Good afternoon, everyone.

Good afternoon.

The Organizational Development Standing Committee of the Richmond City Council will now come to order.

Mr.

Clerk, if you would provide us with the chamber emergency evacuation plan announcement and public speaker guidelines.

Upon activation of the emergency alarm signal, all persons should immediately exit the building.

Please use the exits to the left or right front of the council chamber or the north or south stairwell 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 fenced area located between Clay and Lee Streets.

Able persons should assist visually and hearing impaired visitors with exiting the building.

Individuals wishing to speak during public hearings are generally allowed three minutes to speak.

Persons appearing before the committee are not allowed to campaign for public office.

Promote private business ventures, use language of a personal nature which insults or demeans any person, including comments directed at public officials or staff members that are not related to their official duties, or address or question staff members directly.

All questions are to be directed to the committee chair.

Failure to adhere to the guidelines may result in speakers forfeiting any remaining time and further disciplinary action as necessary, which could include borrowing from attendance at future committee meetings for a period of six months.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

Let's proceed with the approval of minutes and then the papers on the docket.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

Let's uh proceed with this info pursuant to rule 3D 4B of council's rules of procedure.

Member Andrew Breton has made a request to participate in this meeting via Microsoft Teams from his home in Richmond, Virginia, as he is providing care for a sick child, thereby preventing his physical attendance.

The committee members present must adopt a motion to approve Mr.

Breton's participation in this meeting by electronic communication means if it appears to the body that this request complies with Rule 3D of Council's Rules of Procedure.

At this time, pursuant to Rule 3D 4B of Council's Rules of Procedure, I will now solit solicit a motion from those members physically assembled to approve Mr.

Breton's participation in the meeting by electronic communication means.

So move.

Committee is voting.

Is there a second?

Second.

Committee is voting on a motion to allow member Andrew Breton to participate in the meeting by electronic communication means.

Ms.

Gibson.

Yes.

Ms.

Jones?

Aye.

Ms.

Robertson.

Aye.

Ms.

Trammell.

Aye.

Ms.

Abubacher.

Aye.

And President Newbill.

Aye.

That motion has been approved.

Thank you.

Now, Mr.

Clark, let's proceed with the approval of minutes and then the papers for consideration.

The minutes to be approved are from the Monday, March 2nd, 2026 Organizational Development Standing Committee meeting.

And if there are no corrections or amendments, then the minutes will be approved as presented.

Those minutes have been approved.

Thank you.

Let's proceed with the two items in terms of docket.

There are two papers before the committee this afternoon.

Ordinance 2026092 is to establish the code refresh review commission for the purpose of developing optimal recommendations for a forthcoming rewrite of the city's zoning ordinance based upon best practices and expert and community input and ordinance 2026096 to establish the resident planning review commission for the purpose of advising the council concerning the city's implementation of the master plan.

Those papers are before the committee.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

Would the patron of the first paper like to make any comment?

Councilmember Dremel.

No worry.

Um, we're taking the two papers together, and the first that was read was the one that you are patron of before we proceed with public hearing.

I wanted to see if there was any comment you'd like to provide.

Maybe we should do the citizen.

Maybe we should do the commentary first.

Because I'm looking for something on here before I speak about this one.

What do you want what do you want me to do?

You want me to make some comments first?

Okay, Miss Gibson and then I'll come back to you.

Okay, that sounds good.

Council member, and something that the clerk's office sent out earlier.

No worries.

Councilmember Gibson, any comment on the paper that you are patroning.

Thank you, Madam President.

So we have two papers before us that essentially create would create a citizen commission.

I want to thank council member trammel for her leadership and in looking at this.

We have different takes on a similar concept.

In the version that I've introduced, the foundation is ensuring that we are in compliance with our master plan.

The master plan is a legal document voted on by council.

And our appointed planning commission is tasked with making planning decisions that align with uh with our master plan.

And the code refresh is a planned activity that also is intended to align with the master plan.

This is a uh as we consider both you know the the master plan and and any subsequent updates to the code, uh these are decisions that have large impact over uh many decades as we consider what the city um how what we will be like moving forward.

So I do think that the body is um you know has to do its due diligence to ensure that we have made appropriate steps to ensure that the implementation the process is appropriate.

Um other municipalities in the state and the commonwealth have made other updates and you know are unfortunately going through some litigation, and I think we want to ensure that we don't have that same fate.

Um in the version that I've introduced, um, you know, the scope of the work for the citizen commission would again ensure that we are in compliance with all the laws and ordinances surrounding master plans, that we um are making appropriate updates, that the zoning ordinance proposed aligns with the plans, that we are putting front and center our interest ensuring that we are um uh recognize the the possible implications and including the potential displacement that could come.

Um we want to ensure that we're considering an impacts on the environment, um, our stewardship of historic resources, um, and that we are also very um intentional given the interest uh in maintaining uh safety for all uh and particularly pedestrians.

So that is the scope of work.

This work would be conducted by a body of um of citizens.

I have heard uh significant concern about the makeup of the zoning advisory commission, a body that was appointed by the administration.

Um, that there are some conflicts of interest that, and we want to ensure that again we're we're we are being informed.

Um ultimately the decisions that we make here today, um, you know, should impact the the goal is to make it a better place to live.

And so we want to ensure that we're centering residents on the decisions that we make.

The um the makeup of the body um in this version would be um each council person would select two participants.

Um those would be um folks from their district, and it would include one homeowner and one renter, um, to reflect the makeup of the city, which is um um half renters, so or more than half renters, correction.

So uh so that is the the the idea.

Um this work would be conducted over 180 days, um, and the details uh in terms of the process would be outlined in the paper.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Trammel.

Thank you, Madam President.

I know that when I started talking to my to the citizens of my district about code refresh, they thought code refresh was where code enforcement was going to come out there on their property, look at their property and help them with like painting their house or fixing the windows.

Because that's what code refresh, I mean that's what code enforcement officers do.

They go out there when they get a complaint and they write people up.

So they thought because they have some of them have been written up before and they don't have the money to pay for all this stuff, they thought that code refresh meant that they were going to come out there and help them for free.

That's not what it is.

So when I asked them about being on a commission, that I was thinking about doing a commission where we'd have 18 members and all of that, and it would not have developers on it, and it would be like made up of citizens.

You can have them in your district.

You can have a renter, you can have a homeowner, you can have somebody from another district in case a lot of people did not maybe in your in my district, maybe they did not have time for it, maybe they didn't really want to be involved in it because they figure they got me and they can talk to me about it.

And plus, we've had um, you know, the city administration come to our meetings and try to explain it, and by the time they left, by the time that some of the ones left, my people were telling them they don't want it.

They don't want this code refreshed.

Also, um you could have like I said, you can have a renter, you can have a homeowner, you can have two for district.

So to me, there was not a reason to um be upset with the commission paper that um that I have introduced.

Also, when you read all of this, because got it all right here, it's a lot of things that I don't think a lot of people have even read it or seen this.

So to me, I think that um I just thought my paper would be okay for it to be introduced, and um especially when I had said with my colleague that I did not, I think I think she was right when she said it should not be developers and all that on there.

Also, I get an email from the clerk's office today.

Um, that the mayor wants to have a meeting on June the 15th, which I will not be able to be there because another appointment appointments that day.

And I've asked, has he already finished with um let me make sure I say it right because I don't want to get it messed up.

I asked, are they finished with the proposal?

I don't know.

That's another sneaky thing that the mayor is pulling on us on us council members because he wants us to either respond, which Monday be from one to three, two to five, three to six, four to seven, then I guess five to eight, um, six to nine.

Wow, but anyway, um councilwoman trammel.

I appreciate this.

Thank you, madam president.

I just want people to know I've asked a question, I've not got an answer, and here we are talking about these two papers right now, and we don't know if it's final if he's come up with something that we that I'll just say me that I personally don't know about yet, or my people.

Thank you.

Thank you.

At this time, we'll hold a public hearing on the two papers before us.

Are there persons present desirous of speaking in opposition to their persons desirous of speaking in opposition to either of the papers?

Good afternoon.

Are we at this time speaking on both or yes?

Um, opposition and/or support.

Okay.

Um good afternoon.

My name is Annika Shun.

I am a housing policy advocate at Housing Opportunities Made Equal, and I help to coordinate a coalition called Homes for All Our Neighbors, who is in support of a robust and equitable code refresh in the interest of building a city that has homes for all of our neighbors, as the name suggests.

Homes for All Our Neighbors is very concerned about um resident engagement in the code refresh process, which is why we have hosted and attended and tabled at many community events since we were launched as a coalition last November.

But I'm speaking in opposition to these two papers because my concern is that the structure of the coalitions, or rather, the structure of the commissions would not actually allow for the kind of resident engagement that we so desperately need in the code refresh.

The folks who the process continues to not reach, specifically renters, low-income homeowners, minority communities, Spanish speakers on the city's south side, have um have not and more than likely will continue to not attend commission meetings.

They are often during the day, during working hours.

If that is the goal, and those are the folks we are trying to reach, I question whether another commission is really the way to do that.

And I also just want to recognize the fact that both proposals suggest creating a body that is significantly duplicative of existing commissions that the city has appointed, namely the planning commission and the zoning advisory council.

And I recognize the critiques of the zoning advisory council.

I'm not the right person to say what the right number of developers is on that sort of body, but I think given that it is a project of revising the zoning code, which heavily impacts the development community, there simply have to be a few folks who build housing at the table when advising on this process.

But ultimately, at the end of the day, this body, council, are the ones who get to vote on whether or not code refresh passes.

And the zoning advisory council is not a voting body.

They have repeatedly actually during meetings questioned the degree of their influence on the process because it's not exactly clear how their feedback is taking into account and what impact it will have.

So I would encourage this body to really take the reins in this process to engage your residents to represent them, because I worry that establishing yet another commission is not going to be the intended impact.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

All present, desirous of speaking in opposition andor in favor, if you would come forward, please to either of the members.

Good afternoon, President Newbill and members of council.

My name is Woody Rogers.

I work as the policy director at the Partnership for Housing Affordability.

We're a regional nonprofit housing organization focused on championing policies, developments, and programs for quality affordable housing throughout the Richmond region.

We are a member of the Homes for All Our Neighbors Coalition, and I'm a member of the Fifth District.

I'm a resident of the 5th district here in Richmond.

I'd like to speak against the changes to the current code refresh process that these ordinances would bring about.

I definitely agree with the intent behind the ordinances to seek broad community input representing all Richmonders and shaping our city's future growth.

However, I do not think that instituting a new advisory body would lead to greater representation in the process and will actually delay action, which is urgently needed to expand housing opportunities in the city.

Adding another committee into this process will largely be duplicative of the current bodies providing oversight and the community feedback that has already been collected.

The zoning advisory council is importantly not a decision-making body, but rather one that provides input and feedback to technical aspects of the proposed new zoning code.

Decisions on the new zoning code will be made by the planning commission, a body made up of residents appointed by city council and the mayor to represent the public, and ultimately by city council.

While not perfect, the community engagement in the code refresh and Richmond 300 master plan processes has included extensive input with residents across the city who have had many opportunities over the past several years and continuing ongoing to share their feedback on these code on these changes.

Perhaps most importantly, adding another commission to this process will delay the implementation implementation of a new zoning code that will replace the 50-year-old current one.

The need for more housing is extremely urgent.

In the city of Richmond, there's a housing gap of nearly 18,000 units across the region.

That gap is 39,000 units.

Five years ago, a household could buy the median priced home with a household income of 65,000.

Today they would need to earn over 120,000 to buy that average priced home.

Adding new housing units through these changes to our zoning will not solve our housing crisis alone, but is a necessary tool to do so.

Creating additional commissions will delay these changes in a time when urgent action is needed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ted Leffler, and I'm a second district resident who came here today to speak in opposition to ordinances 2026 92 and 2026 96 on the grounds also that they are duplicative of the existing public input processes between the city's planning staff, the members of the zoning advisory council, the many open houses, the online public comment map, and most importantly, the elections for city council and mayor, not to mention the years over which these and other avenues for public input have been ongoing.

Given all of those, it is my belief that by the completion of the code refresh process, every resident of the city who wants to will have had ample opportunity for input and will have had their interests sufficiently represented.

While code refresh may not be a silver bullet for guaranteeing housing affordability in Richmond, it is absolutely a step in the right direction.

And the longer we drag this process out, the more people will be unnecessarily financially burdened by higher housing costs.

As you all know, the most recent survey of homelessness in the Richmond area numbers them in thousands.

Please keep them and every other Richmond are struggling with the cost of housing at the forefront of your mind when you vote on these proposals.

Thank you for your time and consideration today.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

My name is Patty Merrill, and I'm a 25-year resident of the first district.

I'm also the president of the West Hampton Citizens Association and have been working with interested neighborhood associations and concerned citizens as we've moved through this code refresh process.

I'm here today to support the creation of a citizen advisory committee to support city council's evaluation of code refresh, which will be one of the most significant legislative overhauls in our city's history.

Very simply, the WCA, along with neighborhoods other neighborhood associations, seeks a more collaborative process that is driven by reliable information and data that is shared and understood by all stakeholders.

Where is the comprehensive explanation of specific zoning topics?

Where are the frequently asked questions published on the website that DPDR and the city are willing to stand behind?

Where is the data, research, feasibility studies that DPDR and the city are relying on in their assumptions about population growth, infrastructure adequacy, economic rate of change, needed additional rental or owned units to accommodate new and existing residents, and other baseline assumptions supporting code refresh?

What are the city specific plans to protect against displacement and genuinely encourage housing affordability?

Why do citizens hear conflicting messages from city employees in multiple departments on the level of cross communication and involvement in code refresh?

What is the city learned from the experiences of other cities in Virginia and elsewhere that have implemented upzoning, particularly those that now have years of evidence that rezoning has limited impact on affordability and dramatic impact on displacement?

The choice for city council is simple.

Are you willing to rely on a process that lacks collaboration and reliable public data and analysis, or will you interject a citizens advisory committee that has the potential to build trust and seek compromise while assisting you in one of the most important decisions that this city council will ever make?

I encourage you to create such a citizens commission.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

My name is Susan Rabelo, and I'm a citizen living in the third district.

And I am here today to speak in support of a Citizens advisory commission, as proposed in the papers by Councillors Trammel and Gibson.

And I'm doing that because I have taken the time over the past year and a half to really delve into the data that's available regarding what has occurred in numerous cities around the country in terms of zoning reforms and their outcomes.

And there, I mean, we are in such an advantageous position because so many cities have come before us, and we now know which zoning reform plans have been truly effective in meeting the goals of increasing housing diversity, increasing the number of units of housing, of affordable housing, and in fact, there have even been studies now that show what is considered to be evidence-based approaches to community engagement and education and communication.

And we really haven't had that here in Richmond.

In fact, if you look at the American Association of Planning, the Kettering Foundation, there are a number of uh well regarded national organizations that have studied what has happened around the country for the past 10 to 20 years.

And one of the things that they recommend to diminish polarization, diminish opposition, make your process more inclusionary, and uh have your citizens better understand zoning reform and all of it the good, the bad, and the ugly.

You know, we need to understand what the trade-offs are.

It's not that it um is all going to be perfect and that all the goals are going to be met with huge numbers of housing units because they won't be, they haven't been anywhere in the country so far.

And if you'd like a bibliography to all of the data that I've taken a look at, if you'd like my resources for the organizations nationally that have said that a citizen advisory commission is a very good tool, it's a very good process for opening up the discussion community wide and again diminishing polarization, diminishing antagonistic interactions.

I'm happy to provide that to you.

I can't get it all into what I'm saying here today.

My hope is that you will pass on these papers to the full body for review and for public discussion, and that we'll have a really robust discussion about it, and that people will actually look at the available data before they make up their minds about revising the process in a way that will could make a huge difference in whether or not we actually achieve what we're saying we want to achieve for the future of Richmond.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon, I'm Robin Levy.

I reside in the 5th district and Bird Park specifically, and I have been the point person for Bird Park for the past year and trying to evaluate, understand, disseminate information for Bird Park Civic Association.

Code Refresh is one of the most significant changes to Richmond's development regulations in generations and deserves careful independent review.

Council has a responsibility to conduct thorough due diligence before adopting changes that will shape growth, housing, and neighborhoods for decades.

An independent advisory body free from political potential conflicts of interest provides an additional layer of scrutiny and accountability.

This is not a criticism of staff or stakeholders.

It is a recognition that major policy changes benefit from multiple perspectives.

Public trust is strengthened when residents can see that decisions have been reviewed transparently and without undue influence.

For changes of this scale, independent review is reasonable safeguard that helps ensure council is making the most informed decision possible with best practices and visibility to the public.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Um hello, my name is Erin Trimmer.

I'm a member of Richmond for All, and I'm here in support of Councilmember Gibson's ordinance to establish the resident planning review commission for the city's master plan.

Um we've talked a lot about code refresh and zoning, and about the necessity of increasing density to address the city's need for housing.

And at the same time, code refresh is just a piece of the larger puzzle of Richmond 300, which you know is guiding the uh city's growth, how it's doing infrastructure, how it's doing pedestrian safety, all of those intricate pieces that kind of create what we want our Richmond to look like in 15 to 20 years.

Um Richmond 300 has tons of you know goals and metrics that define what success and change looks like, um, and the city has repeatedly promised to publish a report outlining the progress it is making towards those goals.

Um that has not materialized.

I think that this commission creates the framework for accountability and increased community engagement, allowing the council to appoint residents from each district, representing homeowners and tenants, while making sure that while developers are you know weighing in on the zoning code refresh, which is where their area of expertise is, this is separate and allows residents to see how far we've gotten towards the city that we are looking to build.

Um as an example of why we think this commission is necessary, we can look at that feedback from residents who have raised concerns about the zoning advisory council uh and potential conflicts of interest.

And again, their expertise is necessary, but also their concerns.

Um, there's no question that the next few years will bring accelerated growth and change to our city.

It's vital as we grow that the city builds public trust through transparency, accountability, and engagement.

I ask that you vote in favor.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any others desires of speaking to either paper?

Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed, bring it back to the body for discussion comment.

Councilwoman Jones.

Thank you so much, madam president, and thank you to everyone that has come out to support both papers.

And while I understand the intent behind both of them, I do just have like two quick questions, and I don't know who I raise them to because the papers are, you know.

But I guess in terms of either of these commissions, I heard a lot about a lot of folks not knowing about what the cold refresh is.

So I guess my question is, um, how does this process engage the broader community?

And I don't know who to, I mean, are we discussing these papers in this in depth or are we?

Because I I have questions.

You can't vote without the questions.

Right.

I mean, that you have two page.

So should I add this per the patron or yes, because they're the ones who make the okay?

All right.

Well, my question is to both of you how does this uh either of the processes because I know I have residents already on the coal refresh commission, but I'm just trying to get an understanding of if we're saying that a lot of folks, and don't get me wrong, I agree all voices are valid, and all voices should be a part of the process.

I'm just trying to get an understanding of if we each have 20 something thousand uh neighbors in our district, and this refresh is going to affect everybody once we establish a commission.

How do we expect that to reach the broader goal of those who are not engaged at this moment?

So that's the first question.

Anyone can respond.

Would either patron like to comment?

That's a good question.

Because I have been to a lot of meetings, not just in my district, but um all over.

And a lot of the people, as you said, they did not know about code refresh.

They did not know the meaning, the full meaning of it, and then when I brought up at the commission, they basically said the same thing too that they like this idea.

But how do you get it out like like you and I'll just say you and I, over 28,000 people in your district.

A lot of runners because I know that we do have a lot of runners, and I've talked to some of them.

They say they don't want to get involved because they're moving out of the city.

Because utilities are really too high, and some other things.

And so I'm like, and I have talked to some Hispanics and I've asked them about it.

So no.

So you're right.

How do we get the word out to others?

We have a meeting once a month, might have, you know, so many people come.

I talk to them on the phone, I go to different hospital, nursing homes, all of that, and I ask them.

And if the main thing that they say to me, I'm gonna move out of here as soon as I can.

And you know you've heard it too.

So that's where do we go from here?

That's that's a good question, Nicole.

Thank you.

Councilmember, uh Councilwoman Getzman, any comment relative to that inquiry.

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you, Madam President, and I appreciate the question.

Um, Councilmember Jones.

You know, I I mean I think that that's a wonderful argument in support of these papers.

Um I do know that the city has done uh a good amount of work to get the word out.

Um but um you know, given the that there are of course folks that are are not aware, um, having a commission such as this helps to get the word out further.

Um, and uh the version of the paper that I've introduced, and I believe it is the same, although don't quote me uh in the um in council member trammel's version of the paper, um, the the meetings are are structured to um have there so there is at least four public meetings and with public meetings brings public visibility.

Um you have press there and and all of those touch points are are ways to ensure that that citizens can find out what's going on.

Um in this version, two of those meetings would be south of the James, and then um including one in the southeast and one in the south at west, and then two of the meetings would be north of the James, um uh also similarly located.

So um so I I think that if we have um agree that there is a need for for more public awareness, this is I I think an important vehicle to be able to get there.

Thank you.

Count um councilwoman Gibson, thank you.

Sorry, thank you.

Thank you, madam president.

And then my next question is so if we believe that these commissions are going to help expand the um level of informative informate information, is this a would this be a council-led commission?

Because who's paying for all of the engagement and all of that?

Like where would how would we do that?

Is this through council, or because you mentioned that the city has done uh, you know, a lot of engagement.

So based off of these commissions, who would lead that charge?

Councilwoman Jones, um, I don't have clarity from either patron as the intent was in terms of your intent in terms of being council-led or not.

Okay.

Um okay.

So I just I think for me, I think what I'm hearing is not so much the formalization of either or either the commission or the planning review.

I feel like we have an engagement problem, and I think that is something that one, we haven't even really fully as a council talked about relative to the coal refresh or the master plan.

So that's why I was asking those questions because I just want to know that before we two minutes okay before uh before we move forward.

Um, I just wanted to make sure who was leading this, how is it actually going to reach the broader communities?

Because if that's the challenge, and that's what we're saying, we want to establish a new commission, but we yet don't know how we're going to reach the rest of the people.

I think that's something that we should take into account.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Robertson.

Thank you, madam president.

Um, and I appreciate the two papers that are before us, and the expressed interest in continuing to engage uh the citizens in the process of making a decision on a really really huge policy that is before us, both zoning refresh as well as the implementation of the master plan.

If I'm understanding these two uh focus of the papers, Madam President, I have served on the advisory task force for the zoning refresh from its origination.

This process has been going on for close to a couple of years, it seems to me now, maybe off a few months.

But I have been to, I don't know how many meetings, I don't know how many subcommittees task force we've been broken down into smaller groups to focus on different areas of looking at this meetings that have been held throughout the city.

Lots of citizens have been invited to these meetings to give their input and feedback throughout the process.

Lots of surveys have been done.

And what I had asked from the very beginning, and hopefully we'll still get because I think it's important that we first of all recognize the investment in dollars that have already been made to this point as it relates to both the master plan as well as the opportunity to look at creating a revised zoning plan for the city that is should never go as long as this one has gone without having a refresh.

You know, you can't wait 50 years.

What this city was 50 years ago to and what it is today is like totally not even comparable as far as the city is concerned.

And so the work that has been done in this through this process with the advisory board that has been sitting at the table for the past months, almost two years, uh, has been extensive, has been very extensive.

And I am I would really think it would be advantageous to the city and to city council.

If we look back at what we have, what we have done as far as procuring professionals that have done these kinds of plans, um, what work they have done, what they've looked at, what that what data they receive, how they have analyzed that data.

Um, how many meetings have been had, where they've been had, who's attended the meetings.

I think for us to not be able to at least assess two years of paid work, not only by consultants but by employees as well, would better prepare us to make a decision as to whether or not there's a need, and what is the need, and what is the gap that any other commissions would address that has not been addressed.

Uh, to meet with putting together other commissions without at least having the benefit of what we've already paid for and who has invested time, how much time has been invested.

I'm a I'm I'm confident that whatever the gap is, we will not close it without looking at what is currently being done.

So, Madam President, if it's not too much to ask, I would ask that um the lead staff person who has initiated the leadership with the advisory team as well as community meetings, in addition to uh for the advisory group meetings that we've had, but in addition to that, many, many community meetings, many district meetings, many attending council members' district meetings to your presentation would at least give us some insight as to what has currently been done, where we are as it relates to the next steps that are in process of bringing a proposed recommendation first to the planning commission and ultimately back to council.

I think that we need to hear where we are and what has been done if we can do that.

