Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richmond council advances dedicated Affordable Housing Trust Fund with 2.5% real‑estate revenue; advocates demand accountability
Summary
City leaders and housing advocates celebrated passage of a compromise ordinance establishing a dedicated funding stream (2.5% of real‑estate tax revenue) for an Affordable Housing Trust Fund, while community groups warned they will monitor implementation, oppose overreliance on bonds and insist 30% of funds serve households at 30% AMI and below.
Richmond’s City Council on Feb. 23 finalized a measure to reauthorize and strengthen the city’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund, establishing a predictable revenue source and new reporting and implementation requirements, council members and community leaders said.
The ordinance designates 2.5% of real‑estate tax revenue for the trust fund over a multi‑year period and adds accountability measures, including an implementation plan, regular reporting and public posting of trust fund regulations and policies. Council members and the mayor described the measure as a compromise reached after months of negotiation between the administration and advocates.
Why it matters: Advocates called the move ‘‘historic’’ for Richmond and said dedicated revenue will allow long‑term planning for affordable housing production and preservation. Community groups also warned they will hold the city to ensure funds reach the lowest‑income residents.
Support and community demands: Pastor Derek Starr Redwine (First Presbyterian Church/RISC) and other organizers praised the ordinance but emphasized that its strength will depend on faithful implementation and citizen oversight. ‘‘We support and encourage the passing of this compromise, but we do so with clarity,’’ he said, urging funds be protected and targeted to those at 30% AMI and below.
Several speakers noted the trust fund’s prior weaknesses and a recent audit that identified problems, including missing transfers. Marty Wegbride, a former trust‑fund board member, said the audit found $2.47 million set aside in 2022 that was never deposited into the fund and earlier delinquent tax‑sale proceeds that were not disclosed to council; the new ordinance requires an implementation plan and public reporting to address these omissions.
Financial scale and uses: Community leaders presented a rough funding estimate and priorities at the meeting: speaker Janice Lacey said 2.5% of property tax revenue over the next five fiscal years would yield more than $63 million for the trust fund; council members highlighted both production (new units) and preservation/repair as priorities.
Council and administration view: Council Member Robertson, a lead patron on the ordinance, said the trust fund will provide a predictable, transparent source to build and preserve housing for seniors, long‑time residents and working families. Administration representatives described reporting and oversight mechanisms and said an 18‑month implementation period allows operational setup.
Dissent and conditions: Some council members and advocates said the ordinance’s reliance on some bond funding remains a concern. Advocates and council members pledged further oversight and possible return to council for additional reporting and stronger safeguards.
What comes next: Council adopted the ordinance as part of the meeting’s business; staff will provide implementation details and reporting to council and the public during the coming months.
