Avula wants to bring back public spending data access — with limits
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Photo illustration: Axios Visuals. Photo: Sabrina Moreno/Axios.
Richmond hasn't published a full public log of its spending, as required by its own law, since 2019.
Why it matters: Now, city leaders say they want to amend the law to make compliance possible, a move past administrations attempted and were criticized for doing.
Driving the news: Mayor Avula is introducing an ordinance to City Council on Monday that narrows the information the city would automatically disclose in its payment register to make it easier to sustain.
- Officials on Friday told reporters the existing system requires a labor-intensive manual review of thousands of transactions each month to redact sensitive information like foster care payments, tax information and personal identifiers.
- Social Services director Shunda Giles said releasing that information could expose the city to legal risk.
Between the lines: City officials say the register is meant to give residents a general sense of how tax dollars are spent.
- But reporters and watchdogs have used it to uncover fraud, waste and potential conflicts of interest by looking at transaction-level data that the new proposal might limit.
How it works: Under this new ordinance, which Avula said aligns with how surrounding counties publish payment data, the register would still post vendor payments and employee reimbursements.
- But it'd remove entire categories like individual payments, tax refunds and legal settlements.
- Avula said the city could have it up within 60 days.
Catch up quick: The original 2015 law requires a searchable, monthly log of each city payment, including who was paid, how much and for what.
- The city stopped updating it in 2019 after IT director Charles Todd realized it "was not appropriate" for IT to continue publishing without clearer safeguards, Todd said Friday.
- By 2024, the database was taken offline entirely.
What we're watching: The proposal could evolve as it moves through City Council, with potential pressure from members who have already raised concerns about cutting disclosure requirements.