[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6571711,"mediaKeyId","3140116-e8e93091a3338306e1408a2d4066ebca","parentId",3140116,"title","Richmond council, administration reach consensus on many FY26 budget amendments; debate remains over top‑tier raises, park ranger cut and fleet reductions","audioSeconds",3049,"startMs",2443000,"endMs",5492000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3140116-e8e93091a3338306e1408a2d4066ebca&start=2443&end=5492","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3140116-e8e93091a3338306e1408a2d4066ebca/thumbnail_2443000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6571711/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Richmond-council-administration-reach-consensus-on-many-FY26-budget-amendments-debate-remains-over-toptier-raises-park-ranger-cut-and-fleet-reductions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6571711-64971e95300011593780c6ad109febcb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771039239&Signature=H-TU5tJ9IJQqPfbNlW5443jtEQsw1lm3beRgpYjY9fpTq9ZZqF10hhktwTOGejszehzSiLkdbVHIt9~YBCrXEIznJMGpy9w-IuZPHY4Itj2YzF72TvNHJlDzjMjSCPpBvuzGq1-1y9M7ZkGSNWBYgq4kbDzSsc0uDthPtIPTItz6LKQUcZPheEY-JAJoY7M9eXoi7hrhCj3VtjafGi756AsLEekZOnxpmQ8oo~HrzO0EHRDF1MAU7oBeron-OYme6wQFNDh7kELFD6SvmdZb5qO7teEIYW9lMQhJvZu7V8uGjpQnVPWIhj7eUB9lXDQj2vQ~Uu4XojXt3KcF39MG9g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Richmond City","date","2025-04-28T00:00:00Z","article","The Richmond City Council and city administration spent a budget work session reviewing proposed FY26 ordinance changes, capital and operating reductions, and targeted enhancements. Members and staff reported consensus on many items but left several contested topics unresolved for later action.

Interim Chief of Staff Matthew Slats and interim Deputy Chief of Staff Daniel Wagner led the discussion of capital proposals. The council’s reduction package included the proposed removal of an active Laburnum widening (parking/improvements) project, repurposing about $959,617 in general‑obligation bond funding toward Pine Camp facilities in the Third District, and a cash‑funded reduction to the city vehicle replacement program. Wagner said the fleet cut would spare emergency response vehicles (police, fire and refuse trucks) but reduce the pool of other replacement vehicles; the draft reduction totaled about $2.2 million when combined with the Laburnum reallocation.

Council members pressed administration staff about which specific vehicles would be affected and whether animal care control, bulk‑pickup boom trucks, or Richmond Ambulance Authority ambulances would be impacted. Gail Johnson, director of general services, said sufficient remaining funds would allow the city to prioritize purchases for animal care control and solid waste but that not all planned purchases would be available if the reduction stood. Sabrina Joy Hogg, interim chief administrative officer, said the city would continue to fund ambulances through lease‑purchase arrangements with the Richmond Ambulance Authority.

On operating reductions, administration presented a slate of proposed cuts that rely largely on vacant positions across several departments (Office of Community Wealth Building, public works, registrar) and one‑time timing adjustments (a $500,000 timing issue for a resiliency cohort contracted with UpTogether). Bernadine Doggett of the Office of Community Wealth Building confirmed four positions identified for savings are vacant; the office said it has aligned staffing so more than 85% of current staff are in direct‑service roles.

Councilmembers expressed concern about the practical effects of cutting vacant positions that are being covered by temporary or contract staff. Council member Jones asked for a clearer inventory of which functions use temporary contractors and the dollar value of those contracts; council member Gibson requested documentation about temp/contract staffing and the administration agreed to provide follow‑up.

A notable council proposal from Council member Abu Bakr would have reduced the 3.25% across‑the‑board raise for employees earning more than $175,000, reallocating those dollars toward lower‑paid frontline workers. Abu Bakr framed the amendment as an equity measure and a modest way to preserve funds in light of large multi‑year revenue variances. The proposal drew support from several council members who urged an independent salary study; others on council and the administration indicated they did not have consensus to adopt the amendment in the current package.

Parks leadership and several council members pushed back on one personnel reduction that would remove a single vacant park ranger position. Chris Ferlke, director of Parks, Recreation and Community Facilities, said the department had three vacancies it aimed to fill and had used contracted security to cover needs; council members representing districts adjacent to the James River Park System argued that reducing rangers would harm public safety and visitor management during peak season.

Council and administration also agreed on a set of operating enhancements that would not require offsetting reductions in FY26, including boosts to a right‑to‑counsel grant fund, the family crisis fund, eviction‑diversion funding, and targeted nonprofit supports (Caritas, OAR, positive youth development programs and other non‑departmental partners). Wagner said the slate of enhancements, together with agreed reductions, left approximately $50,000 in unallocated funds; council members discussed banking that balance or applying it to fleet or other priorities and asked staff to track and translate the agreed items into the ordinance and contract language needed for execution.

