Apopka CRA races to budget trail, parks and home-repair projects as state bills threaten new work after Oct. 1

Apopka’s Community Redevelopment Agency met Nov. 6 to examine a proposed project list and to prioritize spending after state bills that would sharply limit CRA powers were filed in Tallahassee.

“We're here this evening to discuss House Bill 9 91 and senate bill 12 42,” said Bobby Howell, planning manager and interim executive director for the CRA, opening the presentation on the items staff recommended to close out or accelerate if the legislation takes effect.

Those bills, Howell said, would “limit the powers of CRAs” and — in the worst-case scenario the agency discussed — would prevent CRAs from initiating new projects after Oct. 1, 2025 unless the project was fully budgeted or otherwise exempt. Cliff Shepherd, who identified himself as the FRA attorney of record, told the board that the situation was unsettled in the legislature and counsel advised a conservative planning approach. “For today's purposes you should plan as if you're not going to get to go any more past this year,” Shepherd said.

Why it matters: Apopka’s CRA relies largely on tax-increment financing (TIF) revenues that the city now receives as rebates from the county. If the legislature restricts CRAs’ ability to start or budget new projects, the city could be required to return unspent CRA funds to the county rather than reallocate them locally. That would halt or delay capital work under active consideration, including a multi-phase downtown trail, several park upgrades and property acquisitions.

What staff presented: Howell and CRA staff (Radley and Blanche) walked the board through a proposed list intended to “close out” or accelerate work if the bills pass in their current form. Items discussed included: - Completion of the Downtown Apopka Trail to Alabama Avenue and a Central Avenue segment of the trail (trail work was shown as a multi-phase item on staff slides). - City Hall pocket park (benches/seating near a bakery on Station Street). - Upgrades at the Apopka Action Sports Park (pump track/skate park) including ADA parking, sidewalk, pavilion and water features. - Alonzo Williams Park: court rebuild, a 20-by-28 pavilion and landscaping; possible property acquisition to expand the park (staff reported outreach to the owner, Quest Foundation/Quest, with no firm response to date). - Edwards Field: irrigation improvements and new courts (basketball/pickleball); separate line items were discussed for courts ($150,000) and for fencing/sod/beautification (approximately $305,000 as presented). - Signal and pedestrian upgrades at Fifth and Central avenues, including crosswalks and signal push buttons. - An Eighth Street replat and a small 0.82-acre pocket park (4 lots) brought back for an up-or-down plat vote at the CRA’s request.

Budget context and constraints: Staff said the CRA operating budget figure under discussion is roughly $4,000,004 (presented as $4,000,004.71xx in staff materials) and that the proposed list of projects, as presented, exceeds available funds. Shepherd said the legislature’s proposed amendment (which had been pulled at the time of the meeting) would, in one draft, allow new projects only if they were fully paid off by the agency’s termination date (one amendment under discussion would set a closing date for all CRAs in 2045). He emphasized that while the legislature cannot constitutionally invalidate debt-service obligations tied to bond covenants, project-authority rules are narrower and under scrutiny.

Staff and board guidance: Shepherd advised the board to plan conservatively and to prioritize projects that can be budgeted and at least put under contract or approved as projects before Oct. 1 under the worst-case bill language. Board members repeatedly asked whether money already budgeted or encumbered (for example, for facade or permit-refund programs) would be usable; Shepherd replied that funds already budgeted and approved as projects in the current fiscal year could be used, while new awards after Oct. 1 could be barred under the strict scenario. Staff said that if a project could not proceed before the cutoff, the unspent money could be returned to the county.

Resident concerns and program debate: Several residents urged the CRA to direct more dollars to homeowners in the CRA area (board members and staff stated there are roughly 459 homes in the CRA footprint as cited by public speakers). Member Anderson proposed increasing the residential renovation assistance allocation from the $10,000 staff identified in the preliminary budget to $250,000 and said the long-standing per-applicant cap (a $1,000 limit established in 2017) should be raised. Board members and staff discussed a range of per-applicant figures raised during the meeting — $10,000, $15,000 and $20,000 were mentioned in discussion — and debated whether to require a contractor match or how many competitive bids to require. By the end of the conversation, multiple members expressed support for increasing the pool for residents; board members also discussed changing the three-quote requirement to two quotes for larger per-applicant grants to speed execution, and staff volunteered to return with specific budget amendment language.

Public comment amplified equity concerns: Members of the public urged prioritizing resident-facing grants over downtown business incentives. Mario Hicks urged the CRA to allocate $1 million to help homeowners in the CRA district; Reverend Jimmy Howard and others said they wanted infrastructure and lighting on the south side of town and more attention to historically under-resourced neighborhoods. Staff and several board members acknowledged the community’s concerns and said outreach and clearer program marketing would be necessary to increase resident participation.

Property-acquisition briefing: A Quest representative (Kyle Becker, chair of the Quest board) confirmed the nonprofit had been contacted by city staff about a parcel adjacent to its adult training center but that the Quest board had not voted to surplus or sell property. He said the board would discuss the inquiry at its next meeting and that any disposition would follow Quest’s board process.

Next steps and staff direction: The CRA did not adopt final project changes at the meeting. Board members directed staff to prepare budget amendment options, prioritize projects that can be budgeted and put under contract before Oct. 1 if necessary, and to bring a revised list to a follow-up public meeting. The board set a follow-up workshop for next Wednesday at 6:00 p.m. to refine allocations and solicit resident input. At the start of the meeting the CRA also approved the minutes from the Nov. 6, 2024, packet; that motion was made by Member Draco, seconded by Member Smith and carried unanimously.

Quotes

“The list of projects was proposed to close out the CRA if this bill becomes law,” Bobby Howell said during the presentation.

“For today's purposes you should plan as if you're not going to get to go any more past this year,” Cliff Shepherd told the board about legislative uncertainty.

“I’m proposing that we increase the amount from $10,000 to $250,000,” Member Anderson told the board when arguing for a larger residential renovation fund.

“I believe it would be in the best interest of this commission to increase that budget to at least $1,000,000,” said resident Mario Hicks in public comment, urging a larger homeowner pool.

Ending

The CRA left its list and numbers flexible and asked staff to return with concrete budget amendment language and timelines. The board set a follow-up workshop for next Wednesday at 6 p.m. to refine a final package the CRA could implement quickly if the legislation passes in its current (worst-case) form.