Tampa CRA moves to formal application cycle for housing subsidies, sets RFA timeline and scoring framework

The Community Redevelopment Agency on Sept. 11 directed staff to move from a first‑come, first‑served approach to a structured application cycle for the CRA’s unit creation and conversion housing subsidy program and to return with a draft for board review on Nov. 13.

Staff presentation and proposed process: Bee Parks, CRA community development coordinator, presented a proposed two‑cycle Request for Applications (RFA) process, a 100‑point scoring rubric and a selection committee model. The proposal calls for a primary funding cycle with an RFA issued Jan. 15, a March 15 application deadline, CAC review in May and CRA board awards in June; a secondary cycle would start in July with later deadlines and approvals. Staff proposed a five‑member selection committee including CRA staff and CAC representation, 50‑year affordability terms on assisted units, reimbursement of funds on verified construction milestones and an appeals process for applicants.

Budget snapshot and allocations: During the presentation staff listed earmarked and budgeted amounts for the unit creation and conversion program (rollovers + FY26 budget) in multiple CRAs: East Tampa (combined total about $3.6 million), West Tampa (about $4.5 million), Drew Park (about $1.0 million for FY26), Central Park (about $1.194 million), Channelside (about $13.0 million), Downtown (about $26.0 million), Ybor City (about $3.8 million) and Tampa Heights (small amounts focused on down payment assistance and rehab). Staff said FY25 figures reflected rollovers from prior years and FY26 reflected newly budgeted funding; the presentation noted some pipeline projects already recommended by CACs but not yet formally approved by the CRA board.

Scoring and matrix: The draft scoring rubric weights alignment with CRA plans, affordability level (higher points for lower AMI), developer capacity, financial feasibility, schedule and project characteristics. Staff also showed a subsidy matrix with maximum per‑unit subsidy amounts (up to $250,000 per unit in some categories) and said those maxima mirror SHIP/state guidance used for planning; staff emphasized that reimbursements are tied to work completed rather than advance payments.

Public comment and board concerns: Public commenters, CAC chairs and community developers urged several changes and clarifications: more explicit recognition of legacy landowners and small local developers (site control scored higher), stronger points or incentives for green building, clearer pathways for predevelopment assistance, and specific protections to mitigate displacement. Ernest Coney Jr., CEO of the CDC of Tampa, advised setting expectations by example: “the grant may be you can apply for up to $5,000,000, but the average is a million dollars,” and recommended communicating an average per‑unit subsidy as well as the maximum.

Board members asked staff to clarify terms in public materials and to better distinguish between funds that are budgeted/earmarked and funds already formally approved. The board and several public speakers also raised governance questions: how selection committee members will be chosen, whether more than one CAC representative should sit on the committee, and stronger milestone/deadline enforcement to avoid long delays or opportunistic “build‑stabilize‑sell” development strategies that could erode long‑term affordability. Staff acknowledged state permitting extensions related to hurricane relief can affect construction schedules and said disbursements will be milestone‑based.

Board action and next steps: The CRA moved and approved a motion to adopt the concept for the proposed application structure and direct staff to present a draft program and materials at the Nov. 13 CRA meeting; the motion also included a direction to allow public comment at that November presentation and to collect written feedback in advance via email. Staff provided a contact email for written comments: be.parks@tampagov.net. The CRA additionally approved scheduling a commercial grants funding policy community meeting on Oct. 13 and directed staff to return in November with the commercial policy update and public comment opportunity.

Ending: The board’s direction to formalize application cycles and scoring marks a shift to a more structured and transparent allocation of CRA housing subsidies across multiple redevelopment areas. Staff will refine draft scoring criteria, selection committee composition and award terms and return to the board in November with materials for formal adoption.