Adam Clerk, we'll call this meeting order.

Please proceed with the chamber of emergency evacuation announcement.

Upon activation of the emergency and law signal, all persons should immediately enter the building.

Please use the exits to the life left.

Please use the exit to the left or right front of the council chamber or the east and west there were outside the rear doors of the chamber.

Do not use elevators or escalators.

After exiting the building, security will direct everyone down 9th Street to the assembly area located inside the former public safety building parking lot.

Able persons should assist visually in your hearing appear visitors with exiting the building.

Persons wishing to speak during the public comment period and or public hearings are generally allowed three minutes to speak.

Persons appearing before the committee are not allowed to campaign for public office, promote prior business ventures, use language or a personal nature, which is also demeans any person, including comments directed at public officials or staff members that are not related to their official duties or just to question staff members directly.

All questions to be directed to the committee chair.

And for this disciplinary action as necessary, which can include barring from attendance at future meetings of the committee for a period of six months.

Members of the public who register in advance to speak virtually will be called at the appropriate time, either during the public comment period or during the public hearing for the legislation on which they sign up to address.

Madam Chair, this includes the announcements.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Can we uh let's do public comment?

Is there anyone here that would like to provide comment for items not on today's agenda?

Seeing none, the public comment period is now closed.

Uh let's do approval of the minutes and then we'll do boards and vacancy.

The minutes to be approved from the March 17th, 2026, land use housing and transportation standing committee meeting.

If there are no amendments or corrections, and those meeting minutes stand approved as presented.

Those minutes have been approved.

Good afternoon, Chair Jones, Vice Chair Robertson, Mr.

Breton, Pamela Nichols, Council Management Analyst.

The report before you actually um consists of two vacancies, which were previously considered by this committee, and then prior to council's appointment of those individuals, um, a request were made to send the recommendations back to this committee.

So starting with the commission of architecture review, for the one vacancy we receive an additional application from Daniel Payne, and we have received um support from city staff for um Daniel Payne to be um considered for appointment.

And then moving down to the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

Um we have one new vacancy since the last time this committee considered, which that for Kyle Elliott, um he submitted a reappointment application, and then um the reappointment application for Eddie Jackson was um referred back to this committee from by city council.

And then in addition to that, we received an application from Chelsea Higg-Wise, Kevin Marchman, and he contacted our office and wanted to note that on his application he put in error that he was not a city resident.

However, he is a resident of the city and he resides in the 6th district, but his application shows that he is not, he said he was not.

It was just he was confused on the application.

And then we have an application from Brittany Watson and Sally Wiley.

So there are two vacancies to be considered.

And that's the one for architecture review and the enrichment redevelopment, correct?

Um, so the first vacancy um for our um for carr, the recommendations for Daniel Payne, and then for Richmond Vedevelment and Housing Authority, there are two vacancies that you all are considering today.

All right.

So what do we do you want us to zoom individually or you want us to do it as a block would be fine?

A block, okay, if you're all comfortable chair.

We um I'd like to recommend uh most ideal, but I think there's severe increased conversation that are being had with the housing authority at the present time, and we would like I would request that we continue delay and continue the appointment for the Richmond Redevelopment Housing Authority.

I support the uh recommendation for the commission of architecture review.

And would you like to continue that to July or next month?

July would be fine.

That's fine.

Wonderful, thank you.

Thank you so much accept the okay.

The committee is voting on the motion to for the board recommendation of the Commission of Architecture Review and to continue the board recommendations for the board of the commissioners for the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority as stated to council.

Mr.

Burton.

Aye.

Vice Chair Robertson.

Aye.

Chair Jones.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

All right.

Let's uh run see how fast we can run through these papers.

Let's do um agenda item number agenda item number one.

Item one, resolution 2026 R003 to commit to working with the administration to develop and implement a comprehensive energy efficiency program that reduces the energy burden and cost of living for vulnerable households, support small businesses, assist in the preservation of housing and the stabilization of neighborhoods, it makes meaningful progress towards the city's climate goals.

That papers before the committee.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We have had this one in front of us for a while, gone back and forth.

Is anyone from the administration here to speak to this paper?

Hi, good afternoon, Laura Thomas, Director of Sustainability for the City here speaking on behalf of administration.

We are in support of the current amendments that are before you.

Staff has taken a look at the request from council and tried to submit an appropriate response, including addressing deficit-based language, uh needing to ensure additional brevity and then ensuring there are specific examples within the resolution that get at the heart of the work that is intended to be done.

The additional request or edit that is in front of you is also to ensure that city staff has the appropriate amount of time to respond to you all.

So we have a 180-day response time to get a framework back for such papers, uh, if that is uh the will of city council.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Any questions?

We'll have the public hearing and then so don't go too far.

All right, madam, it's still public hearing on a paper.

Is there anyone that would like to speak in opposition to item one?

Is there anyone that would like to speak in support to item one?

Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed, bring it back to the committee.

Uh yeah, I I just wanted to comment in regards to this paper and other papers.

Um we have uh we got a presentation from Mr.

Merlone a couple of days ago.

Um thank you.

And uh very well prepared comprehensive report was done on the different initiatives that the city has in place for um to address and to assist and perhaps prevent displacement.

And I I strongly feel the same way about a lot of our housing related initiatives that the same population and the needs to address um housing.

Uh and I I feel like there's lots of different programming uh and different initiatives that are in place.

And so at some point we really would like to look at I know that this that the department is working on a uh revision to the housing plan, and I think that that housing plan will ultimately hopefully address all of the different kinds of uh initiatives that are in place and make sure that we are leveraging our resources and leveraging our programming, uh, and that it really becomes uh more of a one-stop opportunity that collectively we know the different components of programming that we have and the dollars that are appropriated.

So that will be a follow-up request that we are planning to make uh to the housing and community development uh community to be able to look at as a part of what we are doing with the total revival re revamping the existing housing plan.

But thank you for the work that you've done.

Yes, and to very briefly respond, I could certainly uh pass that request along to the appropriate parties and just mention that as part of the vetting process for what you all see before you.

We very intentionally worked across agencies.

So this is a result of public works, public utilities, office of sustainability, office of community wealth building, and housing.

Um so all parties have reviewed an input because we agree that it needs to be a whole of government response in order to achieve our shared goals.

Thank you.

Uh I make a motion that we forward this on with a recommendation to approve.

Second.

The committee is working on the motion to forward item one resolution 2026 R003 to council with the recommendation to approve, Mr.

Brighton.

Aye.

Vice Chair Robertson.

Chair Jones.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

And the item number two.

Item two, ordinance 2026 088 to amend city code concerning parking.

Oh prohibitions in specific places for the purpose of clarifying the definition of the term bicycle lane and authorizing certain emergency medical service providers to provide to move vehicles from prohibited areas.

That paper's before the committee.

Do you want to speak to it?

Thank you so much, Chair Jones.

Yes, I would welcome that opportunity.

So we put this paper forward based on some outreach we had from constituent.

And in that research, we actually uncovered that this was in fact a recommendation and request from our city's Safe and Healthy Streets Commission back in 2023.

Just to describe it a little bit more.

This ordinance clarifies that buffer areas within bicycle lanes are included in parking prohibitions.

So that striped etch area next to the bicycle lane is all part of the bicycle lane and needs to be within the areas enforced for no parking.

The change response to documented issues of vehicles parking in those buffers, forcing cyclists into traffic, and creating safety risks.

The amendment aligns with city code, aligns our city code with federal and state design guidelines, which treats buffers as a central safety space.

The fiscal impact is minimal and primarily involves staff education and enforcement clarity, not new infrastructure.

This was an explicit, again, this is an explicit recommendation request of the Safe and Healthy Streets Commission back in 2023.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Let's hold the public hearing on this paper first.

Is there anyone that would like to speak in opposition to item two?

Is there anyone present that would like to speak in support of item two?

Please approach the podium and state your name for the record.

My name is John Barkley.

I'm a teacher in Richmond Public Schools.

I work at Franklin Military Academy.

This is my daughter Maria Barkley.

She's a preschooler at the Richmond Waldorf School.

And every morning we start our day by getting on our bike.

She has a little seat behind me.

It's blue.

And Raynershine, we bike to her preschool.

I drop her off, and then I continue on to Churchill, where my school is located.

That takes us through the Brooklyn Parkway bike lanes, the Brook Road bike lanes, you know, and then I continue on.

I'll take First Street and back when she went to preschool downtown.

I would also go on the Franklin Street bike lanes.

So I'm relatively familiar with the different bike lanes in the city.

Um and I guess one thing I want to just say is that the ability to bike to work and to her preschool is more than an entertaining thing, which it very much is.

By having the availability of good bike infrastructure as well as the GRTC to rely on, we're able to move down to one car in my family, which um for a teacher is quite a windfall of about 10,000.

Unless the city council intends to do a 12% raise for teachers this year.

I would say that's the best windfall I've access to.

Um saying 10,000 dollars is a big deal for a teacher.