We can uh absolutely we can do that at the informal meeting of council.

Is there any reason why we can't?

We are in the process of making a recommendation one way or the other as it relates to both of these papers and to not have the benefit.

Look, I've served, I've been sitting in this seat for two years.

I know what we have done, and to not have the benefit of explaining, at least sharing, because I'm sure no one else knows it as much as the person who's been sitting in the seat for the period of time.

I'm not suggesting to vote up or down, but I'm concerned that if we are not willing to at least explore the information that has been done to this point, how do we make an informed decision?

So, councilmember Robertson, I was not suggesting that we would not have the or need the information.

I don't know the level of preparation in terms of the questions you've asked that uh Mr.

Bonk would have ability to respond to now.

Madam President, if we can.

One second.

So I wanted to just um, and we don't have to decision, we can decision in a way that allows us time to get that information, if you like, and with all due respect, Madam President, I before Mr.

Vaughn gets up here.

Um I mean, I I wholeheartedly agree with this what Ms.

Robertson is saying.

I think there's misinformation flying everywhere about all these things.

But this meeting is probably not the best venue to do that in in an informal meeting or a formal meeting.

We'll have we'll have more folks around the table.

I think it's I mean, this is you know, most members of the public don't even, you know, aren't aware that we're that this is on the agenda today and don't regularly attend OD meetings.

So I'm thinking forward them both on and have that discussion.

Right.

So, Ms.

Lynch, that was my point that we would have it at informal, that we would have the opportunity to have comprehensive responses to how many meetings, how many all of those things.

Uh, we're not pressed to have the decision on the papers this evening.

We can allow time that gets us to that place.

And so um that's where I was so absolutely want the information.

Madam President, Councilmember Robertson.

I respect your leadership and I respect your decision as the chair of this body as to what we would do.

But if we are willing to hear public comments on two papers that are before us and take that into advisement as a decision that we make, and we're not willing to hear from the staff, and I'm a member of the advisory board.

I'm asking on behalf of the advisory board who was appointed for the purpose of representing the interest of the city council, to not even avail ourselves.

I'm not suggesting that this is the best form.

Perhaps this was not the best form to have this on the agenda then is about my feeling.

If we can't have an exchange of dialogue on information that is available to us, um, I don't understand how we could have a paper before us for us to make a recommendation to the full body.

We have papers that come for every standing committee of council, everyone.

And we have public hearings, and we have an opportunity for the administration and other council members to weigh in on the legislation that is before us.

I don't think that this is a public meeting, it is being broadcast.

But I respect the fact that you are the leader of this of this chair of the of this committee and of the council.

And if it's your decision and the members of the committee's decision to not, I just wanted to be made known that I would like for us to consider as a policy.

If we're going to have a paper on the agenda, and we are charging the administration with the execution of this major policy, that we should have it as a policy, that they should have an opportunity, if requested, to present.

Thank you, Ms.

Robertson.

And I will I, you know, I'm concerned, and Ms.

Dr.

Vonk, if you will come forward.

I am wanting to make sure that all of those questions that you are prepared to answer.

I don't want you know partial.

We're looking at a possible work session so that we can do a deeper dive in terms of where we are in the development, what stage, all of those things.

So are you prepared for such?

Sure.

Kevin Javong, Director of Planning Development Review.

Um I can discuss a little bit in terms of a high level from engagement we've done.

If you'd like, we've been working on an engagement report that I could prepare to have available before the informal meeting.

Uh, in short, you know, Councilmember Robertson's correct.

We've been at this for uh just over two years.

Um we started on this process bringing on a consultant in February of 2024.

Uh the zoning advisory committee started in June of 2024.

So it'll be two years at our next meeting this month.

Uh that zoning uh advisory committee again, you know, per city charter work on the zoning ordinance is a product of planning commission, and so planning commission uh basically has asked our staff and bringing on that consultant to bring them a new zoning ordinance.

Uh part of the work in the consultant is to have a subconsultant that focused uh directly on doing community engagement.

Um the budget for this project has been about 1.2 million dollars, and we've spent about 100,000 on engagement.

That engagement has come from everything from uh working on, you know, I'll say the traditional public information sessions where we have open houses, people come in as questions.

Uh we've done a number of online uh things.

We've done round tables where we go out and try and meet with constituents uh directly to hear from them.

We've done pop-up events uh at various other programs and events throughout the community, uh, aside from the consultant staff has also attended probably over 100 community meetings, whether that's neighborhood associations.

I think we've been to every single district meeting uh to talk.

Um I would say just on our preliminary numbers, we've directly engaged at least 5,000 individuals.

Um, that does not count hundreds of emails uh that both myself and and deputy director uh pitts have received.

That does not count all of the comments that we received on online maps, um, and and so I think just you know, again, to reiterate uh we've been very intentional uh about trying to be um robust in that engagement.

So, yes, while the zoning advisory committee I'll say as a body that has looked at this from a technical matter, and not to mention, I think since the second or third meeting, they've also had open public comment where they've allowed speakers to come and offer things directly to that body as well as planning staff.

Um, you know, we are making sure that that we are working hard to hear from all corners.

Um, the one other thing I'll just uh remember is that the I believe it was uh December of last year.

Um we also said just to make sure everyone was notified, every single household in Richmond got a postcard um informing them of what was happening, uh, that they could go to uh a website or call us or email us to get more information.

So um every household should be aware that this is happening in the community.

Thank you, Mr.

Bonk.

Um you have somewhere a compilation of all those activities.

You said over 5,000, how many people by district all someplace or are you able to bring that forth to us?

That is what we're working on putting together, and we could have ready for you by um your meeting on Monday.

Okay, thank you.

Councilwoman Abubacher, thank you, Mr.

Bonk.

Yes, I just think that given information that we need and um the venue for this, I would move to forward both papers without recommendation to full council on um June 22nd to give us enough time to hear both from staff and have the meeting with the mayor.

Okay, um, there is um, if I understand correctly, these papers are on for the next council session.

Is that correct?

And so what would have to occur is that it could be continued to that meeting, and then at that meeting, if we did not have uh what we were looking, it could be forwarded on to the subsequent, but that's as I understand it at this moment.

So I think that makes sense.

I just think there needs to be a little bit more time to gather that information, but we can keep it moving.

Thank you.

I can second this motion.

Thank you.

Um I want to um thank Ms.

Robertson for raising the point.

I want to thank Mr.

Bonk for the information provided and look forward to a more comprehensive report out for our meeting on Monday at City Council in terms of the follow-up that has occurred thus far.

All right, so and I think Councilwoman Trammell, are you on or off there?

I like to say something.

Um my colleague had a both a Ellen and um Nicole brought out some very very good points about how we're gonna definitely get this information out.

We don't have the money to put it in a newspaper, we don't have the money, you know, because it costs a whole lot of money for that.

Um I mean, we only have a certain amount of time, and I want to say something, I wanted to ask Kevin something, Kevin Vonk, because I know that there was a a huge meeting that I attended.

Um, I think it was at I just text someone from them to answer me.

I think um I don't think nobody in this, I don't think nobody was here, but anyway, the the first thing those citizens said, where's the administration?

How come they're not here to answer the question?

You had two liaison from the first district and the fifth district that was trying to answer their questions, and all every just about everybody in there said they did not want code refresh because really it's not been explained that well, and also there was nobody from the administration to take their questions per se to let them.

I mean, they had some really really good questions.

That room was packed.

I think it was at the Virginia Museum.

I think that's where it was.

But anyway, um, I'm just saying that how we're gonna get we got two weeks you say, right?

Two weeks.

So we have, I know I have about 27,000 people.

We're talking about additional information to come back.

I understand that that's been yes, that Mr.

Vonk will provide.

So Kevin's gonna be able to give us all.

So I guess we send the questions to RJ that we have, and then he sends it to you.

There's some additional, we'll make sure he gets that.

In addition to what councilwoman Roberts said, and it explains, but how do we let the others know what what this this commission is going to do?

And I think that I think my colleague says something about the commission.

Well, any time she wants a commission, we do it.

But anyway, you know why you know what?

It's it's just like go ahead, Kevin.

Go ahead.

I just get I get so tired when we're trying to get stuff out to people, and and it's misinformation over here, like I'll say in my district, that it isn't a first or second to fourth or whatever, fifth or sixth, whatever.

You know, I want to know just like I called you and asked you how in the hell, did I come out my front door and see a car lot right there in front of right?

I come out of my door, there's a car lot.

It's not gonna be a car lot.

Nobody's gonna be buying cars or there, it's gonna be a junkyard, and it's gonna be break-ins and all of that.

And I'm meant to take the picture today to show you where the grass is this high over top the stag on the fence they just put in.

Who's going over there to make him cut it?

I used to cut it and put the weed killer down and kill all that.

I'm not doing it now.

He has the property.

Who's gonna make him be accountable for that?

And all my neighbors, just asking me, how did this happen?

Councilwoman Trammell.

Uh, Mr.

Vaughn, you hear the questions from Councilwoman Robertson.

Councilwoman Trammel and anyone else who has questions.

If you would get those to RJ, so we can get them back so we can have responses on Monday.

There is a motion on the floor, but I see that Mr.

Breton also has a question.

Oh, well, um, can you hear me?

Yes.

I was um going to echo my many of the questions that my friend from the first district had mentioned uh on the microphone uh about all the various analyses and answers that we will need to make this very big important decision that relates to our utilities readiness, our schools readiness, our traffic safety plans, our um our analysis of evidence from other cities.

Um these are necessary questions that I have considered it my job to ask, and um, and I have, and so I have asked the mayor's office and the administration to provide all that information.

They have um committed to making it available publicly.

So I think that's very um that's gonna be critical for us to have this conversation.

So um, I just wanted to let our you know, my colleagues just remember that you know we are also a commission of citizens.

Um we can also ask these questions, we can also demand these answers, and it is our obligation to so um regardless um of what happens with this additional um papers uh you know we shouldn't shy away from asking those questions ourselves, and so I've been doing that, and I want to encourage you to do that as well.

Thank you.

Um councilman Bretton.

I would like to call the question.

Committee is voting on the motion to forward ordinance 2026 092 and 2026 096 to council with no recommendation, Mr.

Breton.

Yes, Ms.

Gibson, yes, Ms.

Lynch.

Hi, Ms.

Trammell.

Hi, Miss Ogribacher.

Hi.

And Chair New Bill.

Hi, I want to be absolutely clear that the questions that have been raised, the clarity that's being asked for.

We're asking for that information to come back for our Monday meeting uh from the administration, so it's not being overlooked or it's not of concern.

It is, and so that uh if you have any additional questions or you want to make sure your question gets uh responded to if you would get those to RJ so we can get those to Mr.

Bonk and or whomever, and whoever else in the administration to be able to respond back, but to RJ.

Yes, uh and yes, RJ Warren Council Chief of Staff, and just to provide uh information on the question that's Jones asked earlier, both ordinances state that the Office of the Council Chief of Staff shall provide such staffing and resources that may be needed for either of the commissions if adopted.

So it would be council staff that would help staff these commissions.

Thank you.

Let's proceed to the um reports um from the administration.

And other parties.

And so as I see it, the first three presentation would be um Dr.

Paula Pando, President Reynolds Community College.

Welcome, Dr.

Pando.

Good evening.

It is evening, right?

Or is it a late afternoon?

I'm not sure.

Thank you so much for your time.

I will be brief.

I know there is a lot on your plate, but I'm happy to share some really excellent news with you today.

My annual report to the city.

First, I'd like to recognize our board members, two of whom are in the audience today, Dr.

Brenda Drew and Paul Logan.

Other representatives from the city of Richmond on our board are Peter Blake, Joseph Chaudry, and Dr.

Emmy Smith Reedy.

I often joke that for a whopping salary of zero dollars, they do amazing work, representing the interests of the city to our college, but also spreading the word of what our college is doing for our city members.

Our last academic year was really, when we think about what it was, it really was about planning, prioritizing, and I think the most important disciplined execution.

We could go after a lot of shiny things, but we made a decision that we were going to go deep on the most important and most impactful strategies and opportunities, and they've paid off.

Most of these images are at our downtown campus.

We now have new and enhanced learning environments.

You can see up on your screen our dental assisting program, biotechnology, EMS surgical technology program.

We also relocated our horticulture program from the Goochlin campus to the Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden.

So you might imagine for our students who are in horticulture, their lab is one of the most beautiful and respected botanical gardens in the country, consistently coming up in the top five, and that is the laboratory space for our students.

Our enhanced partnerships with uh Virginia State University.

We are beginning a two plus two program.

They do not have the capacity to run a full bachelor of science in nursing, and so the students will be doing one year at Virginia State University, two years with us in our associate degree in nursing, and their last year at VSU to achieve the bachelor's degree in nursing.

So they will be living in their residence halls and shuttled to our downtown campus for uh for those two years and then complete their nursing, and this will help address a critical shortage in that particular field.

With Bonsacor, we become their training partner where uh it is the Earn to Learn program.

So we have students who are being paid to actually go to school in our health professions programs, and they are also paying the tuition of their current health care workers to upskill and upgrade.

So think about somebody who might be working in medical records, uh Bonsacor's needs uh surgical technologists.

They are actually uh paying the tuition for the incumbent workers to actually upskill and upgrade at Reynolds Community College.

Uh, we have a simulated ambulance, uh, which we would invite you all to visit.

It's kind of really cool.

It uh it's the real experience inside an ambulance.

Uh, any of you have been unfortunate to be in an ambulance, those things rock and roll, and while uh the the paramedics are trying to get your EKG going or maybe get a line going, they're doing so in full movement.

So we have that simulation environment and VCU Health.

We continue that partnership sharing faculty, uh, again, addressing shortage in critical fields and expanding clinical placements for our students.

A great partnership that continues to grow.

We actually had our first surgical technology graduates uh this year.

100% of them are job placed.

100% of them had a job offer weeks before they graduated.

Uh and these are jobs that are in high demand and pay an excellent wage.

So we're really glad to see that first cohort graduate just this year.

Knowing that our students are interviewing for jobs, for internships, et cetera, we opened up what is, I believe, one of the most beautiful career closets.

I visited quite a few of these and different campuses and candidly students walk in if they felt under-resourced, if they felt that they were living in poverty before they went into that career closet, man, they definitely felt it while they were in there.

Our career closet is a beautiful boutique.

I would put it up against any bougie place in Carrytown that's consignment and so forth.

And so our students have access to excellent, beautiful clothing, well maintained in a beautiful environment, coupled with intensive career coaching for that interview, ensuring the resume is ready to go.

So it's full service when it comes to career services.

We also launched this year Next Step VCU.

That is not just a transfer program, it's actually a dual admission program where students are accepted at the same time to Reynolds Community College and VCU.

It's our primary partner in transfer.

Why is that important?

Too many students are completing their associate degree, successfully transferring, but not completing the baccalaureate.

Too many students are completing the baccalaureate degree with excess credits and excess time because not everything transferred.

So through this program, students are duly admitted at specific milestones in the program.

Students get access to things at VCU, including utilizing their library, going to social events, utilizing their gymnasium while they're still with us.

So it's making that feeling that their students at both institutions real at every step.

And what we hope to do with that partnership is see more students achieve the baccalaureate degree in a timely manner without excess credits, without excess cost, on time, and again in a career and a job opportunity that pays a living wage in our community.

Speaking of living wage, our college, we were one of the instrumental partners in the historic $5 billion investment by Eli Lilly that will produce at least 600 jobs, well in the six figures, most of them requiring sub-baccalaureate degrees, associate degrees.

Our team was on the plane with the governor making the case to Eli Lilly in Indianapolis at their headquarters that it was our community college who could actually provide the talent that they would need.

So while it's located, it will be located in Goochland County.

Think of our region and that workforce.

And when they made the announcement, the CEO of Eli Lilly pledged that the jobs, all associate degree and underjobs, these are jobs that pay over six figures with the same benefits that the highest people in the organization earn.

So we're really proud of that role.

One of the key pieces you'll recall, a few years ago, I believe it was two years ago now, you all made a $1 million investment in our building out biotechnology labs and so forth.

And so we were able to show in Indianapolis that we have the talent, we've got the facilities, we've got the curriculum ready to go to produce the talent that they would be needing in order to attract and retain a talented workforce very early on.

We've had record investments in our college and our private philanthropy is up over 150%, more than $3 million raised over the last fiscal year.

