Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Governance Legislation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Delray Beach CRA adopts resolution urging legislature to oppose bills limiting CRAs

2777099 · March 26, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The CRA board approved a resolution urging state legislators to vote against HB 991 and SB 1242, measures the agency said could curtail CRA operations; the board voted unanimously to adopt the resolution and authorized sending materials to Tallahassee.

The Delray Beach Community Redevelopment Agency voted unanimously March 25 to adopt Resolution 2025‑06 urging the Florida Legislature to vote against House Bill 991 and Senate Bill 1242, measures the board said would restrict the operations and authorities of community redevelopment agencies statewide.

The resolution passed by recorded voice vote after a brief staff summary. Commissioners voted in favor as follows: Commissioner Long — yes; Chair Carney — yes; Vice Chair Burns — yes; Deputy Vice Chair Markert — yes; Commissioner Cassell — yes.

Executive Director Renee Jaddising told the board she traveled to Tallahassee earlier in the session to meet with the Palm Beach County delegation and other representatives and that staff prepared a one‑ to two‑page summary of CRAs’ fiscal impacts to share with legislators. Jaddising said staff would send the adopted resolution and the fiscal one‑pager to legislators and would continue to coordinate with CRA trade groups and county delegates.

Board members expressed concern about perceived overreach in the draft legislation and emphasized the importance of educating legislators on how CRAs operate. As the board discussed, staff said the county delegation has generally been supportive and that the CRA would focus outreach on more skeptical legislators elsewhere in the state.

The board’s action was procedural approval of the resolution; no ordinance or other binding development approvals were attached to the vote.