Riviera Beach CRA debates draft land-disposition policy after recent sale and legal questions

The Riviera Beach Community Redevelopment Agency on Feb. 11 considered a draft policy to guide disposition of CRA-owned land, with commissioners warning the document currently hands too much authority to staff and advisory committees and not enough to the board.

The draft was presented as a procedural framework to govern sales, leases and other conveyances as the CRA prepares to dispose of remaining property. Executive Director Bridal Mercius and CRA counsel Chris Smith said the document is a draft for discussion and could be revised and returned for formal adoption at a future meeting.

Commissioner Spiritus said the draft appears to allow staff and advisory committees to make final selections and urged stronger language to ensure the CRA board retains ultimate decision-making authority. "This proposal gives all the authority to the staff and not to the CRA board," Spiritus said, arguing the text lets staff present a single recommended agreement without making other proposals available to the board.

Other commissioners questioned specific evaluation criteria in the draft. Commissioner Guyton urged that intended use and community compatibility be weighted ahead of price, warning that putting price first could result in sales that clash with neighborhood character. He asked that ‘‘use’’ be listed before ‘‘price’’ in the ranking of evaluation factors.

Commissioners also objected to subjective-sounding criteria, such as evaluating a respondent’s current and projected workload. Counsel said workload is meant to be one of several considerations for the evaluation committee and is not dispositive. Staff and attorneys said they would tighten the language to reduce subjectivity.

Public commenter Nakasha Wells said the board had followed staff recommendations without scrutiny in a recent disposition and asked whether a legal opinion requested on Dec. 10 had been provided to the full board. "Staff made the evaluation criteria. Staff determined the relative weight of that criteria, which was not exposed to the proposers at the time that the proposals were actually submitted," Wells said, urging greater transparency and adherence to solicitation rules.

Executive Director Bridal Mercius said a legal opinion dated Jan. 12 had been provided to board members and referenced a state statute in the opinion. CRA counsel Chris Smith confirmed in the meeting that he had sent a letter dated Jan. 12 to the chair and had it disseminated to commissioners; he said the prior disposition is legally defensible under the statute cited but agreed to re-send the opinion immediately after the meeting to ensure all members have the document.

The board directed staff and counsel to refine the draft to make explicit that the CRA board—not staff—will make final disposition decisions, to tighten subjective criteria, and to circulate the legal opinion to every commissioner. No formal vote on the draft policy was taken; the item will return for possible adoption after revisions.

Meeting records show the board approved the meeting agenda and the consent agenda earlier in the session (agenda vote passed 5–0; consent passed 4–0).