Hallandale Beach commissioners direct review of CRA as state legislation threatens future projects

Hallandale Beach commissioners voted 4-0 March 25 to direct the city manager to work with Community Redevelopment Agency staff to prepare options, timelines and cost estimates for the CRA’s future, including scenarios for winding it down or converting its functions into a city department. The commission took the action at a special meeting called to discuss the CRA’s sunset and the potential effects of pending state legislation.

The review was prompted by two near-term constraints: the CRA’s statutory sunset date and proposed bills in the Florida Legislature that would limit or eliminate CRAs. The CRA’s statutory termination date is 09/30/2027 unless the commission acts to extend or otherwise modify the agency, and staff said the county’s final tax-increment financing (TIF) payment is expected on 01/01/2027. Under current rules, any TIF dollars received in 2027 must be encumbered within nine months or returned to the taxing authorities.

Why it matters: the CRA currently covers a large share of Hallandale Beach and funds programs and capital projects that staff and commissioners said support housing, neighborhood improvements and economic development. Staff presented financial and program data showing substantial recent activity: roughly $119 million in TIF was collected over the past eight years (the city’s share totaling about $64.2 million and Broward County contributing about $49.1 million), plus about $10.3 million in non-TIF revenue. Staff also said the CRA’s activity coincided with large property-value growth — staff cited a roughly 481% rise in assessed values over seven years and a 535% increase since the CRA’s base year — and named capital investments funded by a $20 million CRA loan for sidewalks, streetscapes and landscaping.

Options staff described include: letting the CRA sunset and transferring its assets and obligations to the city; extending the CRA but narrowing its boundaries or changing the TIF percentage so it relies only on city TIF (county TIF has not been provided to many CRAs since about 2010 except for affordable-housing-related funding); or retaining the CRA largely as-is but creating alternative departmental structures inside the city for redevelopment and economic development functions.

Staff cautioned that the county’s withdrawal of TIF support means a continuation of the CRA without county funds would leave the agency funded primarily by city TIF. Staff noted the CRA currently funds a variety of residential and commercial programs — including neighborhood improvement, first-time homebuyer assistance, a shutter program, senior mini-grants, façade and small-business grants, and commercial loan/assistance programs — and disbursed significant amounts in recent years to support those efforts. Staff also identified staffing and operational costs that would need to be addressed in any transition; one figure cited in discussion for ongoing CRA staffing was about $1.3 million annually.

Commissioners repeatedly raised two themes: preserve programs and staff where possible, and ensure the city retains a mechanism to pursue affordable housing and economic development. Several commissioners asked staff to develop concrete budget scenarios that show the cost of continuing core residential programs (staff suggested a ballpark of $5 million annually to preserve a set of residential assistance programs citywide) versus the costs and timing of sunsetting the CRA and transferring assets and obligations to the city. Commissioners also requested that staff analyze what happens to CRA-owned real property and restrictive covenants on affordable units if the CRA entity is closed and assets are conveyed to the city.

State legislation and timing: commissioners and staff discussed House Bill 991 and Senate Bill 1242, bills under consideration at the time of the meeting that, as drafted and described by staff, would limit CRAs’ ability to initiate new projects or issue new debt after an autumn deadline and could bar CRA extensions in some forms. Staff also referenced Senate Bill 184 (ADU statute change) in the context of housing policy. Staff urged the commission to consider whether needed projects should be programmed and encumbered now to avoid being blocked by potential state action.

Votes at a glance: the commission adopted a motion directing the city manager to work with CRA leadership to prepare options, timelines and cost estimates for (a) winding down the CRA, (b) converting CRA functions into a city department or other alternative structures, and (c) addressing near-term actions needed should state legislation take effect. The motion passed 4-0 with Commissioner Lima Taub (mover), Vice Mayor Lazaro (second), and affirmative recorded votes from Commissioner Lima Taub, Mary Cooper, Commissioner Adams and Vice Mayor Lazaro; Commissioner Butler was absent.

Staff next steps and timeline: the commission directed the city manager to return with a formal work plan, including scenario analyses and cost estimates, recognizing that some state proposals could accelerate the timeframe for action. Several commissioners asked for a return within roughly a month on framework options so the manager can reflect direction in the coming budget cycle, and to provide a more detailed report to the commission and the CRA board at subsequent meetings.

The special meeting included a single public-comment item earlier in the agenda; a resident raised a permitting and code-enforcement issue and staff offered to meet with the resident after the meeting to address the complaint. The commission adjourned after the motion passed.