Um however, there's also an issue that we run into on our commute, both with her and as I continue on to Churchill, and that's cars in the bike lane, which requires us to veer, as mentioned, into traffic.

But of course, the city is doing an enforcement blitz of a very sternly worded warning about that right now, and so we don't have to worry about cars in the bike lane as much.

But an issue that is not frequently addressed and that uh police have told me is not enforceable is when a car is parked immediately adjacent to the bike lane, such that their mirror is in the bike lane, but the wheels are not.

Or they're parked immediately adjacent such that when they open their car door, it fully blocks the bike lane.

Now that's inconvenient if I see it coming.

And if I don't see it coming and I'm right next to the car, that's deadly.

Because it hits me while I'm riding my bike and my daughter's on the bike as well.

Um something that excites me about this ordinance is that it provides discretion to officers to enforce situations when a car is parked in a dangerous manner in the buffer.

Um the buffer exists so that cars can safely unload and also so that I can safely pass through the bike lane with my daughter without worrying about a car door hitting me.

30 seconds.

Thank you.

And without the authority to enforce the buffer space, police are unable to address this safety hazard.

And so I'd like to ask you for the safety of my family and as well as future bike riders like the one I'm holding in my hand, that you'll approve this ordinance.

Thank you.

Do you want to say anything?

I got like 10 seconds.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else, madam?

We do have someone on this line, right?

Yes, we do.

Uh Ms.

Gordon, if you are online, you should be able to unmute and provide your comment to the committee.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everybody.

Um my name is Louise Lockett Gordon.

I'm the chair for the Richmond uh City Safe and Um Safe and Healthy Streets Commission.

Um just want to speak in support uh of the paper.

And we'll just add um that uh expanding the definition of a bike lane to include that buffer zone accomplishes two things.

Um the person uh ahead of me alluded to it, but um by maintaining that space between uh a parked vehicle and a bike lane, um, what we can ensure that we prevent is called dooring, or when somebody in a vehicle opens that door, if there is not space between um the bike lane and uh that parked vehicle, uh that door obstructs the bike lane, and somebody uh biking through a bike lane um may crash into that door and suffer injury.

So maintaining that buffered zone and maintaining it in a clear fashion um prevents that sort of injury.

Um and then the second part is that buffer zones tend to be part of a broader road diet approach.

I'm sure members of this um committee are familiar with that term, but the um slimming down of the space on streets in an effort to um slow down street speeds.

We know that when the roadway looks very wide, people perceive that they have more wiggle room and will tend to drive faster and above the speed limit.

Um and so road diets visually cue drivers um that the travel space is narrower and thus they slow down and tend to abide uh more closely to posted speed limits.

And when we calm down street speeds, we make walking, biking, and connecting with transit uh more safe, more comfortable, and we promote getting around in a healthy way.

Um so with that, thank you for your time and support of the paper.

Thank you.

That concludes the public hearing, bring it back to the committee.

All right.

Thank you, um, Councillor Jordan for bringing this forward.

Um I'm sure my colleague will be has something to say.

But um I just want to commend you, uh, I think Sand and Mrs.

Barkley for your route to work driving and to have a little one on the back of the bike with you.

Um, I think my one question, and I think is have we identified where we are going to start with these buffers in across the city?

Is anybody from the administration or somebody can speak to that?

I just want to know have we identified the areas.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Daniel Wagner, Department of Transportation.

Um great question.

I think the follow-up I would have is do you mean as far as an enforcement uh blitz is concerned, or do you mean um would we where would we be looking to put more buffered bike lanes?

Because I'm happy to speak to a little bit of both.

But yeah, both, because I'm we we know we own this enforcement blitz, but we try to get a sense of is it citywide, is it specific areas so that we know what we actually are doing?

Yeah, so part of this will uh work with our parking enforcement contracts as standard parking.

Um we'll have to do some training to make sure that they know that that buffered zone is now included within the area that it's illegal to park.

So we'll be a we'll need a little bit of lead-up time to make sure that they're well versed in that.

Most of their work does happen in the central Bridges district, and that's where we see most of our violations.

So I think Franklin Street bike lanes um think going a little bit further to the west potentially, but we're absolutely um excited about the new bike facilities that we're starting to put up in Southside.

So think Hopkins Road bike lane.

Um we'll have the James River branch trail, which is not a buffered bike lane, but it'll allow for more connectivity along to some of these routes, West Over Hills Boulevard as well.

Um so we would definitely look at targeted enforcement there.

Thank you.

Can you make sure that we stay in the loop for as this is rolling out, um, just to ensure if we get asked about it or we can be able to speak to it, um, one in support.

And I know, like I said, we're doing a lot around bike lanes, and I'm gonna let my colleague over here have this one.

But I mean, because everybody deserves to be safe, seriously and awful in all seriousness.

But um, I just want to make sure that we're not targeting specific areas that have more heavily bike riders, and just because you may have an area that doesn't have as many bike riders, we see that as an opportunity to say, oh, well, we'll get to them.

So as long as we're making sure that it's all encompassing.

Um, I look forward to getting that information from you.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um we had a lengthy discussion the just the other day in the budget session about uh pull-offs for schools.

Um I get I get a complaint from a bus from a bike rider weekly uh on mechanic wheels turnpike at MLK school.

We do not have a pull off for families that are bringing their kids to the school.

I mean, the buses can pull into it's just not really a pull off because it's just you know, at the parking lot, and they go around the parking lot where you know, cars are coming in to park there all the time, but it is an off-the-street pull off.

But many middle school parents are bringing their kids to school, and they're dropping their kids off in front of the school so that they can get out of the car and go right on the school lawn, and there is no pull-off.

Um not anything in the budget for that, and it's a major, major, and there's a bike lane that goes right by there, and I get calls all the time from just like this gentleman and his daughter, that you know, people open the door, the bike is coming down, kids are jumping out of the car, getting into the school.

And um, so I would really ask that we look at our school areas where there is no pull off.

There's nothing in the budget to make that happen.

Um and there's a bike lane.

There is a bike lane.

Um and uh MLK is one of those schools that we get a lot of traffic through that area.

We've done a lot of things to try to calm the traffic.

I mean, you go through there and it's just amazing what they've done in that section.

Uh, but there's too many turn lanes.

Um, and there is no plan for that.

And we've asked over and over again for a plan of action for there.

So I really want to suggest that looking at our school zones where there is no pull off of the schools, that we prioritize that as one of the areas that we consider to making sure that we are putting the right kind of buffers in place.

Thank you.

Wholeheartedly agreed, council member.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Um, Alice was going to was going to agree with that point, and there's definitely times when um you don't want to create like a conflict between like the usage of the space for depending on the context, right?

So not every bike lane is a necessary bike lane just because it's bike lane.

I absolutely agree with that.

Um, I was gonna say this this paper, um, which is great, and I think the all the advocates said it best about what's at stake and and the safety uh impacts.

Um I actually wanted to kind of commend the city for the way that they've handled the enforcement changes, that when they when they change their enforcement patterns that they do that warning method, I think it's actually a great policy.

Some people kind of you know are disappointed that we only give a warning ticket the first time.

I actually want to commend that.

I think it's a great way to help educate people that our enforcement practices might be different than they're used to.

And so I want to commend the city for doing those first-time warnings, those transition warning times before going into to more tickets.

So um anyway, I'm glad to see that we're doing that, and I hope that we'll continue to do that um with that.

But I, you know, otherwise, I think this is a fantastic paper just to clarify the safety of those that door zone.

Great job.

Thank you, Mr.

Wagner.

All right.

Um agenda item number three.

Oh, wait, wait, wait.

We gotta make a motion.

I move that we um for this with a recommendation to approve.

Second, second.

The committee is going on the motion to afford item two ordinance 2026 088 to council with the recommendation to approve, Mr.

Britton.

Aye, Vice Chair Robertson.

Uh I would you add me as a patron, please.

Thank you.

Co-patron.

Okay.

That has been noted.

Chair Jones.

Aye.

Thank you.

That motion has been.

I'm sorry.

Never mind, let them have it.

Let them have it.

I don't.

So just to clarify, Ms.

Um Vice Chair Robinson, you wanted to be added as co-patron.

All three of us.

All three.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Agenda item three, please.

Item three, ordinance 2026 084 to authorize the CAO to execute a standard project administration agreement between the city and the C VTA for the purpose of administering the Diamond District Transportation Infrastructure Project.

That paper is for the committee.

Good afternoon.

Dirana Moore Clark here, Deputy Director, Department of Public Works.

The Department of Public Works submitted the request in the amount of $12.9 million to the CVTA to help support critical transportation infrastructure improvements associated with phase 1A of the Diamond District redevelopment project.

The transportation related improvements include new multimodal neighborhood streets, transit access enhancements, and signalized intersection improvements.

The CVTA approved approximately 80% of those funds.

And now we are looking to this request is to authorize the CAO on behalf of the city to execute a standard project administration agreement between the city and the Central Virginia Transportation Authority for the purpose of administering the Diamond District Transportation Infrastructure Project.

