Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Marina Annex topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riviera Beach CRA approves $2.8 million contribution for Marina Annex workforce housing
Summary
The CRA board voted to provide up to $2.8 million in fee and connection relief to the Marina Annex workforce housing project after presentations from developers and partners; the approval includes negotiated deadlines, milestones and verification steps and passed 4–0.
Get email alerts on the Marina Annex topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers seeking relief for the Marina Annex workforce housing project told the Riviera Beach Community Redevelopment Agency board that the project would bring 175 middle‑income units, 15,000 square feet of community space and local retail, and asked the CRA to cover roughly $2.8 million in city impact and water/sewer connection fees.
"These fees are approximately $2,800,000," said Terry Booty, co‑president of Marina Housing Annex LLC, during a presentation to the board. He said impact fees are due at construction start and connection fees later in the schedule, and that the project expects to break ground at the end of the year.
The developers said the financing stack includes a $53 million federal loan through PGIM and $15 million in county gap financing. Alfred Fields, president of the Alpha Educational Foundation, described a 15,000‑square‑foot community center on site and said the project would prioritize local leasing and workforce preference for teachers, first responders and health care workers.
Vice Chair Spiritis, who supported the request, said the CRA was formed to enable projects like this. "We have an opportunity now, to provide 175 units to those people that work for the city," Spiritis said, adding that the community center and other public benefits would return value to the city.
Opponents and skeptical commissioners raised three central concerns: (1) whether a for‑profit joint venture should receive CRA subsidy when the housing authority is a partner, (2) whether the CRA’s budget and other slum‑and‑blight needs would be shortchanged by a large payment, and (3) whether the city’s prior land contribution had already represented a substantial in‑kind investment. Commissioner Miller Anderson asked why the housing authority had no representative present and questioned whether the for‑profit partner should be asking for public relief.
City staff said the CRA has an appraised land value for the assemblage and that the city’s prior contributions would be quantified; Executive Director Jadel Mercius told commissioners he would provide the city’s figures on land value following the meeting.
After debate the board approved a motion — amended to require appropriate deadlines, milestones and verification opportunities and to authorize the executive director to negotiate and execute the agreement consistent with those conditions — to provide the $2.8 million contribution. The amended motion passed 4 to 0; one commissioner who was online declined to vote on the amendment.
The vote carried the instruction that the CRA negotiate terms that limit price escalations, protect affordability for the stated term of the land‑use restrictive agreement, and include verification steps to confirm funds are used for the stated public benefits. The board also asked staff to return with explicit affordability riders and enforceable milestones.
Next steps: staff will prepare a negotiated agreement incorporating the board’s riders and milestones for consideration and final authorization as required.

