by Jon Baliles

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water in Richmond, another scandalous legacy of Levar Stoney has been tossed in Mayor Avula’s lap, and he is just barely two weeks into his term. The cesspool of corruption and inefficiency that has returned to City Hall in recent years is one Avula will have to decide in short order if he want to be different and clean it up by being transparent, or if he wants to maintain the veil of obscurity that Stoney left behind.

The new mayor has handled the water crisis relatively well (with some issues) and people are relieved the water is flowing again. They will be watching to make sure it keeps flowing and that the problem is fixed for the long term; but this latest story is likely (to rightly) enrage a lot of fair-minded people, but comes with an easy solution.

Samuel Parker from the Times-Dispatch has reported on his Twitter/X feed that on Mayor Stoney’s way out the door, 32 severance packages were authorized that were collectively worth over $950,000. He also wrote, “But officials won’t disclose documents or answer questions on which employees, specifically, received those severance packages and how much each employee received.”

Read that paragraph again. And again.

The details become even more predictable because loyalists still at City Hall tell the RTD that no one is allowed to see who received a check or how much. An official with the city, who sources say worked for former Chief Administrative Officer Lincoln Saunders, is actually claiming that the records Parker requested through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) were being withheld because they pertained to “contracts … settling employment disputes.”

Parker’s article is expected to come out any day and it will likely include more information and incredulity. It was so infuriating and insulting to see teased on his Twitter feed that I think it’s valuable to offer some additional information (plus we sadly presaged this happening back in November).

There is a bit of legal minutiae to cover here as well as other examples of such exit greed by public officials at City Hall, but the main point is — this will be the next big test for Mayor Avula. Will he be transparent about revealing these shameless payments or will he allow them to be kept secret? Despite what the loyalist in the CAO’s office claims, the Mayor has the power (and the responsibility) to prove he will be transparent and honest with the public. If not, he will be covering for Stoney instead of being straightforward with the public and start draining the cesspool that has sadly returned to City Hall. But we’ll get to that.

First, the brief history of exit severance payments in which public officials felt the need to pad their bank accounts with public dollars upon leaving government “service.” As we wrote back in November 2024, when Doug Wilder took office in 2005, he found that City Council to approve over $300,000 in severance packages for the outgoing City Manager and Police Chief.

Wilder was furious at the greed but could not do anything to get the money back. He pointed out in early 2005 that the payments shouldn’t have been made “because they were not severed. When did we become so rich as a city that we could just throw money away publicly?”

He also pledged in 2005 that “you can be assured that there will be no such severance packages or sweetheart boardroom deals.” And when he left office four years later, no one got a dime’s worth of severance.

Skip forward to January 2017. Within a week of taking office, Stoney did not inherit a failed water plant crisis and dry city, but he did find that Mayor Jones had authorized more than $220,000 in severance pay, bonus money, and vacation payout to his top staff. Jones’ press secretary received $80,000, his Executive Assistant $64,000, his Chief of Staff $30,000, and his Deputy Chief of Staff $47,000.

Which brings us to awaiting the RTD article in which we will learn that 32 severance packages have been approved and there is no way to get the $1 million back to pay for things like, let’s say, a new battery backup at the water plant. Lamest of all, the CAO’s office says the public is not entitled to know who got what because they claim it is a legal issue as the payments were part of employment “contracts … settling employment disputes.”

Which leads to an interesting conundrum. An employee who knows they will be replaced by the new Mayor and leaves under their own volition does not leave because of a “dispute.” If they are an at-will employee, like the CAO or a department director or deputy, etc., they can be let go for any reason (which is why they usually get paid more and get higher retirement, etc.) or they are replaced. But a dispute used in the general sense mentioned in Parker’s social feed could mean that 32 people loyal and close to Stoney were “fired” before the end of the year and thus, had a right to severance and the CAO’s office is now trying to shield the information from the public. There are a lot of unknowns.

Regardless, the CAO’s office or City Attorney could offer to simply redact the requested documents of names and just leave the amounts of each severance package. At least let the public know the amounts. (Maybe now we know the reason Stoney and CAO Saunders took the city’s payment register offline in 2019, despite it being required by City Code and is supposed to publish all city checks for the public to view).

Of course, the Times-Dispatch will hopefully (and likely) sue the city to get the information, because there is zero reason the public should not know who walked out with a million bucks from the city treasury. Zero.

Last year in Portsmouth, VA, the Virginian Pilot asked for and received severance package information without any issue; they found more than $800,000 of severance checks had been issued in the previous five years. The Pilot later discovered that amount was actually about $1 million because incomplete information had been provided. Portsmouth City Hall was apologetic for their error, not indignant like Richmond.

The incomplete disclosure was an unintentional oversight, according to city spokesperson Dana Woodson, who said in an email that it was “the City’s good faith belief that all relevant records were provided at the time.” As a result of the error, the city is now working to purchase a records management system to better track Freedom of Information Act requests.

The error also prompted City Manager Steven Carter to apologize on the city’s behalf, noting the city “stumbled” in its attempt to respond to the FOIA request.

In a separate statement provided this week, Carter said the city strives to be as transparent and accountable as possible when responding to information requests.

When Portsmouth is outshining and outperforming you in being cordial and transparent and responding to FOIA requests, you know you have a lot of work to do. Now is the time for the new Mayor to begin to re-examine and reinvigorate the FOIA operation and the spirit of transparency at Richmond City Hall and let in the sunshine.

When Stoney came to City Hall in 2017, he released the previous administration’s severance information that he had nothing to do with and did so without worry or delay. So did Wilder in 2005. In fact, it made them look better and their predecessors look worse.

Now, all of a sudden, the city and Stoney loyalists still in City Hall are trying to say there is a legal reason for keeping the information from the public. Maybe because it will be used against Stoney in his bid for Lt. Governor, who knows. But forget for a moment about the political cover, lame legal reasoning (or lack thereof), or the almost certain Times-Dispatch legal action to reveal the records.

Like the water crisis, which was a ticking bomb long before the new mayor took office, Stoney’s selfish severance payments were made without Avula’s knowledge and set in motion weeks before he took the oath. The simplest solution (and easiest political win) for Mayor Avula would be to do what both Wilder and Stoney did — just release the information. The Mayor can do that (and history proves it). Prove that honesty and transparency are paramount to running this government if you want to start to earn back the trust of the city residents.

Avula could also pledge today, like Wilder did in 2005, that no one in his Administration will receive a severance when he leaves the Mayor’s Office; it’s a simple one sentence statement. He is being given an open layup here to prove and demonstrate that he will be different type of mayor and the type of mayor we need — or he has a chance to offer cover for Stoney and his sidekicks, which will let the people know we are in for more of the same.

Jon Baliles is a former Richmond City Council member. This column has been republished with permission from his blog Richmond 5X5. Sign up this week & get 20% off!