary
President Trump has replaced James McCrery II — the boutique architect first tapped for the White House ballroom — with Shalom Baranes (or Shalom Baranes Associates), a long‑established Washington, D.C., firm; the White House confirmed the change and said McCrery will remain a consultant [1] [2] [3]. Reports say the swap followed disagreements over the ballroom’s size and the small capacity of McCrery’s firm to meet an accelerated timetable for what the administration now calls a roughly $300 million project [1] [4] [3].
1. What happened: a high‑profile change in architects
Multiple outlets report that President Trump moved the lead architect role from James McCrery II — whose small boutique firm had been guiding the project — to Shalom Baranes (or Shalom Baranes Associates), a firm with decades of federal and D.C. work; the White House announced Baranes “joined the team” and McCrery will remain involved as a consultant [2] [3] [1].
2. Why sources say the swap occurred: size, capacity and clashes
News organizations cite two recurring explanations: that McCrery resisted repeatedly expanding the ballroom and that his small practice lacked the personnel to deliver on the compressed schedule and enlarged scope Trump wanted. The Washington Post and Reuters reported those tensions and the firm’s limited capacity as decisive factors [1] [2]. The New York Times and other outlets described clashes over increasing the ballroom’s size and rushed, error‑ridden plans that prompted leadership to seek a larger, more experienced firm [5] [6].
3. Who is the new architect and why that matters
Shalom Baranes Associates is the named replacement; outlets note the firm’s portfolio includes major federal work such as the General Services Administration headquarters and large‑scale renovations, positioning it as better able to handle a complex, high‑visibility project on a tight timeline [3] [7] [8]. The White House praised Baranes’ role shaping Washington’s architectural identity, framing the hire as a technical upgrade for the “next stage” of development [2] [4].
4. Project scale and controversy: what’s at stake
Reporting places the ballroom at roughly 90,000 square feet and cites an updated cost projection of about $300 million — numbers tied to the decision to expand the project significantly beyond earlier statements [3] [4]. The demolition of the East Wing in October and the project’s privatized funding claim have fueled criticism from lawmakers, preservationists and watchdogs who say the addition could dwarf the White House and lacked adequate public scrutiny before major demolition [4] [9] [10].
5. Conflicting statements and areas where reporting diverges
Some outlets emphasize design disagreements as the primary cause, others highlight capacity and missed deadlines; the White House framed the move as a constructive transition rather than a firing, saying McCrery will remain as consultant [2] [1] [5]. The New York Times reported that a White House official insisted McCrery was not being replaced — a characterization at odds with other outlets that described the change as a replacement [5] [1].
6. What remains unclear in current reporting
Available sources do not mention a detailed contract change, any public approval steps already completed with planning authorities, or an itemized accounting of the $300 million figure tied to specific design choices; they do not provide a public timeline for Baranes’ deliverables or a formal statement from McCrery himself explaining his side beyond third‑party reporting (not found in current reporting; [1]; [4]3).
7. Why this matters politically and culturally
This personnel change is more than administrative: it spotlights tensions between presidential preferences, preservation norms, and professional architectural judgment at an iconic public site. Critics view the demolition and project expansion as emblematic of broader governance and transparency concerns; the White House’s swift rebuke of criticism and framing of the hire as an enhancement suggests a political desire to control the narrative and reassure donors and supporters [4] [9] [2].
8. Bottom line for readers
Reporting consistently shows that Trump has installed Shalom Baranes Associates to lead the ballroom project and that the change followed disputes over size and capacity, with McCrery remaining in a consulting role; beyond that, specifics about contractual terms, regulatory approvals and detailed timelines are not yet reported [2] [1] [3]. Watch for follow‑up reporting on formal submissions to planning bodies, any public comment from McCrery, and more granular accounting of project scope and funding (not found in current reporting).