Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown P3 Referendum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Boca Raton council approves ballot language for March vote on downtown P3
Summary
After a daylong presentation by city staff and independent consultants, the Boca Raton City Council voted 4–1 to transmit a March 10, 2026 referendum on a proposed public‑private partnership and 99‑year ground lease covering 7.8 acres east of Northwest 2nd Avenue.
The Boca Raton City Council voted 4–1 on Dec. 2 to send a referendum to the March 10, 2026 ballot asking voters to ratify agreements that would lease 7.8 acres of downtown city land for a 99‑year mixed‑use development and to fund related public improvements.
The question approved by the council says the agreements would create a walkable, mixed‑use district with residential, retail, office and hotel uses; it says those projected revenues would help fund enhancements to city property including Memorial Park and new civic facilities. Mayor Scott Singer and four council members backed the language; Council member Andy Thompson voted no, saying the summary still tilted ‘‘toward the positive’’ and that he preferred a more neutral formulation.
Why it matters: The resolution (No. 180‑2025) formally transmits ballot language to the supervisor of elections and sets the referendum before voters in March. The ballot wording is limited to 75 words under Florida election rules; council members spent several hours debating whether to include projected revenues, program details and preservation language, and they amended city‑drafted text live in the chamber before voting.
City staff and independent consultants from PFM Group briefed the council before the vote. Jim Zervas, the city’s chief financial officer and deputy city manager, and Kevin Pledzler of PFM presented scenarios showing the project’s projected long‑term taxable value and an example financing path. PFM estimated project proceeds available for bonding at about $114 million in the first 30 years and reported a net present value (NPV) to the city of roughly $138.2 million under its scenario 4, excluding uncertain percentage‑rent or upside profit streams. "PFM's engagement was intended to meet the Florida P3 statute and to stress‑test revenues and costs," Zervas said.
Public comment was extensive and sharply divided. Residents, independent analysts and local professionals raised doubts about the assumptions in both developer and city models, questioned an appraisal of the 7.8 acres released that day, and warned the ballot summary omitted trade‑offs such as upfront city costs and parking or traffic impacts. Several speakers praised PFM’s independent review; others argued the city’s use of nondiscounted gross revenue figures in outreach materials was misleading.
What happens next: Adoption means staff will transmit the approved 75‑word ballot summary to the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections for placement on the March 10, 2026 municipal ballot. The council and staff stressed that regulatory reviews (site plan, traffic and environmental studies) still must occur before any construction permits are issued, and that details may change during subsequent negotiations.
The council also voted to continue a separate quasi‑judicial planning item to Dec. 16 so members and the public can review outstanding materials and allow staff and the applicant to respond to additional questions. The referendum transmittal does not itself authorize construction; it only offers voters the opportunity to ratify the described agreement package.