Thank you.

Is there anyone that would like to speak in opposition to item three?

Is there anyone that would like to speak in support to item three?

Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed, bring it back to the committee.

Yes.

I'd like to know what are the specific types of improvements that we will be expecting to see as this part of phase one A that we're funding.

Didn't have it, but I have it here.

Um included, maybe not in your package, but it does have some project management.

It has utility demolition.

There would be the construction of road B, Road J, vehicle and pedestrian street lighting.

Thank you.

Can I also ask is there any likelihood that the project might exceed the 10.37 million dollars and would be having any exposure to that?

No.

So the agreement cannot exceed the 10.3 million dollars given by the CVTA unless an additional request is asked through a different you know application process.

My last question is what is the like timeline expect expected timeline to deliver this project?

Uh it should be completed May 2027.

Um, but we are looking, we should have we will be sure that all funds are expended by May 2027.

Yeah, just just one question.

Um total budget, you said started off at 12.9.

We got uh less than that, 80 percent, yes, ma'am.

So the what's the total budget and sources for the entire project?

So the additional approximately 2.6, 2.4 million dollars um is from the EDA.

So um this full body um council approved uh the $37 million uh GO bond.

And so actually those funds that you've already committed to the project um through the EDA are able to match the CVTA funds.

So they are already budgeted um within the total project cost.

Start dates, uh you said completion in May 27.

Yes, and so the start will be as soon as this agreement is executed.

Um, and then we also amend the uh CIP to actually spend the dollars, which we're doing today at six.

Project manager city.

Currently, the project manager is stated Daniel Wagner.

Mr.

Wagner, who's just up here, and that's the project management only on the CVTA on the invoices.

We also have DJ Malkney here, Malkey rather from uh the EDA, who's the project manager on the EDA side.

So we've already gone through procurement.

Yes, so I can bring DJ up if he wants to speak about it.

Um, but the or even Sharon if she wants to speak about, but the development agreement that was approved that actually had the bids in it and was looked at by the CVTA.

And so the bids that were selected from the contractors for that development agreement is what we're utilizing to implement the project.

Local match.

No local match.

Uh thank you.

Well, quick question too.

One is um when we use you you mentioned that we approved geo bonds for the diamond district.

The diamond district.

Was this was this uh in there?

You said because you when she asked you had you gone through procurement, you said it was part of the actual package that we approved.

Did we know that had you already applied for the money from CBTA when we received the package, or did that happen after the fact?

It happened after the package, but the package did include all of the roads that we need to in all of the items I just named to be built within the package within the packet, and that the EDA was gonna oversee that.

Yes.

Okay.

And and is that the area, which area is that of the phase one that we're talking about?

What streets?

So again, road J and Road B, they haven't been officially named because they haven't been turned over to the city yet.

Um, I think road B is is still right now used as an access road, but that will be a public road, and they haven't built road J at all.

Um, and neither of the other signalized intersection improvements have been made.

Okay.

Um thank you.

You're welcome.

To approve.

Second.

The committee is voting on the motion to forward item three ordinance 2026 084 to council with the recommendation to approve.

Mr.

Brenton.

Aye.

Vice Chair Robertson.

Aye.

Chair Jones.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

Agenda item number four.

Item four on this 2026 085 to authorize the CAO to accept 275,000 from the Virginia Transit Association and to appropriate the increase to the FY2526 special fund budget by increasing estimated revenues and the amount appropriated to DPW shared mobility for the purpose of funding a free rides to work program.

That papers before the committee.

Thank you.

Mr.

Wagner, is that you again.

All right.

Hello again, Chair Jones, members of the committee.

Um, so this is to authorize uh the acceptance of an award from the Virginia Transit Association to continue our free rides to work program.

Um little bit of background.

This is an annual program that we're uh we apply for through the Virginia Transit Association associated with uh removing barriers to entry for lower income families to access transit or to access um some sort of mobility options if they're not on a direct fixed route transit line.

So what this does is not compete with GRT service at all, but rather it fills in a gap in order to ensure that families have access uh to their jobs if they either don't live on a designated GR2C line or if their job might be a little bit far flung from a fixed route or a microtransit line.

So what this will do is re-up for this uh fiscal year um we also have another application in for the upcoming FY27 so more news on that will come uh for sure uh just a note that what we've done um newly this year is actually also expanded it to allow folks to um use the program to access child care in advance of going to their job so that's another gap that a lot of folks are seeing is um it's difficult to both get to work and find affordable child care near you or near your job so this program helps to fill that gap a little bit as well uh let's hold a public hearing on this and then we'll come back to you with questions is there anyone that would like to speak in opposition to item four anyone that would like to speak in support to item four seeing none the public hearing is now closed bring it back to the committee thank you um madam clerk uh couple of questions uh Mr.

Wagner L five or six we'll start well can you confirm that this is a grant and so it does not cost the city any money is that correct that is correct all right and then also um can I ask how do we define success and do we already have any measurements from the current year how it's going?

Yeah so as far as demand is concerned um we do have a current wait list so we know that there's a need that is being met um what we're seeing I think as far as from a success standpoint is we don't want this to be uh perpetually full program we want to help folks so what we're working on now is partnering with the Office of Community Wealth Building to see can we also help folks access jobs that are closer to them so that maybe that's not an issue.

One of the screening tools we use for folks is A, of course they have to be TANF eligible that's a requirement of the program and the funding that it's attached to and the other piece is ensuring that they're not actually within walking distance of a GRTC bus line.

So if they have tried to sign up for the program and turns out that they live near a bus, we help them navigate that we'll connect them with the resources they need to so that they can access that so right now I would say success for us is we're filling this need and then looking to what our next steps are to use this as a planning tool for maybe we've also got areas of the city that need more transit service.

And so we'll look at that from a long-term perspective to see uh where folks getting picked up and dropped off maybe there's uh an unmet need in the region um and so then we can start to bring that to the fore as well so it's both filling an immediate need as well as a kind of a long-term planning tool is how we're looking at it.

I guess yeah my last question is kind of can you speak to the you know the long-term feasibility of funding a project program like this especially when the grants run out yeah great question um so for the time being uh there is no need to discontinue the funding VTA has this pot of funding annually uh and we're one of the one of a few applicants that um has been awarded annually um we have a really great relationship with this organization so we don't see a need to sunset at this point um if that were to become an option we would definitely seek to partner with ridefinders GRTC and other folks in the region to help secure that safety net for folks um and in the meantime also look with internally with our other partners to connect folks to make sure that they have either again access to um maybe the resources they need to secure a job closer to their home or an ability to connect to other transportation modes.

Yes.

Thank you for the presentation the 275 what's the what's the demand versus the availability and is there a restriction on qualifies to use the funds and what mode of transportation I'll be using.

Is this Google what what are we using to do the trace?

Yeah great question so the style of service is uh Van Pool um so it's kind of like microtransit uh but from a private TANF provider um and and as you mentioned so we screen only TANF eligible families um right now I believe and I'll confirm this and send you all the follow-up information I believe we have 60 folks who are signed up regularly um and I don't know how long the wait list is off the top of my head but I'll absolutely get that information if you're interested um and we can also talk about where in the city folks are uh residing and then also going to if you'd like to see that information but this is door to door service yes um I think my colleagues asked the questions who did you say operates this um service?

Um I think my colleagues asked the questions.

Who did who did who did you say operates this um service?

It's Palms and Pines.

It's just a it's a local nonprofit.

So it's a private company that we partner with.

Correct.

And as a part of this money, are we um kind of like relegated to insure them?

Like how are we what what does that look like?

Uh can you explain if I have to like insurance?

If they're a company that we're hiring, they have yes, they have they're required to provide their own insurance, yes.

Say it again, I'm sorry.

So they they provide their own insurance, correct.

They to cover that level liability, yeah.

And but the city doesn't have to have a specific policy since we're contracting through them.

Okay.

And how are the people selected?

I'm sorry, I might have you might have said that, but I'm not sure if I heard it.

So it's uh it's really first come, first serve, and then folks have to be TANF eligible um to ensure that they have access to to this program it's as part of a um requirement of the funding.

And when you say first come first serve, meaning if I call and say it's 60 rides and I'm the 61st person, I don't get it.

And how is this?

How is this information communicated to folks to know that this service even exists?

And so they don't get confused with micro transit or pair of transit or something related to GRTC.

Yeah, it's a great question.

So uh the initial round of engagement um took place typically actually during the Richmond Connects planning process.

Um so we did a lot of outreach in communities uh there, um specifically in South Side, specifically in parts of Northside that might have uh what we call like transit deserts.

Um so that's that that was the first kind of round, and then since then um we've also seen a lot of outreach within our public housing communities.

I think the Genesis was uh for the program, which predates me, uh, was actually to specifically try to connect RRHA residents um who are having access to jobs.

So that was where the initial outreach uh took place, and then it kind of grew from there.

Okay, you know I got more questions, but uh offline.

Yeah, looking forward to it.

Thank you.

I move that we forward this with a recommendation to approve.

Do we have a second?

Thank you.

The committee is voting in a motion to forward item four ordinance 2026 085 to council with the recommendation to approve, Mr.

Brighton.

Aye, Vice Chair Robertson?

Hi, Chair Jones.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

Thank you, madam clerk.

Uh actually, you want to just do these in a block or are they two different ones, five and six?

If that's what you would like.

Yep, because you have in the block.

Okay.

Item five, ordinance 2026 086 to designate the 1000 block of East Play Street in honor of Bill Martin.

Item five, ordinance 2026 087 to designate the 2023 block of Rosewood Avenue in honor of James, Jimmy Lee, Bracie.

Those papers are before the committee.

Do we have anyone here to speak on behalf of either of the papers?

I know Ms.

Lynch was saying she was on issue online.

Okay, Miss Lynch.

If you could briefly uh share about this paper.

Yeah, you want to.

Hello.

I'm Michael Gray, and appreciate this opportunity.

I'm sorry.

Are you opening the floor now for public hearing?

She's not, she's not on.

Okay.

Okay, so you can we she's into she's what?

Yeah.

So we'll take him.

Yeah, I'm sorry.

You want to go ahead and proceed?

Yeah.

All right.

Um, thank you for the opportunity, of course, to be here in support of James Bracie.

I don't know if um the council anybody knows the do you know the history of the uh what the proposal as far as the Western Striders.

Could you please state your name for the record?

Michael Gory, G-R-A-W.

Jane Bracey was the uh community leader, actually, and what of the and a founder of the West End Striders or Western Straters of the Youth uh Track and Field Organization started in, I believe it was seven to seven, but I'm not certain of the original date.

But my affiliation with the Western Straders was a little bit limited.

Um in my affiliation with James Bracie himself.

I met Bracy as a youth, and Bracie took me under his wings as we went to work for the Federal Reserve Bank together.

Bracey was already there when I got there.

He took me under his wings, showed me how to live life, mentor others as he mentored me.

And this impact he has had on not only me, countless other youths.

I'm jumping around, but the West End Striders that he started is actually in existence today.

They have AAU meets.

They have a summer track and field events, competitions.

So I wholeheartedly just want to put my support behind this proposal.

It's for the 2300 block of Rosewood Avenue.

And the proposal, of course, is to have to sign in his honor, and Jimmy Lee Bracey.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay, you can you can go ahead, Ms.

Counselor Lynch.

Thank you.

Um, first, you know, first and and and foremost, um I want to thank um the uh committee, the the Bracey Committee for bringing this forward and for all the community members who um are working so hard to honor such um such an amazing uh human being and um really truly one of the greatest honors of being on councils is getting to celebrate um to uh to folks like Mr.

Bracey.

So it's truly an honor to um to bring this forward.

Um you you heard it um, you know, the the West End Striders and some of the work that uh Mr.

Bracey did in the community was absolutely absolutely um some of the most impactful work to the to the neighborhood in the community and changed so many lives and the trajectory of so many of our youth's lives um living in the neighborhood because of his selfless act of giving to them and giving back to that community and standing those programs up and being just a caring adult in those kids' lives.

Um you know, he um was a shining example of who the type of leader that um that we want to see and support in the city.

Um, and just a real change maker.

So hopefully we can we can move this one forward and um we're looking forward to an amazing celebration when we get this hopefully get this street naming underway.

Thank you, Councilor Lynch.

All right, um second, we'll call you.

Yeah, Madam Clerk, can we do a public hearing on this paper?

Is there anyone that would like to speak in opposition to items five and six?

Is there anyone that would like to speak in support to items five and six?

Who's opposed to calling station eight for the record?

Uh good evening.

My name's Al Hutchinson, uh, Madam Chair and committee members, uh, thank you for the opportunity.

I'm here to support the uh the movement for James Brace to have designated for the 2300 block of Rosewood Avenue.

I come to you as one of the West End Striders.

I met Mr.

Bracey when I was uh eight years old.

I grew up in the West End, proud graduate of Maggie Walker High School, and uh Mr.

Bracey was one who not only if he was here today, he would tell you I was the worst West End Strider uh on the team.

Uh I was a horrible track runner, but did some other things well.

But um I think the genius of Mr.

Bracey, for those of you who don't know Mr.

Brace, he committed to helping young folks in Richmond for over 40 years.

He didn't have a job description, he didn't have pay.

He volunteered to help people like me and the thousands of other folks who now around the country to be successful, to have vision, to grow, to be positive about what they could do.

I recently retired as president CEO from Visit Baltimore in the tourism industry.

And there are many folks like me who came under Mr.

Brace's Tuelegates, their doctors, their lawyers, their accountants, their teachers, their care makers all around this country.

And if not for Mr.

Bracie's leadership, his love, his care for us, we wouldn't be who we are.

So there are probably many other folks who've come through Richmond who've done great work, but no one has done better and greater work than Mr.

James Bracey.

And so I would applaud you to move this forward because what Mr.

Bracie did for folks like me and others is to make sure we are good husbands, we're good wives, we're good leaders, we're good fathers, we're good daughters.

That's the genius of Mr.

Bracey.

Yes, he was a great track coach, but his genius was investing in people helping them with visions.

I'm a graduate of University of Alabama, but that was because of Mr.

Bracey stretching my vision.

So I would applaud you to recognize a Richmond giant in a Richmond gym who cared and loved young people and did it from a place of love, not from a place of title or place of salary.

So thank you very much for the opportunity, and I hope you will move this forward.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Hutchison.

You speak in my love language when you're talking young people.

Shout out to Mr.

Bracie and his family.

Do we have any?

Is there anyone else that would like to speak in support?

Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed, bring it back to the committee.

Thank you all for coming down and speaking so highly of this gentleman and the work that he's done.

And I think that there are heroes in the city of Richmond that have done marvelous work to transform growth and development in our communities and supporting families to make the right choices and leading them to the place of success in the city.

So we're grateful.

And I'm honored, I don't know this gentleman, but I'm sort of great privilege in knowing him and also you all that he has uh contributed greatly to your lives.

So I'd love to be a patron of the paper.

Uh and I also want to be a patron of the paper for uh Bill Martin.

Um we know Bill Martin and we know the work that he has done, and sorry to have lost him in such a tragic way.

Um he had given so much to the city, and um it's a it's a little thing that we can do to honor him in this way, and I'm sure that all of council would want to be a patron of this paper as well.

And with that, uh but also motion for both of the papers to be moved forward with a recommendation of support to the council.

Thank you.

I second that motion.

The committee is voting on the motion to forward item five, ordinance 2026 086 and item six, ordinance 2026 087 to council with the recommendation to approve, Mr.

Bretton.

Aye.

Vice Chair Robertson, Chair Jones.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

All right, thank you, Madam Clerk.

Now we will move into the presentations.

Up first, we have uh GRTC, followed by uh Richmond Redevelopment Housing, Mr.

Nesmith.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

Adrian Torres with GRTC.

Um, I also have with me uh Laura Chutman.

Um she's over Capital Construction as well as Joe Tiller, who does our outreach and engagement.

So they're gonna assist me with this presentation.

Can I just speak forward to the mic?

Pull your mic down a little bit.

Thank you.

Yes.

Uh this is an overview of where we are with our current FY27 draft budget, as well as doing an outlook over the next five years, looking specifically at operating at a very high level.

Um, and then we'll touch base on where we are with our North South BRT efforts.

So this shows um what is our baseline operating cost.

Uh, they are growing from FY26 to FY27 looking pretty flat.

I just want to note that this is at our current service level, so it does not look at any sort of expansion scenarios, and the assumption is a 3% growth for inflation.

The North South BRT is considered, but we are looking at operating for that in FY32 and beyond.

So it is not represented in this chart.

So for FY27, we are looking about a 96 million dollar baseline budget.

We do have some grant funded studies that support kind of the engineering for the Western Extension BRT and Transfer Hub that are not shown here because those are capital one-time efforts.

The rest is kind of maintenance of current service levels.

North South BRT.

So quick overview.

This shows kind of the alignment going from the Henraiko County line all the way to Chesterfield County line on middle of the intern pike.

It links Richmond's north side, south sides about 12 miles.

We have 30 planned stations.

I already mentioned we're looking about FY32 for operating date for projected.

We are currently very, very early in this project.

We are doing environmental and then some early design.

So project schedule.

So what this chart does is it highlights things that are kind of already complementarily funded.

So if you look at the blue and the green, those are projects that have funding that will already enhance the BRT, whether it's our current uh Route 1 efforts, but will eventually feed into the North South BRT.

We also have other C VTA funding, DRPT funding.

We have pending funding with transportation block group, and have also had additional funding considerations that applications are being worked on.

With that, I am going to bring up Laura to get a little bit more technical into the conceptual designs.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

My name is Laura Toothman.

I'm the director of Capital Construction.

