Is Danny Avula the Right Mayor for Richmond?

Richmond has heard what Danny Avula inherited. Now it should judge what he is doing about it.

Danny Avula has been mayor long enough for Richmond to ask a question more important than what he inherited:

Is he the right mayor to solve it?

This isn't about whether Avula is intelligent, compassionate or sincere.

It's about leadership and results.

The Diamond District has been plagued by delays and litigation. Utility billing problems affected thousands. Richmond Public Schools needs enormous investment. Downtown continues to struggle. The Coliseum remains closed while demolition moves forward without the standalone competition that could establish whether renovation or reuse makes economic sense. And the sweeping Code Refresh zoning overhaul is generating enough opposition that citizens are pursuing petitions to force the issue before voters.

Meanwhile, Richmond is asking taxpayers for more.

The question isn't whether Richmond has problems.

It's whether Avula is demonstrating that he can solve them.

The Diamond District: Avula Owns the Bet Now

Avula didn't negotiate the Diamond District deal.

But he has defended continuing it.

In March 2026, Axios Richmond reported that Avula said he would not have walked away from the deal even if he had been mayor when it was negotiated.

He called Richmond's investment a “pretty good bet.”

But Richmond isn't playing with Monopoly money.

The project involves substantial public financial commitments and taxpayer exposure. Avula himself acknowledged that Richmond carries more risk. A risk that equals $130M.

Now the Richmond Flying Squirrels' ownership has sued the city and the Diamond District developer over alleged breaches associated with the project.

That doesn't mean taxpayer-backed debt has become a taxpayer loss. But it does mean Avula can't have it both ways.

He cannot say he inherited the deal, say he would have continued it anyway, call it a “pretty good bet,” and then leave responsibility entirely with the previous administration when problems emerge.

Avula inherited the hand. He chose to keep playing it.

Richmond gets to judge the result.

Utility Billing: The Basic Competence Test

Then came utility billing.

Thousands of customers were affected by account and payment-processing problems following implementation of Richmond's new billing system.

Forget the technology jargon.

City sends bill.

Resident pays bill.

City credits payment.

That's basic government.

Yet Richmonders were left questioning whether payments were properly posted and balances were accurate.

The full taxpayer cost of correcting those problems hasn't been publicly established. But the management question remains:

How did thousands of residents effectively become City Hall's quality-control department?

A mayor doesn't operate billing software.

But a mayor is responsible for an administration capable of making government work.

Schools Need Money. Where Is the Growth?

Richmond Public Schools faces massive facilities needs.

Avula supports an additional one-cent sales tax to help finance school construction.

Maybe voters decide it's necessary.

But before asking Richmonders for another penny, City Hall should answer another question:

Where is the aggressive strategy for generating new recurring revenue?

Where is the dramatic expansion of Richmond's commercial tax base?

Where is the downtown revival strategy?

Where are the transformative economic-development projects?

Raising taxes creates revenue.

That's arithmetic.

Growing the city creates revenue too. That's leadership.

Richmond needs a mayor who can do more than identify needs and find another tax to pay for them.

The Coliseum: Why Not Test the Market?

The Richmond Coliseum has been closed since 2019.

Avula didn't close it.

But he now leads the city deciding whether it disappears.

Virginia has provided $15 million specifically to support demolition, and Avula has pushed an aggressive timeline for moving forward.

Yet one fundamental question remains unanswered:

Why hasn't Richmond issued a standalone competitive RFP for the Coliseum before making an irreversible decision?

Invite developers, arena operators, entertainment companies and private capital.

Ask for renovation, reuse and redevelopment proposals.

Maybe nobody produces a viable plan.

Then Richmond would know.

But while City Hall argues that it desperately needs additional revenue, it should be aggressively testing the economic potential of assets taxpayers already own.

Before asking Richmonders for another penny, prove you've explored every reasonable opportunity to generate one.

Code Refresh: Leadership Also Means Listening

Then there is Code Refresh, Richmond's sweeping rewrite of its zoning ordinance.

The administration argues that the overhaul can increase housing supply, improve affordability and modernize rules that haven't been comprehensively rewritten in decades.

Those are legitimate goals.

But a proposal this consequential demands a process Richmonders trust.

Opposition has grown enough that citizens are circulating petitions seeking a referendum on the zoning overhaul.

That doesn't prove Code Refresh is bad policy.

It proves something else:

A meaningful group of Richmonders doesn't believe City Council approval alone provides enough public consent for a change this sweeping.

Legal and procedural questions matter too. The City Attorney's role is to advise Richmond's elected and administrative leadership on what the law permits and requires. Where that legal advice conflicts with an administration's preferred timetable, it should be treated as a guardrail, not an inconvenience.

We've already seen tension over timelines and legal interpretation during the administration's handling of the medical 911 transfer.

Code Refresh is even more consequential.

If residents believe the process is moving too quickly, petitions are circulating to force a vote, and legitimate legal or procedural questions remain, the answer shouldn't simply be to race toward the finish line.

Slow down. Answer the questions. Make the case.

Richmond will live with these zoning rules long after Danny Avula leaves City Hall.

Getting them right matters more than getting them done quickly.

Avula Wants Another Term. Start the Scorecard Now.

This isn't merely an academic debate.

Avula has already publicly indicated that he intends to seek reelection in 2028.

That makes the question of his performance even more important.

A second term shouldn't be granted because the first wasn't long enough to finish the job.

It should be earned because the first demonstrated that the job is getting done.

Before 2028, Richmond should keep a scorecard.

Is City Hall functioning better?

Are utility bills reliable?

Is downtown improving?

Is the tax base growing?

Is the Diamond District delivering on Avula's “pretty good bet”?

Was the right decision made about the Coliseum after genuinely testing alternatives?

Did Code Refresh produce better housing policy through a process residents trusted?

And when citizens demanded a greater voice, did their mayor listen?

So, Is Danny Avula the Right Mayor?

Avula unquestionably inherited serious problems.

The water system didn't deteriorate overnight. The Diamond District predates him. The Coliseum was already closed. Richmond's school buildings weren't neglected during a single administration.

But every mayor inherits somebody else's government.

Eventually, it becomes theirs.

Avula's strengths are apparent. He communicates well, emphasizes empathy and speaks comfortably about housing, education and inequality.

But Richmond's problems require something else too:

Execution.

Can he get the Diamond District under control?

Can he restore confidence in basic city services?

Can he significantly expand Richmond's tax base?

Can he revive downtown?

Can he manage public assets intelligently?

Can he pursue major policy changes while genuinely listening to citizens who disagree?

And can he demonstrate that asking taxpayers for more money is the last option rather than the first?

Danny Avula inherited a difficult city government.

But Richmond didn't elect him merely to explain what was broken.

Richmond elected him to fix it.

The inheritance has been documented.

The explanations have been heard.

The initiatives have been announced.

Now Richmond needs results.

And because Avula already wants another term, the question voters should begin asking isn't whether four years is enough time.

It's much simpler:

What has actually gotten better?

Don't tell Richmond why you need eight years.

Show Richmond what you accomplished with the first four.

Then let the voters decide whether Danny Avula is the right mayor for four more.

Brian K. Telfair
Publisher & Editor | The Richmond Chronicle

Independent commentary and investigative analysis on Richmond government, public spending, economic development, and the decisions shaping the city’s future.

The Richmond Chronicle
Asking the questions City Hall would rather not answer.