Our public grants are 232% above where we were the prior year, more than 11 million dollars awarded, and it's been the largest fundraising year in the college's history.

And I believe the reason why we've been so successful is because sex.

Because of sex.

Please strike that from the record.

Success.

Success.

Oh my.

My husband's in the audience too.

He'll not gonna let that go.

Because I think the success that we've had and the commitments that we follow through on consistently, consistently, we have become a winning bet for many private and public opportunities for fundraising.

But since then, that was just our last fiscal year.

We were one of only 18 community colleges in the nation awarded a FIPSI grant, highly competitive.

That's the fund for improvement of post-secondary education, in the tune of almost 2.4 million dollars, all again to be invested right here in downtown Richmond, supporting the expansion of our health care programming.

Again, one of only 18 community colleges.

There are 1100 of us in the country, and we were successful in that grant.

And we also are thrilled to announce the largest single gift that the college has received in its history: $5 million from a private family foundation here in Richmond, again, to expand our health care programs, all of them located in our downtown campus.

We were also accepted by the Aspen Institute, College Excellence Program, specifically for the unlocking opportunity.

These are 55 community colleges across the country who are doing the hard work of ensuring that the program mix in the portfolio actually leads to living wages.

That requires us to make some really tough decisions.

It doesn't mean that if you're right below the line, we're going to shut down the program.

But what it does mean is we need to look at the curriculum.

What in that degree can we add that will bring it above the line?

So, for example, at some colleges doing this work, agriculture fell below the line consistently, an associate's degree in agriculture, below the line in terms of our wage.

By adding drone technology to that curriculum, it brings them well above the line.

So it's really deep work at looking at our program mix and our portfolio to ensure that what we offer is actually of value once they leave our college.

Completion is no longer the finish line.

What happens to the students after they graduate?

Are they employed?

Are they employed with a living wage?

Good jobs with benefits.

So we're really excited about that work and highly engaged team in ensuring that when our students graduate, they graduate with a credential of value that's highly marketable.

This year, because of the work that we've been doing, we were designated a leader college by the nation's most respected education reform network of community colleges and leader college.

This is not because of our popularity, it's not because of our reputation, it's the actual data that we are seeing.

So we're really excited to have that prestigious designation this year.

Little bit on our enrollment trends, our fall enrollment.

You can see we continue to move up 8% over fall 2024, and in our FTE, an 8% increase from fall 2024 as well.

So we continue to move up.

Last fall, 9,376 students, 8% above.

And again, that's what it looked like in the spring, 9% above where we were in spring 2025.

And the reason why we're seeing, yes, we are enrolling more students, but this is the more important part to me.

We are keeping more of our students.

We can boast large enrollment numbers and have it be a revolving door that we just keep recruiting.

But you can see our fall to spring persistence had hit a 69% low in spring 2021.

We are at 81.7%.

Some attrition is expected and justified.

We moved, I got a new job, I had a baby, I had to take care of my family, expected and justified.

But too many students were not returning, and we have to look inward and ask, what about us?

What about me?

And we've been doing that more and more, and we're seeing that in our persistence numbers, which are so important.

A little bit about City of Richmond.

Uh we have almost 1,200 students enrolled, 78% of them are first in their family to go to college, 56% uh get Pell Grants, 53, over half of them are adult learners, and we've been doing a lot of work on adult learners, those folks who are 24, 25 to 35, 45, who are underemployed, who perhaps aren't fully employed, who are not in jobs that pay a living wage.

So we're doing a lot of really aggressive work reaching out to that population called opportunity youth.

And an additional 686 students, these are students in our credit programs in our workforce programs, and additional 686 residents are enrolled in a short-term credential, again, primarily in our downtown campus.

And that is everything from HVAC technician to plumbing to electrical and so forth.

So nearly 700 students, Richmond City residents are enrolled in those type of programs.

Our early college academy this fall, we had 81 students enroll in that program.

And a total of 242 students have graduated again with their associate's degree in hand weeks before they graduate from high school.

And that's really wonderful.

And working with the folks at RPS, we're really hopeful to see more credentialing of teachers in the high school, that number would skyrocket because by law, those uh 50% of that associate degree is now free for the family and for the school division if it's taught in the high school during the school day.

So more work to do there, but wonderful uh wonderful portrait of students who are doing wonderful work.

And an additional 61 students are just taking some classes.

Not every student in all of our school divisions is built to do a full college curriculum while in high school.

But we want students to take courses anyway because A, it opens up a window to possibility.

Some students who never imagined themselves to be college material all of a sudden learn they've passed college algebra 101 while in high school.

It opens up possibility.

And it also makes pursuing a college education a lot less expensive when you have 10 to 15 college level credits in your bag.

So an additional 61 RPS students are enrolled, are taking some dual enrollment while in high school.

This last year we awarded nearly 2.6 million dollars in scholarship and aid to City of Richmond residents.

As you know, we have an incredibly robust scholarship program.

We raise millions every year to put in the hands of our students to ensure that the cost of an education is not the thing that derails them from fulfilling their potential.

So a lot of supports for our students, including the holistic supports, food pantries, legal aid, tax aid, a whole um holistic way approach of supporting our students.

Financial is one of the strongest ways that we can do that.

So I want you to meet two uh students from the city of Richmond, Sydney.

She was in an ACA program.

Uh she graduated from the early college academy.

She was the Phi Theta Kappa New Century Transferred Scholar Award recipient for the Commonwealth of Virginia, only one of those awards.

She has transferred to William and Mary and currently studying neuroscience.

That's one of our RPS students.

That's Sydney.

And I want you to meet Dean.

Dean is in our respiratory therapy program in our School of Health Professions.

She's originally from Jamaica.

She couldn't find schools willing to accept her high school diploma.

We have a professor at our college, Nikia Austin, who provided a one-on-one orientation.

When the program had already started, the inn was full.

But our faculty said, come on in, we know the inn is full.

One-on-one, we're going to make sure you get into this cohort.

She was hungry.

She just graduated.

She has three offers from hospitals as a respiratory therapist.

So these are the kinds of things and stories that help us get up every single day with passion and commitment for this work because we know when we do our jobs right, lives are transformed, families are helped, communities are strengthened.

And with that, I thank you all for your support.

And certainly if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

And I promise not to talk about sex.

Dr.

Pando, we needed that moment.

So let's vote there.

Um I am going to defer to my colleagues first.

So I'll start, it looks like Miss the line.

Uh Ms.

Albacher, Councilwoman Robertson, then Lynch, as best as I can see in this line up here.

Okay.

Oh.

Oh, sorry, we were working out some orders towards the point of where we're here.

Councilmember Lynn.

I'm just looking at this screen and that.

And I'm happy to defer to Mr.

Clerk, but what I'm looking at has uh, I have to unfortunately take a work call at 5 30.

So I was trying to do case.

At 5 30, okay.

Miss Albacher, were you different?

Of course.

Thank you.

I'm sorry.

Thank you, Sarah.

Um, I thought I was first on the buzzer because I was so excited about this presentation.

Um, and we do have a blooper reel that uh the city clerk has been working to put together.

So that that'll be first on the shelf.

I'm excited about that going into the archives.

Um so I just want to say, I mean, Paul Pandeau is the person that you want to be when you grow up.

Like he is the type of person that um executive directors, salvate over, and thirst over to be.

And the presentation, your results and the presentation, all the presentations that you always present have have demonstrated a cascading impact on our community time and time again, and it just keeps getting better.

I mean, I remember the first time I heard um your your your the presentation, and I've worked with Reynolds in it in a very different hat um a long time ago, and understand the profound um impact and and um just the wealth of opportunity it offers are um not just the kids in the city, but any of our um vulnerable community members that to your point may have not thought that they would have flourished in a college setting.

Um, and and to literally change the trajectory of those people's lives and to see that every year and the impact progress has just been awesome.

So I want to be you when I grew up with Paula Pando.

I do.

Um, and I just thank you for the work um that you do and continue to do.

And I would love to sit sit here for longer, but I do have to take the work, Colin.

I just appreciate you taking the time to come to come be with us tonight.

Thank you, Madam Councilwoman.

Councilwoman Alba Backer.

Yes, uh, I echo my colleague's sentiments and um also want to extend my gratitude to your board members who are here today, and I know that they've been instrumental.

Um, I I have uh I have watched Reynolds over the last 30 years, and it's just a um, you know, truly a regional driver of this economy.