Could you speak more to the mic, please?

I'm the director of capital construction and facility improvement at GRTC.

So what you see before you is part of our conceptual design for the North South BRT.

As Adrian mentioned, we have been at this for a couple of years now, and our conceptual design has changed a little bit.

What you see in the slide right now is the top slide shows the previous recommendation for the location of our North Avenue station heading south.

The bottom slide shows the current proposed location to move it to.

We basically just moved it to the north side of the intersection.

These slides also show a little bit of what we are proposing as far as dedicated lanes.

The let the red lanes on the slides will be for transit only.

Part of what we will need to do in order to see this vision is to reduce the size of the current median to allow for that extra lane of travel.

As Adrian mentioned, this is still very early in conceptual design.

We are planning to continue our NEPA analysis, National Environmental Policy Act analysis through the third quarter of this year.

And we will also be continuing to have a great deal of public engagement, both one-on-one with civic associations.

And then as we near the end of NEPA, we'll be engaging in another round of larger public meetings to further discuss and refine these.

As part of this conceptual design advancement, we are currently working with consultants and subconsultants to look at aerial surveys of certain parts of the corridor, geotechnical information gathering specifically around the proposed location for our stations.

And then we're also going to be conducting ALTA surveys of the entire corridor.

We have sent out about 707 letters to property owners to notify them of this effort and to request access to the properties so that the surveyors can get more information on the roadway alignment.

Okay, thanks.

We are proposing right now dedicated lanes, as I mentioned before.

At intersections, we will also have left turn lanes.

This will require some adjustment to the medions, as I mentioned before.

And we have also, in addition to this work, at the request of the Richmond Urban Forestry Office done a tree inventory to take a look at what's in the medians now, and then to propose trees that would be good replacements.

Since we are having to narrow or we would have to narrow the median as part of our proposed design, we would have to replace the trees at about a two to one ratio.

So for every tree we removed, we would have to plant two.

And then when we move to Midlothian Turnpike, we are proposing to have center running lanes in what is now the median.

So we would be making some pretty major changes to the median along Midlothian Turnpike.

This would also involve improving some of the intersections along Midlothian so that people walking to the stations would have safer ways to cross to the stations.

And as we move closer to the end of our NEPA analysis, our National Environmental Policy Act analysis, we will be engaging in larger public meetings as well to discuss our findings.

And as you can see, we have we have been working both with larger groups and individual individual civic associations and district-wide meetings as well in the past.

In conjunction with our overall North South study, we're also undertaking a transit-oriented design study.

This is to look at six of our station pairs along the proposed route to see how we can how we can encourage transit oriented design and what that might look like along the corridor.

Uh we chose our consultants helped us choose um station pairs all along the corridor.

Um each of these uh station pairs has a slightly different current situation and the proposed or the the recommended changes over time um all vary depending on current conditions and uh future conditions.

We are working closely with uh the the city's code refresh uh to make sure that the recommendations that we're we're putting forward would be uh in alignment with the code refresh.

Um and in conjunction with the North South uh BRT and RTOD study, um that also ties into our proposed downtown transfer hub, which uh we're which will be across the street from our current uh temporary transfer hub uh at the site of the former public safety building.

Um right now uh we're preparing to issue uh request for proposals to selected respondents to the request for qualifications that was advertised earlier this year.

Um we do expect to release the RFP sometime in the second quarter of this year.

Um questions?

Thank you so much for that presentation.

Um I'm sure my colleagues have questions, but I want to say how come when I saw the melothian uh design, there was no housing on there.

What's happening?

I seen it on north side, I'm paying attention.

So for the conceptual designs that we've we've um been proposing, we haven't shown a lot of housing.

We basically just focused on the corridor, the the corridor and the transit improvements themselves.

That's all that new housing on that north side slide.

Yes.

Um and I will say, I will I will say that the um our TOD study, our transit-oriented design study, does take a look at uh at housing along Midlothian um in the in the vicinity of the Eric Street stations and makes recommendations over time.

So takes a look at the um at the current conditions and then shows what they recommend over a period of about 10 to 15 years.

I'm gonna let my colleagues ask that questions.

Well, I always want to ask about fare-free.

How are we projecting our ability to continue to support our fare-free model given that you know Richmond is just like lasting past national ridership trends?

And I assume barefree has a lot to do with it.

So is this project you know consistent with supporting BRT?

Is it competing with it?

How do we um we keep that going?

I will say that I am not the expert on fare free, but I will let Adrian answer that question.

So fare-free is still a policy and is within our budget.

Um right now we have a couple different, I guess, vehicles where we're trying to bring in additional revenue for that.

Uh, we have our advertising program.

Uh we are partnering actually with Plan RVA to do a broader study to look at kind of the regional support related to businesses, as well as just kind of understanding the prioritized regional need um for funding related to transit.

Um we are currently absorbing um some of it within our own operating budget, and that's kind of the proposal for FY27 as well.

Actually, I mean, I was kind of simplicitly saying that fare-free must be why our ridership is so high, but are there any other factors that um contribute to uh the success of our ridership numbers?

The well, the zero fare, I mean, people are definitely riding differently.

Um, I feel like that's a big factor where you're not limited to getting off and on with the limit of like how much you pay.

Um, so that's a different factor, but we also go just different places than we did before.

The 1A going all the way to Walmart Way and below the intern bike, that's actually different people.

Um, the one going all the way up to Virginia Santa Commons, that's also new, different uh demographic and profile of people who didn't ride the service before.

So the combination of all of those.

But zero fare is also, I mean, you usually see a 30% increase when you have a zero fare system.

All right.

And my last question is actually about like the construction aspect of the design, which is um do we tend to expect that the dedicated bus lane is gonna come from a travel lane, come from a parking lane, will it come from a median?

Um, how do we make those decisions?

So typically they uh for this project, we're proposing to uh to put them in the parking lane.

We're not trying to widen the roadbed.

Um, we're trying to keep the roadbed the the way it is now and not try to do a lot of construction in that direction.

So we would be using parking lanes.

Thank you.

All right, thank you very much.

You don't have any more additional questions.

Thank you.

All right.

Up next is Richmond's Horrorism with Mr.

Nesmith.

Absolutely.

Presentation.

Good afternoon.

Uh, Madam Chair and Vice Chair, members of the committee.

Thank you for the invitation to speak uh before you today.

First, I want to thank uh the city council staff who did an excellent job, I might say, in working closely with my team to ensure that my opening presentation uh would be comprehensive, uh, and focus on the areas that this committee are concerned with.

Uh, prior to my uh former remarks, I'd like to offer a letter of support.

I can hand it to the assistant clerk if I may.

Uh the letter support uh is addressed to the the chair, the members of this committee.

I'll just read it out really quick before we go in.

It says uh on behalf of the executive team and the rest of the reader of the housing authority and me as CEO, I highly recommend the renomination of our chair of board, Eddie Jackson Jr.

Commissioner Jackson served on the RHA board for four years and has been a passionate and consistent, effective advocate for residents uh that we serve across our public housing and choice voucher programs.

He has been a strong champion of advancing policies, advancing uh opportunities for local and small uh minority businesses, advancing fair and transparent access to agency contract opportunities.

As a longtime resident of Richmond and respected business leader in real estate industry, Commissioner Jackson brings a valuable practical experience in his role during his tenure as chair of the real Mr.

Nesnip.

We've already done the boards.

Oh, you did the boards, okay.

We already done the boards and commissions, but thank you for this letter.

We'll definitely take a look at it.

And the packet has been continued into July.

So if you want to maybe speak to it back when we come bring it back in July, that's fine.

Thank you.

Madam President.

Yes, yes, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am.

Can you please finish it since he's already started?

Because I didn't know anything.

I don't see it.

Yeah, and uh and for the sake of time, it's 420.

We need to keep it moving.

And we've already done boards and packets.

I mean, boards and commissions at the top of the meeting, and that was the purpose of us doing it.

So we didn't make through the whole meeting.

I'll come back.

I'll come back to you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh so the three core issues that are important uh to this room.

I want to first say that my longer detailed written presentation, which is filled with data, metrics, and facts, focuses on what?

How does the work that RHA does every day align with the mayor's action plan referred to as MAP and the Richmond Rehundred, uh the Richmond 300 master plan passed by city council, which guides growth for the city?

That document uh you all of the committee members see in advance of my testimony.

So, what were the three areas?

The first was what is the work that RHA is doing as both a public housing authority and a redevelopment authority.

The answer RHA is we all know it's above both a public housing authority and a redevelopment authority for the city.

And being uh successful at both, it is critical that I that we work with city council, mayor Vula, affordable housing stakeholders across the city, our local developers, and yes, the activist community who are on the ground trying to find challenging solutions and doing two things perverting preserving redevelopment for affordable housing, ensuring that our residents have safe, stable places to live, while creating pathways to opportunity for self-sufficiency and homeownership.

Unfortunately, we have met uh these goals.

