Community Parks Revitalization Act
Sponsored By: Representative Menendez, Robert [D-NJ-8]
Introduced
Summary
Creates a Community Parks Revitalization Program to rebuild and expand local parks and a smaller federal credit program to attract private investment. The bill sets up competitive grants for construction, innovation, and local recovery planning with matching rules and federal oversight.
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
4 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 2 mixed.
Competitive grants to rebuild local parks
If enacted, HUD would run a competitive grant program for parks. Local governments could get funds to rebuild or expand parks, add safety features, or run new recreation programs; routine maintenance would not be covered. Nonprofits could receive transferred funds if they serve the whole community. Projects that help dense or disadvantaged areas, veterans, people with disabilities, and add green features would get priority. Applicants would need a park recovery plan (a draft at first, then a 5‑year plan) and could receive progress payments, with advances up to 20% of project cost.
Low-cost loans for parks and trails
If enacted, HUD could offer loans or guarantees to help finance parks, community centers, and trail projects, including planning and construction. Projects would generally need at least $20 million in eligible costs and investment‑grade senior debt. Federal loans could cover up to 49% of eligible costs, and total federal help could not exceed 80% of total cost. Interest would be at least the Treasury rate and fixed, with terms up to 35 years; repayments would start within five years, and prepayment without penalty would be allowed. Congress would authorize $50 million each year for fiscal years 2026–2030 (up to $2.2 million for administration) to support these loans and guarantees.
Park grants: local match and caps
If enacted, most grants would require a local match of at least 3/7 of the federal amount. Planning grants would need a 100% match, but the Secretary would waive matches for rural or hard‑pressed places. States that chip in could trigger extra federal money equal to the State match, up to 15% of project cost, but total federal support could not exceed 85% of the project. Congress could fund the program for fiscal years 2026–2035, with yearly caps of 10% for innovation grants, 3% for recovery‑plan grants, and 2% for insular‑area grants.
Guardrails and reporting for park grants
If enacted, recipients would file yearly reports, keep records, and allow audits; repeated reporting failures could lead to losing funds. Getting federal money would not replace State or local permits or approvals. Land improved with these grants could not be converted to other uses without HUD’s approval and a replacement site of similar use and location.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Menendez, Robert [D-NJ-8]
NJ • D
Cosponsors
Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]
MI • D
Sponsored 8/15/2025
Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2]
LA • D
Sponsored 8/15/2025
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
DC • D
Sponsored 8/15/2025
Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]
NJ • D
Sponsored 8/15/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov