Poverty, food insecurity, childhood trauma, evictions, exposure to gun violence, schools that just push kids through the system, and unaddressed mental health issues are all drivers of community violence in our city. In the United State, poverty is highly racialized with Black and Latino receiving the most scrutiny from law enforcement. This disproportionately causes minority communities to have contact with the criminal justice system—itself an indicator that an individual may be involved in violence again.

In Richmond, there is widespread agreement that we are missing opportunities to ensure public safety through public resources like mental health supports, anti-poverty initiatives, housing supports, expanded city and school programs, gun violence intervention programs, safe school buildings and the growth of good, living wage jobs citywide. Our conversations should start with our budget, looking critically at where and how we invest funds. It is going to cost money to address the roots of violence. We need community-driven solutions that allocate resources to areas that truly create public safety. We can create a system that better serves and reflects the needs of our residents.

Political campaigns encourage politicians to come up with quick fixes. While it might not get me extra votes, I won’t sugar coat it. It would be naive to think that there are immediate solutions to community violence that no one else has thought of before. Violence—in particular gun violence—was unfortunately baked into our society through extreme economic inequality and racist policy from our founding. This problem is complex and requires funding anti-poverty measures, ensuring that every student receives a high quality education in a safe building, restricting access to guns, and creating dignified jobs. It is going to cost money and take policy to address the roots of violence. As your council member, I commit to doing whatever it takes, including fighting for increased funding and more gun control on the state and federal level. To get this done, I will need residents by my side demanding the same, and I commit to ensure that we engage in broad community-based decision making about the best programs that work for us.

Yes

The RVAgreen 2050 Plan is a good initial framework for reducing the city’s reliance on fossil fuels and planning for resilient infrastructure. I am happy to see that the current council has made good on some of the commitments in the plan—including funding for expanded tree canopy in heat islands, the creation of an urban forest master plan, and requirements to track emissions outputs in city buildings. However, the city is already falling behind the commitments made in the plan for the end of 2025; the current council has not implemented requirements to ensure that new municipal construction achieves net zero energy or requirements that all new capital improvement projects incorporate electrification requirements. The plan is also missing several core components for a just energy transition. There is no clear plan for the separation of our combined sewage-storm water overflow system that leaks sewage into our watershed and no comprehensive plan to decommission Richmond’s Gas Infrastructure. We need these items in our climate planning. There also need to be stronger commitments for good paying jobs for resiliency and electrification projects. I believe that the next City Council must incorporate RVAgreen 2050 as an ordinance instead of just an advisory resolution. The tipping point for climate change is fast approaching, and Richmond must serve as an example to the country on how to address global warming head on.

Yes

As noted above, poverty in the United States is extremely racialized, and sadly, Richmond is no different. In most policy decisions, low-income, working class, Black or Latino Richmonders are left out of the process and often face the brunt of policy shifts. Much of the city’s attention and money is still focused on the highest income areas and the areas where large corporations set up shop. As we face what is likely to be the hottest summer on record, Richmond residents are increasingly vulnerable to climate change-related dangers, including river flooding and extreme heat. These are central housing issues that are too rarely discussed. Our lowest-income neighborhoods often suffer from mass tree removal, leading to dangerously high heat indexes in the summer months. We must invest heavily in increasing tree cover in these areas to mitigate heat and prevent erosion after flooding. Public housing, which is some of our safest with regard to flooding, is currently facing mass demolition in favor of private redevelopment. We have seen mass displacement of residents because of this privatization scheme. Like many housing advocates, I fear that these residents will be into flood-prone zones while developers make a profit off of their communities. Public housing and schools are where our lowest-income residents spend the most time, so it’s crucial to keep these spaces available to them, safeguard them from the impacts of climate change, and end displacement from the communities they call home. This requires functional HVAC systems, increased tree planting and green spaces, mold remediation in buildings, an end to school closure, and housing protection in flood-safe zones. The conversation must prioritize the needs and concerns of working-class families. We also need to radically rethink how we invest in the riverfront to plan for more frequent flooding. Low-income residents are being pushed into the most flood prone areas. Our city has been slow to adopt long-term climate safety measures. Simply relying on flood walls is not sustainable—we must explore more proactive strategies.

Yes

Richmond has the momentum to lead by example in transitioning from methane, inspiring other localities in Virginia to follow suit, especially as we navigate the challenges posed by Republican control in the Virginia House of Delegates, the Governor’s Office, and the US House of Representatives. Together, we can set a powerful precedent for municipal climate action. Electrification must be zero-cost to low and median income households in the city, period. Thankfully, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provides consumer subsidies for household appliances and electrification projects, but they are not zero cost. If you are living paycheck to paycheck, any amount of money is too much. As the city plans for a transition away from natural gas, we must ensure that the most economically vulnerable residents are not bearing the cost. As has been rigorously demonstrated by Beyond Methane RVA, it is imperative that we transition the gas works both because we must stop releasing greenhouse gasses and also because the utility is in a financial spiral the cost of which will land on residents. In this process, we have the opportunity to eliminate methane consumption while lowering energy costs for residents and creating good jobs. We should redirect capital funding from new gas construction and transition the Gas Works to a public clean energy utility. Since we wouldn’t be subject to Dominion Energy’s profit guarantees, we can pass the savings onto residents and workers. The city is able to subsidize this plan using the Direct Pay program funded by the IRA. We can no longer treat sustainable living conditions as being at odds with the needs of our workforce. We must ensure that our green transition is built by local union labor. As a top priority, I will push for ordinances that mandate prevailing wages, local labor commitments, and project labor agreements for all public projects. Too often, corporations pass the burden of market and regulatory shifts onto the least economically stable. Organized labor is our most effective tool to guarantee fair wages and ensure working people benefit from our green transition. Many residents also currently work for the Gas Works and associated contractors. Our transition plans cannot eliminate jobs or specific employees. We need to mandate that the current contractors for the Gas Works are using union labor; our gas infrastructure has been neglected and can only be maintained safely by highly trained workers. We have to ensure that there is one-for-one replacement for jobs during our energy transition. They must be union jobs, and we must protect our existing public and private sector workforce to ensure no worker is left behind as we build a sustainable future.

Yes

It is clear that we need to encourage the construction of multi-family housing in residential zones, accessory dwelling units, and high-density, mixed use development near high capacity transit nodes. However, market driven strategies alone will not fix our housing crisis. This is especially true for low-income residents who are getting displaced today and cannot wait for the invisible hand to course correct because they will already be gone. As a Dillon Rule state, Virginia limits our ability to demand affordable housing from private developers. However, we can amend the master plan to designate target areas for affordable housing and use state-allowed incentives for mixed-income developments during rezoning. We should fully utilize density bonus laws to mandate affordable housing when developers seek to use our air rights. Encouraging density while maximizing affordable development is crucial. We must simultaneously demand the ability to implement inclusionary zoning in the city from the state legislature.

Yes

Currently, the city has no substantive, consolidated plan to address affordable housing. Like Arlington, we can create expectations for affordable housing in particular areas as part of the development of our master plan. Council must set the president that these expectations should be equally divided across the city and be added to the master plan.

Yes

If we are looking to address the affordable housing crisis, this is not the right question. We need leaders who understand that regulation is not the core issue with the cost of housing. With the recent “City of Grants Pass, OR, v JohnsonIt” supreme court case, it is now permitted for localities to throw people in jail simply because they don’t have housing. In fact, regulations for landlords and oversight of rental properties in Virginia are extremely lax. Tenants can be evicted with little notice and in the middle of leases without cause. The core issue is that corporate developers have nearly unlimited capital to scoop up the lowest cost housing and flip it for profit. In smaller cities like Richmond, there is almost unlimited demand as folks from more expensive cities, who were themselves priced out from their communities, move here. It’s driving up costs for everyone, either through their property taxes or rent. It is not a surprise that in Richmond where we have highly racialized poverty that we have lost six thousand (6,000) Black residents since 2010 while the city as a whole grows. Low-income Black residents are being displaced from neighborhoods their families have lived in for generations. Black Richmonders have faced the brunt of explicitly racist housing policies that stole their wealth. And, since that wealth was taken, they don’t have the ability to participate in today’s housing market which does not consider this history. Everyone has a right to housing and to live in their community of choice. I grew up in Newton, Massachusetts—a wealthy suburb of Boston, and I was fortunate to attend an extremely well-resourced school system because my parents were able to rent a subsidized unit in a mixed-income development. These cross-class developments were the only reason Newton had any racial diversity at all. To be clear, I had access to resources because of housing regulations and subsidies, not in spite of them. We must come from a place of creating stability today. Housing instability is a public health crisis. Adults are more likely to develop mental distress and trauma and come into contact with the criminal justice system, and students are less likely to succeed academically if they are experiencing eviction or don’t have a home. We need to amend the city’s definition of affordability. The 2018 council-adopted HUD definitions do not suit Richmond residents, as the area median income is much higher than Richmond’s median income. This discrepancy allows developers to receive public subsidies for what is essentially market-rate housing. Additionally, any redevelopment of traditional public housing must ensure one-to-one replacement of physical units. The current strategy reduces the number of affordable units in the city, displaces residents, and puts those limited units into the hands of for-profit corporations. I likewise will only vote for appointees to the RRHA who will commit to one-to-one physical unit replacement of like kind for any units lost during demolition. We need to establish a rental inspection district so that slumlords cannot abuse residents and force people to live in substandard housing. This is a particular concern for undocumented residents in the city who typically don’t have access to a wide array of housing options and are targets for exploitation. We need to fund eviction diversion programs, in particular a local rent subsidy program with very few barriers that goes directly to low and moderate income renters to aid with rising costs. Renters must be entitled with a right to counsel during eviction proceedings. Every resident under the threat of displacement must have access to free legal services. We know that evictions plummet when residents have access to a lawyer. Lastly, we need to work together and form a broad coalition to demand further local authority from our state government and eliminate the Dillon Rule. At minimum, we need authority for inclusionary zoning, rent control, and vacancy taxes. I want to work side-by-side with residents across the city to pressure the state government so that we have the tools we need to guarantee a home for all residents.

