Volusia County Council approves 10-year extension for Holly Hill CRA with stormwater and LPGA projects prioritized

Volusia County Council voted 4-2 on June 2 to approve a 10-year extension and modification request for the Holly Hill Community Redevelopment Area, subject to a council directive that county tax-increment funds flow first to stormwater and LPGA Boulevard infrastructure projects.

The council’s vote followed a presentation from Claire Irvin, director of Growth and Resource Management, and testimony from Mayor Penny of Holly Hill. Irvin described the CRA mechanism under Florida statute and said Holly Hill asked to extend its CRA past a December 2026 deadline so it could continue unfinished projects within the roughly 755-acre district.

The extension drew sharp debate. Councilman Kent moved to approve the extension; Vice Chair Reinhardt seconded. During discussion Councilman Santiago argued the county should step away from CRAs and urged cities to pay using their millage room. Councilman Robbins and Councilman Johansen supported the extension, saying Holly Hill has shown measurable redevelopment progress and the tools would help finish infrastructure projects. A roll call showed Councilman Robbins, Councilman Johansen, Councilman Kent and Vice Chair Reinhardt voting yes; Councilman Santiago and Councilman Brower voted no.

Mayor Penny said the CRA work remains critical to his city. “I think it’s a 10 out of 10,” Mayor Penny said, when asked how important the extension is to Holly Hill’s ability to complete economic-development and infrastructure work. He told the council the city sees stormwater as its top immediate need.

Council members who opposed the extension cited countywide budget pressure and a desire to follow the state legislature’s trend of curtailing CRAs. Councilman Santiago noted projected general-fund shortfalls and said the county should focus limited general revenue on countywide services rather than continuing TIF diversions to multiple CRAs.

To build a majority comfortable with approval, the council required a written directive to be appended to the resolution directing that any county TIF contribution “must be used solely for the direct cost of publicly owned capital projects identified for infrastructure enhancements,” and that Priority A2 (address flooding and runoff/water quality) and Priority A1 (LPGA Boulevard improvements) be funded before other CRA priorities listed in Table 5 of Holly Hill’s plan. Councilmembers said staff would insert clear language reflecting that requirement into the resolution text to document the council’s direction.

The budget impact was discussed in detail. Finance staff told the council the extension would mean roughly $1 million per year in county contributions at current rates if the county continues the TIF contribution in the same form; that amount is charged against general revenue in the draft resolution before the council. Several council members pressed whether Holly Hill could raise local millage instead or whether alternative funding sources (state stormwater grants, Transform 386, utility grants, economic-development reserves) could cover stormwater priorities.

The council also emphasized that the extension and county contribution are discretionary, and that Holly Hill must pursue outside grants and other programs as well. Staff and councilmembers repeatedly noted a statutory window (120 days from April 16) for the county’s final action unless both governments agree to extend the decision date.

Ending: The council approved the extension 4-2 while directing county funds toward stormwater remediation and LPGA Boulevard improvements first. Council members and city officials said they expect follow-up briefing language and a finalized resolution to reflect the council’s stated priorities before the county’s administrative action is completed.