Administration and the city attorney clarified process points: earmarked nonprofit funding that is explicitly named in the adopted budget can be converted directly into contracts without returning to council for re‑appropriation; general allocations described only by program area (for example, “after‑school programming”) would require a subsequent competitive or contracting step and, if necessary, a re‑appropriation paper.

The session produced multiple consensuses—captured by staff for inclusion in the budget ordinance—but several politically sensitive items (the pay‑cap amendment and some position reductions) remained unresolved and will be the subject of follow‑up work between council and administration ahead of formal adoption.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Richmond City - City Council on 2025-04-28 1:00 PM - Budget Work Session To access the meeting via Microsoft Teams, please use the following link: https://bit.ly/4laJIlN or dial *67-804-316-9457 and enter ID: 937 780 472# - Apr 28, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Council and administration agreed on a package of capital and operating adjustments and a set of nonprofit and housing‑related enhancements to the FY26 budget, but debate remained over limiting raises for employees earning above $175,000, cutting a vacant park ranger post, and fleet reductions.","taxTitle","Richmond City (Independent City), Virginia","taxId",5755,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6571716,"Richmond city assessor proposes 6% increase in taxable real estate for Jan. 1, 2026 reassessment",753,2565000,3318000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3140116-e8e93091a3338306e1408a2d4066ebca&start=2565&end=3318","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3140116-e8e93091a3338306e1408a2d4066ebca/thumbnail_2565000.jpg","/articles/6571716/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Richmond-city-assessor-proposes-6-increase-in-taxable-real-estate-for-Jan-1-2026-reassessment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6571716-0f9ac2e0673761e889589bc773559081/orig.mp4?Expires=1771039239&Signature=bDl7x6hWUiIE9B8KiGA~dGBhFlVpDxOnoiMq9u9tv6kC1YC9a2VmZygTGEUmqSIISpF4KvKTziW0pqHVamZAMWt-4TG6s4fBUNmY4hcUD6OD1HaYdo5JB33QapTBv5xHifZqrVDG5Dxsw-R0lO1Lnxk4PSGDaSHSLLWLgd0HFUxgsni5hH9pP9n~kGUOp8SiH73eMQC5NVAJE8Nqd6L0FKmbMrCGZFwppTzKuyVBFx6sYe8FupIlpPKnSVU2xI8HphkH~xgaNTU0snPBUfzE9oD1ZKsbCFugylyTFypMqpsby7WWJ18TVIM9Mfb3wYxQ4oCVNVKoVhC1nrY~xnx0jw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Richard McKeith, Richmond’s city assessor, told the Richmond City Council at a May budget work session that his office’s forecast for the Jan. 1, 2026 reassessment is a 6% increase in taxable real estate value.

McKeith said the forecast draws on recent assessment history, current assessment-to-sale ratios in higher‑value neighborhoods, and consultations with a newly hired economist who has validated the assessor’s estimate. “This year we’re forecasting six percent land book to land book from last year,” McKeith said, adding that economists’ independent forecasts were “within a half a percent” of his estimate.

The discussion mattered because council members must take the assessor’s numbers into account while finalizing FY26 budget amendments and a proposed tax rate. Council member Kenya Gibson and others said the city should consider recent large variances between budgeted and realized revenues when deciding whether to reduce the tax rate; Gibson cited multi‑year revenue variances in tens of millions of dollars and urged caution. Council President Newbill and others pressed McKeith for follow‑up detail on the baseline amount behind the 6% projection.

McKeith said his 6% figure reflects a downward trend in the pace of increases after two years of double‑digit growth (about 13% in earlier years), then 7.7% and 6.7% in more recent years, and that assessment/sale ratios in some neighborhoods have moved into the high‑eighties and nineties, leaving less room for aggressive increases. “I don’t want to be overly aggressive,” he said, noting national economic uncertainty and that the values are effective Jan. 1, 2026 and must “hold up all the way through December 31.”

Council members requested the assessor provide the raw land‑book total for the base year used to compute the 6% increase, and McKeith agreed to supply that figure to council staff. Several council members said they supported a measured approach and asked staff to track regional assessor benchmarks so Richmond’s forecast could be compared with neighboring localities.

Council members also pressed for more staff coordination so the assessor’s early forecast is paired with revenue and collection details from the city finance office when the council finalizes tax‑rate decisions later in the budget process.

The exchange closed with McKeith saying he would notify council staff promptly if the forecast changed.

","City Assessor Richard McKeith told council members the office’s forecast for the next reassessment is a 6% year‑over‑year increase in taxable real estate, citing recent market trends, assessment-to-sale ratios and conversations with an economist; council members asked for the raw land‑book numbers behind the calculation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Richmond council, administration reach consensus on many FY26 budget amendments; debate remains over top‑tier raises, park ranger cut and fleet reductions

Richmond city assessor proposes 6% increase in taxable real estate for Jan. 1, 2026 reassessment