Uh we we face these goals with decades and decades of this disinvestment from the federal government.

And even now, uh from year to year each year, we get reduced funding.

It is important to understand that uh by legislation and by statute, RRHA is not as something housing of last resort.

Based on regular regulation, we are required minimum rent to be paid by our residents.

However, uh there are housing organizations as we know in Richmond that we work closely with whose mission is to house the unhoused, and they are housing, they are housing of last resort.

The second issue.

Why is the work that we do at RHA matters?

And why is it so important to the city and the residents that we serve?

Answer RA part of the broader long-come housing community whose mission is to serve long-come housing families, the elderly person with disabilities, providing safe and decent affordable housing.

And yes, public housing.

Um I'm deeply proud of the work that we do.

Public housing is extraordinarily important.

I know that personally because I grew up in public housing my entire life.

And while and while we don't always get it right, uh, and residents have the right to complain when we do not, we have to celebrate when we do get it right.

Celebrate it, like for instance, uh number one at Creighton Court.

We have just recently competed, completed the construction of phase A and uh A last uh September when we handed out keys, the 68 residents, and many of them being public housing residents with tears in their eyes when they had those keys in their hands.

We must celebrate that.

We also just completed the construction of phase B at Creighton Court, which includes 72 units, and we have begun leasing up new units that are underway for those 72.

Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt you again, but is it are you reading from the presentation?

No, ma'am.

So what I said at the beginning is that I would not read from the presentation.

Uh uh council staff had only had 10 minutes.

So no, we want to hear from this presentation, which is why we thought we were here.

And so again, I know we are it is getting pretty late.

We got um, you know, some time, and this is uh, you know, pretty decent and lengthy presentation, but we would really love to hear from this.

Um, if you can present this in 10 minutes.

And that's great.

And you think you can present this in 10 minutes?

No, it's it's it's 15.

Yeah.

Well I followed basically what you all did, but I was just trying to get through the three essential questions that staff said you want uh to hear from Yeah, I I don't know why we why was he not informed that he was he not informed that he was gonna present this?

Yes.

I'm I I'm asking staff, I'm sorry.

Chair Jones, thank you.

Um I think what Mr.

Net Smith is saying is generally he's um he has the full presentation, and I think I would recommend that we hear uh perhaps an abbreviated version of the longer one.

Uh I think we were um that's uh our standard for the committee.

So I I would I would anticipate that that's okay.

I'll try to do the briefing.

And I and I apologize for the confusion.

It's not your fault.

You're doing what you were told, and I received the presentation, and I'm waiting for the clicker and ain't nothing clicking.

So I'm like, what's that?

That's right.

That's right.

So whatever works for you, and whatever prepared to align with this is fine with me.

Okay, I'm gonna try to do it then.

Limited time.

Let's see what we got here.

And don't feel and don't feel super rushed, because again, you can't really appreciate that.

We're told.

So again, on the first slide here, uh, I'm not gonna go through which RNA, we are the largest.

Uh we were created uh uh 1940, we're instrumentality of the commonwealth of uh uh of Virginia.

Uh we have nine board members, things you know, with about 242 staff.

I'm gonna try to run through some of this.

But what is important is that we serve over 6,000 public housing residents and serve over 4,000 housing choice participants.

Therefore, we serve uh over 10,000 uh families, and we're trying to do this mission and complete it by uh uh engaging in public-private partnerships.

Uh why?

Because there's not enough federal funding.

When you look at all the redevelopment and you look at all the phases that has to go through, there are funding gaps, and that's all across the country, but there are funding gaps, and the only way to uh really do that development is to engage in fund uh public-private partnerships to uh fill those financial gaps.

Uh, next page here, I talked a little bit about here.

Um our our operating dollars, I think I'll I'm gonna run through some of these in the interest of time.

I want to know that 80% of our funding, 80% comes from HUD.

And what uh we've been trying to do is what other housing authorities have done throughout this commonwealth.

That is uh leverage our 501c3 nonprofit at the RDC, which was the big thing a long time ago in the news.

Why is that important?

Because with the reduced funding every year of HUD and federal funding, we have less dollars to serve our residents and do our mission.

We do have an effort underway.

Uh we have about 79 uh lists, spreadsheet of nonprofits, philanthropic groups, national, uh, and also uh state and local, we're gonna go after those unrestricted dollars to be able to do things for our residents to get them the self-sufficient, because we do not have those dollars.

It's so important because RHA as an entity legally cannot accept said fundings.

For those who don't know, who may be watching, uh, scores uh RHA, uh there's three uh big six, I mean their big six properties, uh Creighton Court, Gilpin Court, Mosebury Court, uh, Fairfield Court, Hillside Court, and Wickham.

Some of them are all older, uh older than the others, but what is important, what is important is that we have from Miami up to up to Vermont, the old one of the oldest infrastructure in the city.

So when we see things like when you know Creighton Court, when something goes down and a boiler breaks this year, uh recently when Creighton Court uh we had a boiler that that broke.

You know what happened?

We could not find a supplier that had the parts, and we didn't have to go to South Carolina, we have to go to the South, South Carolina, South Park of South Carolina.

And we took the only two parts that were left.

We have the oldest infrastructure along the eastern seaboard, and that is pretty important.

Similarly, HUD over the last 20 years, they have consistently reduced the capital funding for what?

Preventive maintenance.

So someone said to me, and you know, our board members are really tough on me and said, Nesmith, you've got to do something.

Well, the majority of our vote, our money for preventive and maintenance is reduced every year.

Um, so how do we how do we do redevelopment?

Uh there are certain universal principles from HUD and Washington, DC that we must follow when we do redevelopment.

Uh, you see them right there.

There are seven the resident resident involvement and empowerment, mixed income communities, one one for one of replacement, and I'm gonna talk about that for a second, community and economic development, sustainable and green design, fair housing and equity, and long-term affordability and financial stability.

Now, those are the seven principles.

What we what we're gonna be doing, and uh, President Newbell has asked us is to take those universal principles.

HUD in Washington, DC says that must be applied to any housing authority.

Now we're gonna say, how do you take those universal principles and apply them to the big six?

One for one replacement, I'm gonna say it maybe later on in our uh presentation.

It is important that when people hear the phrase one for one, what does that mean?

It does not mean when you demolish one unit, you rebuild another unit.

In fact, what it means is that you have to ensure that those residents will you'll be able to replace it.

That's either HUD says on-site or off-site.

So, for instance, if you're looking at now, uh, as we're looking at uh what we may do with Gilpin Court, one for one means we have 781 units there.

And so, will we look to do one for one on the actual uh Gilpin property?

No, we will look at uh Jackson Ward and look at some of those.

How do we do that?

One of the questions in here uh was staff was that how do you know that if someone takes a voucher and you go to off-site replacement, that uh that that will be enforced deep and full of four uh deep deeply affordable will be enforced.

Well, they have a tenant protection voucher.

You have a project-based voucher.

And what does it say?

It's say that when you do take it off-site, that that landlord cannot offer charge you're paying no more than 30% of your income.

And I want to say something that's important about our voucher program.

In the past, people have said, you know, Mr.

Ness, we talk a lot about these vouchers.

Well, we know that there's discrimination in this country and specifically in Richmond.

And when you take those vouchers, you don't know if those public housing residents are gonna find a place to go.

Well, we have our head of a our voucher program for TIMA, and I'm gonna take my hat, I'm gonna brag about you for a moment because despite that discrimination, we have been uh 97% of our budget authority and utilization of our voucher program.

I have to say it again because people need to hear it.

97% of our voucher program.

Why?

Because we've had incentive programs.

We've had one where we said to landlords, we had a match day when we make a marriage.

Rather than have our uh residents say just go out there and find something.

We sponsored when we brought the landlords in, we brought our tenants in and say, let's find a match.

Let's find a marriage.

And through our incentive program, we uh give landlords uh financial incentives to say, come and see and meet our residents.

For our residents, what we've done is said that for your application fees and other fees, we're going to waive it.

And we found we've been finding marriages because as um councilman Alan Roberts and I were talking before the hearing, that HUD only gives you allows you 120 days to go out and find it.

Yes, we do grant extensions.

But the fact is we've been finding creative ways to make those marriages and get to that 90% utilization rate, and we're very proud of that fact.

Now, uh I want to speak on this uh slide here, six here talks largely, I'm gonna do a summary here attend a bill of rights.

It's important.

What does it tend to bill of rights say?

It says, and we're trying to put it in all of our redevelopment uh uh uh um uh uh master development agreements.

The tenant bill of rights says that every resident has the right to come back if they want to, right?

The right of return.

But what have we seen and what is data shown uh across the country and even here in Richmond?

We have found is one of the questions that staff gave me.

What has the been the percentage of those that actually do opt to come back?

It's been about a third, about a third of the folks.

You know why?

Like me, I grew up in public housing, you get the voucher, you go to Shock Hill, you go to uh um uh Himraiko, or you go to Houston, Texas.

You still take that tenant protection voucher, you will still pay no more than 30% of your and you know what happens?

