WASHINGTON — D.C. taxpayers would pay more than $800 million toward the major redevelopment of RFK Stadium in a preliminary agreement with the Washington Commanders, according to D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), who said he was briefed by the mayor about the details this week.

While the city and the team are close to a deal, two people familiar with negotiations told The Washington Post earlier this week, it has not been finalized and it’s unclear how or if numbers may change. Mendelson and some residents oppose the use of public funds for any part of the stadium.

Under the preliminary agreement, a stadium would anchor a large development at the 174-acre site including hotels, housing, some retail and possibly office space, plus parking facilities, Mendelson said. The overall cost of the stadium development would be $3.2 billion — the majority of which would be paid for by the Commanders, which would put up a minimum of $2.5 billion, Mendelson said. D.C.’s contribution would be $500 million. EventsDC — D.C.’s convention and sports authority — would put up $181 million for a parking facility, the chairman said.

The Commanders would also fund a parking facility, which D.C. would buy from the team in 2032 for $175 million, Mendelson said. Combined with EventsDC’s portion, the costs to taxpayers add up to a total of $856 million. NBC4 first reported on the preliminary financial details of the deal Wednesday.

The team — which currently plays in Landover — will pay 100% of the construction for a stadium in any deal, according to a person with knowledge of the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private negotiations. That could suggest the city’s contribution would go more toward related infrastructure, although Mendelson said it was not clear to him what exactly the city would fund.

Mendelson said he sees $856 million as a minimum, noting the amount does not include the cost of debt service, and he said he feared taxpayers could ultimately spend north of $1 billion. He added that he did not have any information about how D.C. would plan to finance the deal. The D.C. Council would have to approve any taxpayer money that goes toward a deal, and members are divided on the use of public funds or how they should be used.

“My position has been that there should not be public dollars — the D.C. treasury should not be paying toward a stadium,” Mendelson said.

He also questioned if the city might be on the hook for upgrades to National Park Service land under a tentative agreement Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) made with the office of Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) in December in a final push to get the U.S. Senate to pass a bill turning control of the federally owned land over to the city. That agreement was not ultimately part of the terms with the federal government outlining D.C.’s responsibilities at the site, and Lee’s office didn’t have an update on the status of the agreement or D.C. land management when asked last week.

A spokeswoman for Bowser declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the Washington Commanders. A spokeswoman for EventsDC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Other council members either did not respond to requests for comment or were not part of the briefing and did not have details.

Bowser has seen the 174-acre RFK Stadium site as a generational development opportunity for the city, and she had eyed it for a decade before unlocking it through congressional action in December. The mayor has pitched sports and entertainment as a big revenue and tourism driver for D.C. The city is separately putting half a billion dollars toward renovating Capital One Arena, where the Washington Wizards and Capitals play, while the Washington Nationals are also hoping the city will back major upgrades at the ballpark.

But the city has a limit to how much it can borrow for capital projects, a bucket of money that is separate from funding city services but does include projects such as school or library renovations, meaning they all compete for limited funds.

The city’s separate operating budget, meanwhile, is facing significant strains. The House has yet to pass legislation correcting $1 billion in cuts to D.C. due to the omission of routine language in a recent spending bill — leading Bowser to begin planning for furloughs and facility closures — while D.C. also faces a separate $1 billion shortfall over the next several years because of economic headwinds caused in part by the Trump administration’s shake-up of the federal workforce.

While some residents at a recent town hall were thrilled about a potential return of the Commanders, others have launched opposition campaigns, with some contrasting the city’s desire to invest in the stadium against the expected cuts to city services. Organizers of “Homes Not Stadiums” are seeking to prohibit the construction of a stadium at the RFK site through a ballot initiative they launched this week, wanting more land set aside for housing. The “No Billionaire’s Playground Coalition” is also strongly against public funding of a stadium.

“DC should not be giving $850 million of taxpayer money to the NFL when city leaders have said there will be cuts to teachers, police, schools, and human services,” Ebony Payne, a Ward 7 advisory neighborhood commissioner who organizes with the No Billionaire’s Playground Coalition, said in a statement Thursday. “This emerging back-door deal makes it clear why RFK should be developed for the community and by the community.”

Bowser has said she wants to do it all at RFK, saying there is room for a stadium, affordable housing and retail on the 174 acres. She said at a town hall in February that the stadium could also allow the District to attract other major global events, bringing in revenue for the city benefiting the overall economy.

“Until we have a modern stadium, we will not be able to host events like the world is used to, including a World Cup, including a Super Bowl — and yes, Beyoncé and Taylor Swift,” Bowser said.

Washington Post reporter Jenny Gathright contributed to this article.