Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cra Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
East Tampa volunteers say CRA process and materials arrive too late for meaningful review
Summary
Members and volunteers active in the East Tampa Community Redevelopment Area told council they receive large agenda packets late in the week and cannot properly vet million‑dollar proposals, and they asked for independent management of CRA operations.
Volunteers on the East Tampa CRA advisory board told the council they routinely receive large agenda packets on Friday nights and are expected to make decisions on complex, multi‑million‑dollar proposals the following Tuesday.
Speakers said the timing deprives neighborhood representatives of time to consult constituents and requested an independent manager for CRA operations or improved timelines and packet transparency.
Allison Hewitt, an East Tampa resident and business owner, told councilors the CAC had received an agenda item with 131 pages after 5:30 p.m. on a Friday and was then expected to render a decision on a $9.7 million request at the Tuesday meeting. “That is not even enough time to take it back to the community to make sure that when they sit at the CAC, they can bring the opinions of the neighborhood associations they represent,” she said.
Fran Tate, a longtime CAC member and former chair, described the same meeting as a “nightmare,” noting volunteers are unpaid, often have daytime jobs, and lack training in economic development and budgeting. She and other speakers asked the council to require staff to deliver materials earlier and to offer technical assistance so community members can meaningfully participate.
Speakers also criticised the operating agreement that currently oversees CRA staff, describing it as permissive and urging the council to consider an independent administrator to reduce perceived conflicts and improve responsiveness to neighborhoods.
Council members heard the concerns but did not take immediate action during the public‑comment segment. CAC members repeatedly asked for more time and clearer staff processes; the council agreed to consider changes to notices and packet delivery but did not announce a timeline during the meeting.