You find your own, you find a new church, you find yourself a new school, and you say, I found myself a new community, I have no interest in coming back.

But what's important is that we will have the tenant bill of rights in all of our developments.

Would you like to expand on that, Mr.

Hampton?

Yes, thank you, CEO Nesmith, and to the chair and all committee members and staff here and uh city staff and my colleagues in the audience for Creighton Court phase A, where it's 16 percent.

Keep in mind this is a multi-phase project.

So for that first phase, 16 percent of the folks that opted to return are back in phase A, and we're leasing up.

So it will continue to grow nationally.

We're hoping uh from best practices that we can get to around 20 or 25 percent of that return.

Uh, who choose to?

Thank you.

Yep.

And part of that is um, I want to uh give a kudos to uh shout out to uh Mayor Vula.

He talks, he's he will be we're working with his team about uh an announcement how we're gonna have create a framework, how we're gonna move forward.

And uh Mayor Bula has talked about um intense, intense case management.

He's so right, it's so important because when you say, How are you uh President Nubo said, Mr.

Nessmith, the buildings are gonna look good.

The question is, Mr.

Nelson, how are you preparing the people so that to get the self-sufficiency and then they will be they will sustain that, right?

And so I uh uh I'll give uh Mayor Bula, he said he's gonna be talking about this people plan.

I'm not gonna get ahead of the mayor, but he's got it right.

We've got to be able to figure out how we're gonna be able to uh uh do intense case management for substance abuse, for mental health issues, for uh uh uh um health care dial uh diabetes and all those issues.

And only when you get now, you may say uh one of the issues is that something we're talking about today, and we have to be honest.

So, and Maryland O's talk about this uh uh uh President RTO.

Mr.

Nesmith, are all those folks gonna be able to qualify and come back?

Because they have to come back.

There was a question of good standing that was in there.

Oh I'm gonna say I need you, I need you to stay in the good standing and good standing.

We're talking about relocation right here on page seven, relocation.

Because on relocation, we make sure we that's the people that's uh we gotta have an intense, intense plan to uplift people and make sure they they stay there.

And so I I I agree and we look forward to working with uh the mayor and their team to come back and say what that will look like.

Uh the mayor's and them, they're the lead on that.

But I agree we must have it must be very, very intense, and it must be intentional.

The next slide is um really here talking about uh the C and I.

And that is uh, you know, in 2021, HUD and DC are granted RHA uh planning grant.

Uh uh, but to date they did they have not put out uh set out money for implementation granting.

The implementation grant, if we had that, that would have gone to a people plan.

Uh but we'll we have to figure out how we're going to uh fund that.

Next slide here.

Um and and so one plan for you know other communities won't look the same.

There's no cookie cutter plan for a people plan because we know each of our big six, the demographics are different, and so and many of the issues are different as well.

Um now, Britain here.

I think uh this is important.

I'm gonna turn to my colleague.

Sometimes she talks longer than she don't talk as fast as I do because she's from the South.

But I want you to try to get through these real quickly.

And if you don't get through, I'm gonna hit the next slide.

Mr.

Nasmith, you're standing in the South and you were born or had relatives from the South.

So here we wanted to showcase uh to this committee and the council how the work that we do fall within the mayor's map plan, may or action plan.

And so the first question is new units added.

You will see our total.

We divided this out in categories.

The first are the projects that we gave uh project-based vouchers to, which allow for deeply affordable 259 number of new units, and we gave out 115 vouchers for Creighton Court.

That's our big six, another category.

You you see the information there.

Next slide, please, sir.

Now we also have 339, in addition to that two something that will come online between now and the end of 2026, and that's an additional 700 project-based vouchers.

Our third category, where we really are proud of all of our work and the work of my colleagues for helping the city or assisting or doing our part with the tools that HUD allows is um another tool, the conduit bond program.

We thank this council for uh the actions that you have done to approve that process, and you will see there the projects um from 23 through 25.

The red asterisk are projects on the south side, uh, Chair Jones, and we'll talk about those later.

You'll see some are completed, some uh when construction um will be completed, anticipate dates, and we also give you the area median income AMI for those, and you will show that data will show that um we have 40 percent AMI, and I can share with you the income limits, but you can pick up your deeply affordable because those are the maxes, and so it's that and below.

Next slide, sir.

Again, asterisk on uh denote projects on the south side, um, and you see that total number of units there, 1,199 that we have in the last three years.

Many of these projects also have come to the city and have leveraged city dollars, uh performance grants, um, also either home or the affordable housing trust fund and your bond program, EAHP if the city hadn't renamed it, but um under um the Department of Housing and Community Development.

It will show the various stages that those projects are in.

Next slide, please, sir.

We move, I want to say something on this page.

See the nominal number at the bottom there, a thousand and a hundred and ninety-nine.

That number represents over the last three years, uh what RRHA as a redevelopment authority, not what we do, our work with the public house, but as a redevelopment authority to help address the issue of the affordable housing crisis that this city council uh said was in 2000, I think it was 22 or 21.

That is what we've done to contribute that number, that many units.

You want the next slide?

Yes.

So we're just finalizing that, wanting you to know that we use uh two tools, tenant protection, as you heard Mr.

Nesmith say, and project-based vouchers, and it just gives a little additional information on the TPV uh TPVs there and how important it is to get those because they add to our base allocation after one year.

Why does that matter?

Because our project-based vouchers come from that.

So if you increase your base allocation, you can also increase the amount of project-based vouchers.

But we are watching the utilization and allocation of our project-based vouchers very closely because HUD is may or may not always be uh adding money.

So we have to also make sure that we uh watch or analyze any fluctuations that could put us in shortfall.

Goal B under the mayor's map.

We just talked about the various tools.

All of these redevelopment projects have to have tax credits with them.

They cannot be made, maybe smaller projects, um, but you're gonna leverage uh a number of uh participants in that capital stack.

That's every source of funding that has to be used for redevelopment.

And so just some additional information there.

Next slide, sir.

And now this is just a continuation of our goal B.

How have we done for our progress to one to one?

It is one of the seven principles, as our CEO said.

We can accomplish that, and HUD allows us to accomplish it in two ways, off site and on-site.

But I know you all are concerned and all rightfully so, about our deeply affordable, our tenant protection vouchers and our project-based vouchers allow for that lower AMI or lower income or very low income household to be served.

Next slide.

These are the projects on the last one of the goals that we were asked from the information, madam chair that came to us was goal F.

What are we doing on the South side and how has our projects uh facilitated that?

So you saw the red asterisk before, but all of the projects listed on this page, you will see the value of assistance.

That's what HUD determines the value of a project-based voucher is over three years, I mean over 15 years or 20 years.

Next slide.

And if we go to the next slide again, the middle uh column talks about those units that were built or preserved.

And you see the total there for all of those projects for just out of that 1199, 1,199, 951 of them are coming, uh, were done for projects on the south side, and that's a total of 72 project-based vouchers, 70 projects with uh conduit bond funds.

We went to a Liberty Town homes uh and in Miss Ummell's district on yesterday, a beautiful project.

We saw city staff there as well.

Our 10 vouchers in that project alone over the 15 years is a 1.8 million dollar uh investment.

And we're gonna be start talking about our vouchers just as that, as investments, not grants, not vouchers.

And I mean, I mentioned that yesterday and we were at that event.

Is that those 10 vouchers?

When you quantify it, it's she said over 1.8 million over the course of 13 years.

So uh I did get through it.

Again, I have to say this.

I'm gonna say staff, partially my fault, but you guys were really good.

So thank you.

I'll take part of the blank.

You did good.

Thank you, Mr.

Nasma.

Um, I will say uh this is a pretty thorough report.

Um I like the way you broke everything down and um just really aligned it with with the city's priorities because I think we've talked about that before.

The goal is to um, and I'm always referencing my colleague, Ms.

Robinson, the one city, our city.

And so we talk about public housing as if it's separate from the city of Richmond when all of our families either work, live, play, attend school in the city.

And so we should be thinking about them just like we would any uh private uh resident or homeowner.

We should be looking to ensure that they have the same level of um emphasis on uh well quite well a quality of life that is you know good for them and their family.

So thank you so much with um all of that.

I did have um one question on you mentioned that this was you were asked about the South Side.

What which project is Southgate?

What is what is that?

No, the Southgate project?

Level of emphasis on a well quite well a quality of life that is you know good for them and their family so thank you so much with um all of that I did have um one question on you mentioned that this was you were asked about the South Side what which project is Southgate what is what is that the Southgate project Madam Chair um the developer is Genesis property could you talk in the mic I can't hear you that's okay the Southgate project is um the developer is Genesis properties it's 112 units it was a renovation to preserve those already affordable units what district is that I believe that may be in six oh six eight I don't have that with me but we can certainly check that we can look at and and ship and hand place that's the one right on Bryce Lane yes and when you say renovation what was the renovation they did um substantial renovation onto that property uh gutted some units um had a lot of um challenges and issues because it is an old property uh and that's what um they did and they also have lie tech in that as well okay and then tax credits yeah when I used that and then the Walmsley Gardens where it says construction is that the new one that's right up behind Second Baptist Church.

