Have other presidents similarly changed White House recreational facilities and how were those projects funded?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Presidents have long altered the White House’s recreational and event spaces: Franklin D. Roosevelt added a therapeutic indoor pool in 1933, Harry Truman installed a bowling alley in 1947, and later administrations added tennis courts and other amenities [1] [2]. The current 2025 Trump project—a privately funded, roughly $200–$300 million ballroom attached to the East Wing—echoes that history but has drawn scrutiny over process and exemptions from historic-preservation review [3] [4] [5].
1. Presidential renovations are routine — and bipartisan
Changing the White House footprint for recreation or ceremony is an established presidential practice. Theodore Roosevelt’s 1902 reconfiguration created the West Wing and new gardens; Franklin D. Roosevelt later installed a heated indoor pool for therapy in 1933; Truman’s postwar overhaul included a bowling lane in 1947 [6] [1] [2]. These examples show additions have come from both Republican and Democratic presidents and have ranged from therapeutic needs to staff recreation and larger ceremonial capacities [6] [1] [2].
2. Funding models vary — public, private and mixed
Available sources note currently announced funding for the 2025 ballroom is being presented as privately financed, with an initial figure of roughly $200 million later reported around $250 million and other coverage citing up to $300 million; a donor list released by the White House includes high‑net‑worth individuals and corporations [3] [4] [7] [8]. Historical projects have used different arrangements: Truman’s massive mid‑century renovation involved Congress and federal commissions [2]. The sources do not provide a comprehensive catalogue tying each past recreational change to a single funding mechanism, so “every project was publicly funded” cannot be asserted from these materials — some projects clearly involved federal action, others (like the current ballroom) are described as privately funded [2] [3] [4].
3. The Trump ballroom: scale, schedule and sponsors
The Trump administration announced a 2025 ballroom project led by Clark Construction and engineering firm AECOM, slated to start September 2025 and claimed to be completed “long before” the administration’s term ends [3]. Reporting places the cost in the $200–$300 million range and describes a donor list that includes crypto billionaires, sports owners, financiers, tech and tobacco firms and other wealthy supporters [4] [7] [8]. PBS and AP reporting describe demolition activity at the East Wing facade as construction began in late October 2025 [4] [8].
4. Legal and review questions: an exemption and voluntary engagement
A nearly 60‑year‑old law and executive practice have complicated review. The White House and similar federal properties are exempt from certain historic‑preservation rules under a law signed in the 1960s, but presidents have typically submitted plans voluntarily to the National Capital Planning Commission [5]. The BBC and other coverage note that while the exemption exists, administrations typically engage review bodies — and the Trump project’s initial handling prompted debate about whether those customary reviews were being followed [5].
5. Pushback, litigation and preservation concerns
Sources report public and institutional pushback tied to process and environmental review: the National Trust filed a lawsuit alleging violations of administrative and environmental statute for fast‑tracking the ballroom without standard reviews and public comment, per reporting summarized on Wikipedia and mainstream outlets [9]. Media accounts also record contentious details — for example, removal of commemorative magnolia trees during construction and disagreements over design and pace — underscoring preservationist concerns [9].
6. How this compares to past additions practically and politically
Past additions like FDR’s pool and Truman’s renovations were framed as functional or safety imperatives and involved formal federal processes; by contrast, the 2025 ballroom is being positioned as a major, donor‑backed expansion intended to increase hosting capacity and avoid tented events, and it is attracting intense public scrutiny over private funding, scale, and review [1] [2] [4] [3]. The scale claimed — a 90,000‑square‑foot ballroom that would, in one report, “dwarf” the White House — and the target capacity of 999 people mark it as far larger than typical past recreational additions according to PBS and other reporting [8] [4].
Limitations and closing context
Sources used here document historical precedents, the Trump administration’s stated contractors and donor list, cost estimates ranging from $200M to $300M, and legal questions about preservation review [6] [3] [4] [5] [8]. Available sources do not mention a definitive, itemized accounting tying each past White House recreational addition to a single funding source, nor do they provide the full donor contracts or legal filings in detail within these excerpts, so some financing and legal particulars remain unreported in the materials provided (not found in current reporting).