Residents press Boca Raton council to halt ‘government campus’ P3 and demand better outreach

Dozens of residents spoke at the Boca Raton City Council meeting on Sept. 22, pressing elected officials to stop or substantially revise a proposed public–private “government campus” redevelopment and criticizing the city’s public-engagement approach.

Martha Parker, who identified herself as a neighborhood resident, told the council the city had performed an “incomplete and just flat-out terrible job on the public outreach” and said staff appeared ill-equipped to negotiate a large land conveyance without a full appraisal and stronger community consultation. Parker urged the council to preserve public land and asked council members who received campaign contributions from a named developer backer (Tara Frisbie) to return them, saying the donations created an appearance of pay-to-play.

John Perlman, another resident, said the city had used its citywide email list to direct residents to developer-hosted materials and to prefilled forms on a developer website rather than showing the community the breadth of opposition captured in a notarized petition. He called the city email language “misleading” and asked the council to send a more balanced message.

Other speakers, including Jonathan Unjian and Alexandra Abillo, urged council members to structure upcoming charrettes so they are not dominated by the developer and so they can earn trust from residents who currently oppose the project. Abillo said she had been canvassing and warned that electoral consequences could follow if residents feel ignored.

City staff responded to specific procedural questions: Mr. Brown explained that an appraisal requires a defined property and proposed uses and that staff cannot reasonably determine value until plans are more clearly defined. The mayor and staff also noted that earlier acreage figures discussed publicly (31, 18 acres) may overstate the actual acreage under consideration. The chair clarified that the citywide email referenced “interest in the project,” not support, and that the city invited residents of all views to the charrettes.

Procedurally, council approved a motion—moved and seconded during the meeting—to postpone agenda items 11B1 and 11B2 to the second November meeting (Nov. 18, 2025). The council did not take a final policy vote on the government campus at this meeting.

What’s next: The council directed that public charrettes continue and scheduled the postponed items for the Nov. 18 meeting; staff said they will provide further project details, including a refined property description required for appraisal.