Yes they have two there's a uh family and a senior yeah one is I think just got through and one is almost through and will be completed over the summer.

My colleague and I wrote through there yesterday it's the new one we saw it.

Mm-hmm uh and then I was going to ask about the you're right we uh we have heard a lot about the tenant protection vouchers not so well both and so can you just I think you explained it but when you talk about the tenant protection vouchers you name something about that allows you to then get the project based voucher can you just elaborate a little bit for the public and make sure everybody understood what they meant by that because I know we hear a lot of specifically in like human services and about the project about the tenant protection vouchers so when a housing authority makes an application to redevelop its site it always has to get if it's public housing HUD approval in that request to HUD that application to HUD we asked for a number of tenant protection vouchers which uh is HUD requires that we do not displace folks and just put them out.

So the tenant protection vouchers allows us for those deeply affordable all the way up to 80% AMI that they can use that voucher and pay their rent and go somewhere else and find a new um home we work with them on that relocation to do that and now as you heard Mr.

Nesman say we'll be looking to work with the city on a core plan called the people plan that we can use but there are certain tenants in that whether it's a big people plan or a smaller people plan there are certain tenants that ought to be in there you ought to have some mental health you ought to have find out and assess the family just things like that and I can go on but I wanted to did I answer your question.

You absolutely did and you hit the 1000 word that is always spoken by my colleague here displacement.

And so I am glad that you shared that so that folks can have an understanding of why those tenant protection vouchers are so important and the strategy that you all are now using to ensure that folks are not displaced because I think a lot of it was oh we're tearing down and people are just left high and dry but with these vouchers it is actually helping so they don't get displaced so thank you so much for that and I can I say something else on that and you're right and I also want to say something about the vouchers because people get them uh hung up uh or misconfused in nomenclature so uh it is important that people say well you know I hear HUD's cutting vouchers is in the proposal the tenant protection voucher in DC it's a separate funding stream from the other vouchers cut so I want to make that triple the record and you're right about displacement displacements is so important I just want to add for you all the council members that you know there was a group um that I think that was against RHA when we have been talking about Gilman Courtland and the rest and they were coming to counselor and they would see um uh guilt and informed residents you know I decided I decided CEO one of my most important things is sometimes to sit there or stand there and and take the incoming but guess what figure out how we can come together so I'm happy to say today we're meeting with the Gilpin informed resident we're telling them that they are part of the conversation and we're coming together and say that we all recognize we may have a different way to get to N goal but we all want the same thing.

So I just want to say for the record, probably someone probably not here, because we're going to come together.

That's my job.

Even if someone may disagree, we're now bringing people together, because that's my job.

Thank you for that, and happy to hear the work.

And it it is, I will say, I've been sitting here for a little minute in this seat, and I think this is probably one of the most inclusive presentations that have a lot of thorough information that folks can relate back to when they have, and then come to you all for questions.

So thank you.

Um, I'm sure my colleagues have some questions for y'all as well.

Um, mine was also about the anti-displacement uh tenant protection vouchers.

And so um, I believe you said is that the 97% statistic that you said that when we give people these vouchers, they have a 97% success rate.

Um, I'll just understand what that statistic represents.

And since it's like a ratio of like something over something, what what are the two numbers that we divided to get 97% number?

And my colleague is also back there, but I want to clarify, if I may, uh, council member Bretton, the 97% is the utilization rate of our base allocation for our regular vouchers, housing choice vouchers.

Okay.

Okay, that's that's the regular regular voucher.

If you want to know tenant protection voucher, that's that's how who gets a voucher to help them because they're being displaced due to redevelopment.

We give them a tenant protection voucher.

Everyone on that property is eligible as long as they meet the um HCV voucher, because all of them, regardless of the type of voucher, they all have to meet the voucher program eligibility.

So they have different names, tenant protection, project base, regular voucher, but they all have to meet the same um eligibility criteria.

So we work with our residents on that.

We they have three options.

They can sign up for that tenant protection if they want to move, whether it's temporary or permanent, they can sign up and get project base, but there are only so many project-based vouchers per phase of a redevelopment, and or they can choose to transfer to another public housing site.

And I hope I've answered your question.

Well, I think because this this came up in the in the during the conversation around discrimination against people who try to pay with vouchers, and so it sounded like, oh, we're having great success.

It sounded as if 97% of people who receive a voucher are successfully able to get placed.

Um, but I was trying to understand if that's what it means.

And um, and then when and then how do we calculate that 97%?

What are the numbers that are going to be?

No, separate that that 97% is our utilization, and it is for the overall voucher program.

I want to give this R star.

She's our Kamala Harris of RHA when it comes to vouchers.

Oh my goodness.

Hi, you guys.

I'm Fatimus Mudders High Grove.

I'm the current vice president of the housing choice voucher program, and you're in the right neighborhood.

So 97% utilization is of our baseline program.

HUD has awarded us a baseline of 4,060 vouchers.

Right now, I'm using utilizing about 3,967 of those vouchers.

That's giving me that 97%.

A little bit, and it's separate from the TPVs.

The TPVs, which are tenant protection vouchers, they don't roll into our baseline until a year after usage.

So they're not being counted in that 97% at all right now.

So then do we have an estimate for that year?

Like because this is, I think the question where we're we're using this anti-displacement program, but people worry that they're not gonna have success using these.

Do we know what the success rate or utilization rate is of those?

I don't want to speak for Ms.

Hampton, but I would just personally say I don't know if there's enough data for it because TPVs are pretty new to the housing authority.

This is just our second project with TPVs.

Prior to that, I think we had a project maybe almost eight or nine years ago, town and country, if you're from Richmond, and they kind of did it like a revitalization of that community.

Um, and so there were only about 60 units over there.

So I don't think there's really enough data.

Creighton would be the newest project to be able to start collecting what that um success rate would be, because that's what you're asking is what's the success rate of people being able to find housing with vouchers.

Yes, I mean I'm interested to know that because that's the big question where we say good news we have these TPVs, but people want to know how successful people are using them.

Councilmember Bretton, I'd like to point out one thing.

Yes, some do, but I have not found in mass where there are thousands in Richmond that discriminate.

For Creighton, my colleague is correct.

I would like to say in the first phase, even before I came, there were 192 households that were relocated in that first phase.

I would venture to say, and we're going to get that information back to you in this committee, but approximately, approximately 50 to 60% of those got TPVs and they have relocated.

Everyone in that phase one demolition, we relocated that 192.

We're working now on the we've combined the second and third phase.

So that's where we are now.

But we'll get the exact numbers back, and that will show the success and utilization of those TPVs.

So you just said you relocated all 192 people, 50 to 60% of which were with through TPVs?

192 households.

And I believe from just the data in my head from working with it every day, um, that about 50% or more of those took TPVs than took transfers.

Some got project base, but we're gonna break those numbers out for you.

Thank you.

Well, thank y'all so much, the dream team.

Okay, and thank you for all this information.

Ms.

Robinson doesn't have any questions.

Um, and if we do, we'll have staff follow up with any additional questions or concerns that we may have.

But thank you so much for this information and thank you for being here today.

It's always good to see you.

Uh staff report.

Thank you, Chair Jones.

Just very briefly.

Um, on resolution 2026 R003, the energy efficiency resolution.

I just wanted to make one thing clear.

Yes, ma'am.

Yeah, just wanted to check if um again there had been discussion of an amendment.

It might be better if we um make that plain in your motion.

Thank you.

So looking at Ms.

Reed, do we restate the motion?

Would a menify a motion?

Okay.

Okay.

Well, so I'd like clarification.

So I read um the text of the motion a few days ago.

Um are we moving to recommend that text or a further amendment beyond that?

That is it even more different with the new change.

The adding the one that we received from the administration.

Okay.

All right, so I move that we forward that amended version to general counsel for approval.

Is that what we're the move motion?

Approval with that amendment is what I move for.

Do we have a second?

Okay.

The committee is voting on the motion to forward item one resolution 2026 R003 to council with a recommendation to approve with amendment.

Mr.

Bretton.

Aye.

Vice Chair Robertson.

Chair Jones.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

We have staff report.

Yes, thank you, Sophie McGinley with Council Chief of Staff.

Um, so our next meeting is going to be Tuesday, May 19th.

We're going to have a double header presentation from the Department of Public Works.

First, they'll chat with us about traffic calming and engineering, and then they will discuss beautification and neighborhood placemaking.

I have three follow-up items to uh follow up with enforcement of the rollout of the buffered bike lane ordinance if passed, um, keeping you updated on a plan of action for uh school zones with no pull-offs and adjacent bike lanes, and then just now um the success rate of people using vouchers for the second and third phase of the Creighton demolition.

Thank you.

Uh if there is no further business, this meeting is adjourned.

Two hours through