Um, and I'm grateful for your leadership.

Can you talk to me a little bit about the um the trades programs and your um partnership with RPS and how many students are currently enrolled in those?

Sure.

Um, so when we talk about trades, we're talking about uh specifically welding, automotive technology, um, electricity, HVAC technician, um, uh logistics, um uh fiber, uh, and so forth.

We we have been in conversations with RPS from gosh, I will tell you back in 2020 was when those conversations began in earnest when we were looking at the Maury Street uh building that had been gifted by Altria.

We have been at the table ever since on how we can um, and I think there has been a shift uh in RPS in how where the trades fall.

I don't know that there was much of an appetite.

That's not a criticism, it's just there was not a lot of appetite for trades.

Um, and I think in the age of AI, there's a lot more interest in trades because those are jobs that are not going to be replaced.

So we um uh our hope is that we will be able to um work with RPS in a way while they're designing their building.

And we do have many people from City of Richmond already enrolled in these programs.

I mean, they're uh they are especially in the adult learner population.

But our our hope would be that we would create a concept where students are doing where whatever the technical school is, let's say it's in the Maury Street, they were the recipient of a very large grant as well, that a student graduates with uh CTE post-secondary credential at the same time so that we can co-locate some of those programs that are very expensive to run so we can run them together and have students actually achieve the credential while in high school, the same way we have in our transfer, they're getting their um uh their associate's degree while they're graduating from high school, that would be the idea for the trades as well.

So it's very reasonable to me.

Please let us know how we can supportive and facilitate that conversation.

Yes, yes.

Councilmember Robertson.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Dr.

Panda.

Um, I was fortunate my grandson graduated from J Sarge this year, and uh he had a really rough time doing COVID with uh virtual learning, didn't do well at all.

And um he graduated Toppin's class at from J.

Sergeant Reynolds.

So we're really really proud of the work that is being done there, and when it's one of your own grandkids that you can sit there, and I will say to you, and I said to my husband when we were sitting there in the graduation exercise, and when you stood there and shake the hands of every student, and that beautiful smile that we see right now didn't break that one time.

I said it shows the level of dedication and commitment and love that you have for the work that you're doing, and when you invest that much love and passion with um great expectation and excellent service and what you provide, I'm not surprised at the extraordinary accomplishments that are being done at J.

Sarge and Reynolds, and you are to be highly commended, the board, your staff, everyone there on that campus.

I mean, I've come there to have meetings and so forth, and your spirit resonate in every person that I have met there, and the students really, really love and appreciate what Jay Sarge and Reynolds does for them and put into their lives, and um the crown is going to be extremely large uh for the great work that you're doing to change so many people's lives and the innovation and the readaptations that you have exercised and put in place to make it possible to reach people where they are, and it is really just a fortunate blessing that we have here in the city, in the state, and for every student that walk through your door, their parents, um, and the generation, the generation that you're changing.

We do a lot of work and care a whole lot about reducing poverty here in the city.

The work that you're doing is probably one of the most impactful service that is going to significantly reduce poverty, not only here in the city, but for everywhere that those students go and where they're able to walk out with an education with a great job.

And um I just can say enough to express my appreciation for the work that you're doing, the spirit that you bring to all of this, and the consistent innovation that you continue to apply to make things work.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate you.

Dr.

Pando, I thought the last time you gave a report, that it was extraordinary.

I didn't.

I just want to say thank you.

Your vision, you are a visionary leader.

It's embodies.

I don't have enough, I have run out of page for adjectives here.

So your visionary leadership that's transformative, that's collaborative, that's effective, that focuses on outcomes versus outputs in terms of our community.

That Council Robertson that's creative and innovative.

I can't thank you enough.

And uh this is like I said, I don't have enough adjectives, but I really thank you on behalf of our community and all that you're doing.

And I thank your board who are in, you know, in it with you, and uh look forward to um goodness.

I'm not sure where else we can go, but I know that you'll find that next place.

And I just want to say uh thank you, and I remain committed to uh supporting your leadership in the way that you are um working to address our community across all these.

Thank you, and thank you, board members, uh, as well.

Thank you, madam president.

Thank you to all of you.

This it is um it's an honor to do this work, it's an honor to do work you love that makes a difference every day.

Thank you.

Thank you.

With that, I believe we have one more uh presentation, national community survey for Richmond, Virginia.

Mr.

Riyadh Ali, how are you?

Good, good.

Um, good afternoon, council members.

As you all know, my name is Riyad Ali, and I'm the Richmond City Auditor.

I wanted to give some brief background on the Richmond Community Survey prior to Polco's presentation.

Uh, the community survey was conducted in conjunction with the Department of Citizen Service and Response, and it was overseen by the Office of the City Auditor.

Uh the survey was completed in order to fulfill the service efforts and accomplishments requirement of the Richmond City Code.

The last community survey was performed late in 2021, and the results were finalized in 2022.

The role of the auditor's office in the community survey was essentially to ensure the process was objective, transparent, and comparable over time.

To achieve that objective, we partnered with Polco, a reputable third-party vendor who does this type of survey work across the country.

We utilize Polco's standard set of questions so that the results of the survey could be compared to those other governments, as well as compare to our last community survey to really see uh trends over time.

It's important to note that the community survey is both a resident feedback tool and a strategic management tool.

Leadership can use this information to better understand broadly residents' perspectives, uh opportunities for improvement, as well as areas where the city performs well.

This data can be utilized both at the citywide level as well as a department level, especially when it comes to things like budget development as well as legislative prioritization.

So without further ado, let me pass it on over to our representative from Polco for the presentation of the community survey.

She's uh virtual.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to join you today.

Um, just uh I'm gonna provide just a very quick introduction to the results of the 2026 National Community Survey for Richmond.

There's a lot of extra, you know, details in the report, and we'll definitely invite you to dig into those.

I'm the executive vice president of Data and Insights here at Polco, and I've been working with local governments to do research for the last 20 years.

So also before I begin, I'd love to thank Peter Braille, who provided a lot of thoughtful feedback on every step of the way on this project, and also acknowledge Lily Vasquez, who was our Polco project manager, um, so just to start, just a little bit about Polco.

Our mission is to unite people, data, and government leaders to help communities thrive through informed decisions that improve residents overall quality of life.

We provide tools to empower resident voices and also to visualize community metrics to support strategic planning, budgeting, and performance tracking.

NRC National Research Center is the research arm at Polco, and we've worked with hundreds of jurisdictions nationwide over the last 30 years.

As this presentation is necessarily short, we're going to focus on providing an overview of the survey process and some high-level results.

And then we'll invite staff to dig deeper and bring the data into their discussions.

The National Community Survey or the NCS is a standardized five-page comprehensive survey that's used to assess resident opinion about their community and local government.

The NCS survey questions are categorized into 10 facets of community livability shown here, and that provides a holistic picture of your community from the perspective of your residents.

These facets have been identified through extensive research as the most impactful to quality of life.

There are many survey items related to each facet and the facets align with municipal departments, making it easy for staff to quickly find information that's most relevant to their work.

Most commonly, jurisdictions use their survey data to monitor trends in resident opinion over time, inform budgeting processes and strategic plans, assess community needs, and then measure the impacts of policies and programs.

How a survey is conducted matters, and we use our expertise to ensure it's statistically valid and reliable.

First, we're going to just explore an overview of how the survey was conducted.

This was Richmond's second time conducting the NCS.

As mentioned, the last time was in 2021.

To select survey recipients, a list of addresses was purchased from the U.S.

Postal Service and cleaned using city boundary files to remove any addresses outside of Richmond.

From that list, 4,000 households were randomly selected to receive the survey.

Those households received survey mailings starting February 23rd, and the survey remained open for six weeks.

The first mailing was a postcard invitation, followed by a paper survey packet with a postage paid return envelope, so that there was a digital and a paper component to this survey.

The first, both mailings also included included that link to the online survey, so folks could make that choice.

The survey was available in both English and Spanish, and all mailings included instructions in both of those languages.

In total, 268 completed surveys were returned, and that provides a margin of error of plus or minus six percentage points.

Our target is the four to six percent margin of error for this type of research.

And just if you're not a statistician, the margin of error gives us a sense of how precise the results are.

In practical terms, it means that if we did this survey and repeated the survey process multiple times, the results would be expected to fall within six percentage points of those estimates.

