Richmond officials move to increase public housing transparency
VENN
RICHMOND, Va. (WRIC) -- Richmond City Council passed an ordinance aimed at ensuring the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) is more transparent with public housing tenants.
During a city council meeting on Monday, July 28, councilmembers reviewed legislation meant to increase public transparency and accountability for both the RRHA and the Richmond Development Corporation (RDC), a Virginia nonprofit.
A drafted version of the ordinance obtained by 8News states that "the Council of the City of Richmond is concerned that the RRHA and RDC are taking actions without sufficient public oversight and meaningful engagement with Richmond residents and public housing tenants."
This debate centers around the future of Gilpin Court, which residents fear is in jeopardy due to discussions about RRHA transferring the property to the RDC.
Del. Michael Jones’s plan to build affordable housing at his church hits a hurdle
Councilwoman Stephanie Lynch previously told 8News that Gilpin Court tenants may be displaced if these transfers proceed.
RRHA CEO Steven Nesmith previously said the RDC transfer would lock in "tenant protection vouchers" and give housing officials more freedom to secure different types of funding.
A major objective of the ordinance is to "ensure public and resident control of public housing and redevelopment plans." In addition to several proposed changes to both RDC and RRHA's bylaws, the ordinance would order the RRHA to develop both a "Community Benefits Agreement" and a "Tenant's Bill of Rights" for Gilpin Court.
"We have 2,000 residents who need to have a voice -- and we are their voice in this matter," said councilwoman Kenya Gibson during Monday's meeting.
Troubled Chester daycare cited for false advertising after changing signs
The RDC bylaw changes proposed in the ordinance include:
- New controls over who can staff the board. The RDC's board would exclusively include members of the RRHA's Board of Commissioners.
- New regulations for public meetings. The RDC should give notice of the date, time, location and remote location of its meetings on RRHA's public website no later than 5 business days prior to the meeting. Only items included on the meeting's agenda could be discussed unless two-thirds of the board approves it. A video of the meeting should be posted within 7 business days of the meeting.
- New controls on how bylaws can be altered. Amendments to the RDC's bylaws would only be able to be made by a two-thirds majority of the RRHA's Board of Commissioners.
- New conflict of interest controls. Members of RDC's board would be required to make annual filings about any potential conflicts of interest.
The RRHA bylaw changes proposed in the ordinance include:
- New controls over contract approval. Contracts valued at more than $250,000 would not be able to be executed by the RRHA without that contract being discussed in at least two public meetings. City Council would also have to approve the contract.
- New requirements for public comment. The RRHA would have to allow public comment on matters unless two-thirds of the board voted against having such a comment period.
- New regulations for public meetings. The RRHA should give notice of the date, time, location and remote location of its meetings on its public website no later than 5 business days prior to the meeting. Only items included on the meeting's agenda could be discussed unless two-thirds of the board approves it. A video of the meeting should be posted within 7 business days of the meeting.
- New controls on how bylaws can be altered. Amendments to the RRHA's bylaws would only be able to be made by a two-thirds majority and with additional approval by City Council.
- New annual report requirement. RRHA's board would need to file an annual report with audited financial statements and other fiscal details.
- New conflict of interest controls. Members of RRHA's board would be required to make annual filings about any potential conflicts of interest.
No one spoke against the ordinance during Monday's meeting, but several spoke in favor of it. Multiple of these speakers said they were Gilpin Court residents.
Most said they were not satisfied with the level of communication the RRHA has been offering residents. Others accused the RRHA of both unlawful conduct and corruption.
Council president Cynthia Newbille spoke about a letter provided to City Council from the city's attorney and legal concerns with RRHA brought up within it.
"It is clear that clarification is needed, certainly, in this instance," Newbille said. "I unequivocally support the involvement of our residents in the process of transforming our public housing communities."
Newbille added that, though Monday's discussion was about Gilpin Court, she is concerned about all public housing sites throughout the city. She said she wanted to revisit the potential issues facing these communities.
City council ultimately voted unanimously in favor of this proposal.
