Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board opens work session on ‘whole home repair’ after residents urge a county-sponsored working group
Summary
Residents and Virginia Organizing urged the Montgomery County Board of Supervisors to form a working group to explore whole‑home repair programs; staff explained the county’s complaint‑based property‑maintenance enforcement and legal limits on direct payments to landlords.
Residents and representatives of Virginia Organizing asked the Montgomery County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 24 to form a working group to explore whole‑home repair and rehabilitation programs after nearby counties received state funds for housing rehab.
The board moved the item into a work session and heard from staff about how the county currently handles housing complaints and inspection. County staff described the existing process: tenants file a complaint and sign an application granting inspection access; building inspectors document code violations and issue a letter to the property owner with a required response time; owners may appeal within 14 days, and enforcement can proceed up to court if violations are not remedied.
Why residents asked for a group
Speakers representing Virginia Organizing and several residents said many lower‑income homeowners and renters lack resources to complete necessary repairs and that nearby localities (Floyd, Pulaski, Wythe and others) received Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) funds for housing rehabilitation. Speakers urged the board to convene a countywide working group to explore how Montgomery County could access similar funding and how to design a local program rather than rely solely on complaint‑driven enforcement.
Legal and operational limits cited by staff
County attorney Marty (last name not specified in the transcript) warned that the county cannot use county tax dollars to directly pay for repairs to for‑profit entities (for‑rent landlords). He and staff noted that some DHCD grants and other state programs are structured for owner‑occupied rehabilitation and that nonprofits often serve as grant recipients or pass‑through entities for such funding. Staff also explained that Department of Social Services intake can refer individuals to community partners (Community Housing Partners, Community Action, Habitat for Humanity and civic groups) and that those partners have historically helped with weatherization and targeted repairs.
Board direction and follow up requested
Supervisors asked staff to research state DHCD programs, grant paths used by neighboring counties, the role of nonprofit partners, and what could be done for renters versus owner‑occupants. The board asked staff to return with options and to consider convening a working group that includes community representatives, nonprofits and county staff. Some supervisors recommended beginning with staff‑level coordination (county and town administrators) before a larger elected‑body meeting.
Ending
Board members did not adopt a program that night but directed staff to gather more information on eligible DHCD funding, potential nonprofit partners and existing county referral pathways; staff was asked to report back so the board can decide whether to form a formal work group.