The results were weighted using the Census and American community survey data to ensure results better fleck Richmond's adult population.

This is a best practice in survey research, and it's used to correct over response by older adults and under response by younger adults that we see in every survey we do.

While the overall response level might seem a little low, I do want to emphasize that in the same way that a thousand responses are sufficient to represent 250 million adults in the national survey, your level of response is sufficient to represent Richmond.

The essential part is that the methods are robust, that the sample is random, and Pew Research Centers done an extensive amount of research to support this.

One key benefit of the NCS is the ability to compare how ratings for local services and community characteristics perform relative to peer communities.

Given our large database, we are able to select custom benchmark groups for your city.

And in this case, we've selected a group of communities with medium large populations between 100 and 500K.

Those details are also shared in your report.

In the survey, we asked two questions about those 10 facets of community livability mentioned earlier.

So these are pretty broad questions.

The first question asks residents to rate the quality of each area.

The next will ask about importance.

Responses to this question were on a four-point scale.

And excellent or good are good are considered positive.

So the results shown here represent the percentage of respondents who rated each area as excellent or good.

Looking at this chart, the highest rated areas were education, arts and culture, parks and recreation, and the natural environment.

And education, arts and culture was above our national benchmark.

The lower rated areas were safety, economy, and utilities.

These were lower than your peer cities.

The second question asks about those same facets of livability, but it's centered on how important residents think it is for the community to focus on each facet in the coming two years.

Here you'll see that utilities, economy, and mobility emerged as top priorities, while parks and recreation, education, arts and culture, and health and wellness were less prioritized by residents, although still were considered important by at least two-thirds.

This is similar to what we see in peer communities.

And we ask both about both the quality and importance of each of these facets so that we can create the quality importance gap chart, which we're going to see on the next slide.

We use this chart, which is also included in your report to help determine which areas are of relatively higher importance and lower quality rating to from residents.

Highlighting which areas, this highlights which areas may need additional focus or resource allocation in the coming years.

Utilities and economy have the largest gaps, meaning it was rated relatively lower in quality but high in importance.

Safety and mobility also showed moderate gaps.

In the survey, within the 10 facets, there are 123 survey items that for which respondents provide evaluative ratings.

Of these, items were mostly similar or higher than the benchmark, and overall four received higher ratings, 68 received similar ratings, and 51 received lower ratings.

One initial additional note on this data.

These are resident perceptions.

So among other considerations, an important step is to think through any of these areas that you feel have high service levels but are have a lower perception.

These are areas may require more community education rather than changes to services.

POCOL does have dashboards of community metrics from our public sector data sources that are aligned to the NCS facets and available to your team on your POCO profile.

These are also benchmarked nationally and also to your state to give additional context.

When compared to the results from Richmond's 2021 survey, in 2026, most ratings were similar to 2021.

Six ratings were statistically significantly higher than the previous survey iteration.

84 received similar ratings, and 33 received lower ratings.

It should be noted here that nationally we did see an uptick in ratings in 2020-2021, which a polco we referred to as the COVID bump.

During COVID, residents really saw their local governments in action, and many local governments saw increased ratings that dropped a little bit after that 2022 after 2022.

So as we don't really have a survey, we don't have a survey prior to 2021, it's hard to say if this is the case for Richmond, but it was the common experience among our clients nationwide.

A quick summary of the things that stood out for us and are reflected in more detail in the report that was also shared with you.

Overall, Richmond residents view the community positively.

They see it as a place where people want to live and they intend to remain long-term.

This is a strong foundation for the city.

Looking at quality of life drivers, cultural amenities and community events stand out as clear strengths, while perceptions of K-12 education were a bit less positive when compared to benchmark communities.

Safety results told a mixed story.

Residents feel safe during the day and rated fire-related services highly, while crime-related safety perceptions and some public safety services represent opportunities for improvement in communication or services.

The community character also emerges as a strength.

Residents did rate public spaces and the overall feel of the community more positively thanks some aspects related to residential and commercial growth, which may reflect some mixed feelings about development or how growth is occurring.

Transportation results suggest mobility is generally working well, particularly for residents traveling by car.

However, not all aspects of transportation performed as strongly.

So overall, Richmond has a strong community fundamentals with several clear strengths and a few areas that could benefit from continued attention.

So that was my very quick overview of the survey, and I'll pause for any questions.

Thank you.

Members, are there any questions at this time?

Councilwoman Gibson.

Thank you, Madam President.

I was wondering a bit uh if you could talk a little bit about um just the um participation year over year.

Um if I'm reading the report correctly, there were there was like seven percent um response rate, how that compares to the prior survey.

Um I also saw that um about two percent of the 4,000 mailed invitations were returned because the household addresses were vacant.

I'm curious how that compares both to prior year surveys and to other um other municipalities.

Um, to address the um the paper surveys that were returned and the um postcard invitations that were returned, we typically see between three and five percent of paper of these returns.

Um we use a US Postal Service list that's updated every three months, but we just typically see that amount where somebody's moved, and the the address is just no longer, you know, there's no longer somebody there.

Um, the post office does update those vacant um vacancies every three months, as I said, but within those three months, you can get it's usually about three to five percent.

So two percent is normal.

I don't actually know what the results were from 2021.

Um, in terms of a response rate, uh, we are seeing typically 7% to 15% response rates right now across communities, so it is on the lower end of response rates.

Uh, but as I said, the most important part of the survey is to use a random sample and do robust methodologies to make sure that you're not biased in who you're hearing from.

But of course, we would always want to push for higher response rates.

The response rate last time, I believe from when I reviewed the data was in line, it was about nine percent last time.

Thank you.

Um, and looking at the survey um findings specifically, you know, obviously it's uh quite notable.

The um the scores that we saw for utilities and the subsequent importance that residents put on that.

I'm curious if there were, you know, um what what are some you know ways that we might leverage this data or if they're if you've seen any patterns in in other areas and other municipalities that have that have had this type of result, um, obviously I I think that that should serve as a call to action of some type.

Um I have similar questions about other areas where there is uh significant room for improvement, um especially around the quality of development, um access to affordable quality food, um the value for services for taxes paid.

Um those those things stood out to me, and I'm I'm wondering, you know, where what we might do to leverage this data uh to to move the city forward and and and get more support from from residents.

I think the I think the first one of the first steps that most communities do is to really look, you know, talk within their departments who are responsible for those things to think through how they um how their services, you know, um compare to other cities, and then to try and first of all just suss out whether or not there's really a difference in um is that a is it a service lack or is there a perception problem?

So sometimes it's an education thing.

I've definitely seen it in communities where people are concerned about utilities because say there was something in the paper about water quality or something, and it may be true or not true, so you may be addressing the water quality issue itself, or you may be addressing a misperception about that water quality issue.

So I think that's one of the things that um communities do first really is kind of going internally and talking to their experts to say like does this seem right?

You know, sometimes in communities there's a lower police services rating for instancy, for instance, and but there's also at the same time have been some kind of incidents with the public, right?

That maybe they're keying on.

So really thinking through first of all, if it's perception or if there is a lower quality in services for some reason and if that needs to be addressed, if it's older infrastructure, if it's um some other um reasons, you know, and then there's also when we looking diving into the survey results, there is a lot of information that is by demography, um, and I potentially areas so that you can kind of look at what how how people are differentially experienced in their services because sometimes that is the issue, it's more the differentials and the overall.

Thank you.

Any up, are there any other questions at this time?

And so, with this information, Mr.

Umley and the administration will this is obviously been shared, and so we'll be looking at this to inform our efforts in these areas moving forward, correct?

Yeah, the information obviously was provided to administration.

I know they've gone over it, discussed it uh and shared it with the departments as they've even discussed it with us.

Sure.

Okay, thank you.

Um thank you for the report.

We'll look forward to administration as you look to incorporate these items in informing our work moving forward.

I'm looking that way.

So with that, I believe the next item on the agenda would be the um reports of standing committees.

And I'm sure that most members have received the written reports.

Uh, and so unless there are any other reports that you would like to make any committee members and or chairs, then we will accept those written reports as our updates.

Ms.

Gibson.

Oh, okay.

Okay, seeing none.

We have no other business for discussion.

Thank you, everyone.

The in the Organizational Development Standing Committee of the Richmond City Council now stands adjourned.

Thank you.