yes

First and foremost, we need to fund maintenance of existing sidewalk infrastructure and construct sidewalks that connect to useful public transportation. As it stands, many working class areas lack sidewalks and bus stops all together. It is functionally impossible to get around if you are a wheelchair user or if you lack a personal vehicle. When CIP funding for pedestrian infrastructure does materialize, it often is allocated to the most resourced areas first while sidewalks elsewhere deteriorate or just don’t exist. Council must create a fairer system to allocate infrastructure dollars to create equitable access everywhere. We need to couple these with traffic calming measures to reduce pedestrian death and make good on our Vision Zero commitments.

yes

We must find the funding to continue the zero fare program while expanding our public bus network. After the Pulse redesign, the Federal Department of Transportation found that the GRTC used inaccurate data regarding the impact of stop closures and rerouting on minority communities. Residents report that the new hub-and-spoke model has doubled or tripled travel times for those who rely on the bus system. As we explore new expansion plans, we need to ensure that we are using accurate impact data. We can encourage new ridership while ensuring that residents who depend on the bus system can rely on it. We must return reliable service to low income areas.

yes

I am most interested in Strategy 2.4 “IMPROVE BUS SERVICE”, as noted in the previous question, the bus has become less efficient for low income residents across the city, and we need to work to restore and expand service to working class areas.

To ensure the future success of our children, we need to ensure that their caregivers have the resources they need to create a stable home environment. Many children face housing and food insecurity that make it more challenging for them to succeed in school. Fundamentally, we must reduce poverty. The only mechanism to reduce poverty—and its negative effects on children—is to put money in the hands of working people. Our city’s current poverty reduction strategy has been to provide wasteful handouts to mega corporations and hope the money trickles down—it hasn’t worked. Since the Progressive Era, it has been self-evidently clear that stimulating the economy, bolstering public finances, and reducing poverty is only achieved by directly investing in workers. Many of our students' parents work in the schools or for the city. We must continue to vigorously defend the rights of local labor unions and ensure that adequate raises are fully funded by the City Council. Many others work in building and construction. An early priority for me will be enacting ordinances that mandate prevailing wages, project labor agreements, and local hiring requirements for all public projects. Public projects have the opportunity to provide immense economic opportunity to workers and to provide apprenticeship for young people. Too often, public projects are poorly constructed, delayed, and exceed budget, while workers are exploited and illegally underpaid. With union labor, we can ensure high-quality projects and good compensation for workers. By continuing to promote public sector bargaining, we can set a standard that pressures private employers to improve wages and working conditions. It gives us legitimacy to advocate for workers’ rights outside of what the City has direct control over. This all will create economic opportunities for young adults as they enter the workforce. Students also need licensed, experienced teachers in their classrooms and safe school buildings free from mold, mice, fire hazards, and asbestos. On the board, I was proud to champion measures that tied the superintendent's compensation to teacher retention and to push the construction of five new schools in the district.

For local solutions, I firmly believe that the folks who have been doing community-based work for years have the best answers, despite a lack of attention and funding from current leadership. We need to invest in community-based gun violence intervention programs—like was implemented in Hopewell and is being proposed by RISC. We also need to invest in anti-poverty initiatives as detailed above. When you look at the safest communities, the thing that defines them is not any specific programming, but access to resources. We need to give people the resources they need to thrive.

Voting to maintain our landscape of small community schools was my first significant vote after I was elected in 2017. Successful schools are community hubs that reflect the needs of their respective communities. Small, neighborhood schools provide better educational outcomes and ensure that working parents have close access to their school community. It is likewise important to preserve the historic tradition and neighborhood pride our current buildings provide. The community unity and support in these schools is difficult to replicate in a larger building. When the local community has direct input on investments and programming, the funding of community schools with wraparound services can be critical to ensure that these buildings can serve their maximum potential for their neighborhood, and I certainly would advocate for such funding.