Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item S08
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COUNTY of MONROE Mayor Michelle Lincoln,District 2 The Florida. Keys Mayor Pro Tem David Rice,District 4 p Craig Cates,District 1 James K.Scholl,District 3 Holly Merrill Raschein,District 5 Regular Meeting April 15, 2026 Agenda Item Number: S8 26-0753 BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Administration TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Christine Hurley AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Discussion and direction on Human Services Advisory Board (HSAB) non-profit funding for FY27; HSAB Resolution 232-2022 and Monroe County HSAB Grants and Grant Policies and Procedures documents; DOGE essential findings related to non-profit grant spending. TIME APPROXIMATE 11:00 A.M. ITEM BACKGROUND: The Human Services Advisory Board(HSAB) is charged with reviewing funding requests from non-profit, human service organizations and making recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)regarding the distribution of funding for health and human services among individual organizations. Each year the BOCC determines an amount of funding to designate for the HSAB. The five members of the HSAB are each appointed by a County Commissioner. In FY25, the Human Services Advisory Board recommended funding for a total 30 local non-profit organizations. The BOCC awarded $2,203,226 in funding to these groups. In FY26, the HSAB recommended funding for a total of 29 local non-profit organizations. The BOCC awarded a total of $1,101,613 in funding to these groups. With the recently released DOGE report, the County is requesting guidance from the BOCC on how to proceed with the HSAB program. Listed below are some potential options for the BOCC's review; OPTION 1: I.A. Maintain HSAB Resolution 232-2022 and Monroe County Human Services Advisory Board Grants and Grant Policies and Procedures, adopted August 30, 2012 at same level from FY26 $1,101,613 or reduced level of$550,806. I.B. Revise HSAB Resolution and Policies and Procedures to only fund medical and/or core services and implement funding sunset per FY26 budget deliberation 25%reduction for FY 27 to $550,806. OPTION 2: Begin the process of creating a Children's Service Council and fund remaining organizations through HSAB. OPTION 3: Increase Department of Health(DOH) millage to add an additional funding at $366,554 or less (BOCC TO DETERMINE) and allow DOH to decide and fund all non-profit medical based services under their Core Services Contract utilizing their annual millage. Increase funding to Community/Social Services at $602,758 or less (BOCC TO DETERMINE) for any non-profit partners that provide nutrition/utility support/transportation programs deemed necessary by Community Services Director. Rescind HSAB Resolution and Policies and Procedures at a future BOCC meeting and discontinue funding non-core services and quality of life programs under HSAB. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC approved funding for fiscal year 26 HSAB programs at their Budget Meeting on 9/10/2025. INSURANCE REQUIRED: No CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DOCUMENTATION: DOGE,HSAB, Discretionary Spending Presentation Resolution 232-2022 Replace 077-1991; 056-1992; 093a-2002 HSAB Policy Document App A-5 Audit Resolution 277-2009 FY25 &FY26 Budgeted Amounts Florida DOGE Report Non-Profit Funding REVISED 3.3.26 FINANCIAL IMPACT: Effective Date: Expiration Date: Total Dollar Value of Contract: Total Cost to County: Current Year Portion: Budgeted: Source of Funds: CPI: Indirect Costs: Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: Revenue If yes, amount: Producing: Grant: County Match: Insurance Required: a c � o N U C N �Yll�lllliii � n ulq�uuuuuJ` � uiii � puQlu���luuuuuumi : idiliiiilll��� r ' I�� ii I'�IIIIIIIIIIIIII C� iii�ill��ll�i�����ii d�luVl��lllll�llllllllllll O � } 0, p O - � o ° 0 a � a � E p } - O N O in � Z � Q � _ ' O " rrrr r /ia � � r /1, ✓' aaaa�;�i/iiiiiiiiiii raaaaij //� � allaaaaa////„//rrr/ir,rrrr 70 Of �a%%// Z o U - . �3 �- w CJ c ,,,,,, ,;..- io„rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr i � � �i rr, „r r i i i 000/ r„ r / O / rr r r r r rr ,,rrrr, rir i / rrrr rrrr rrrr r ,rrr.....r r r , r r r 1 r - rr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr � ii // o , i r a/,//rill ,,,,,, i .,rrr i ,, rr mmmmmil. ,'% rri/ ,,.... r �ll�rMelll riiiiii � // ri a rri rrrr 0111 1 Ili I Illm w , ( LO �u �-< CL OL CN t0 � � .� �IIIIIII J IIII I�illllllllll' UIII ii i IIIIIIIIIIIIII � � I� �U �b Ui IIIII Iliill m I�u�l�ll IIIIIIIIIIIIIII �' � ���::, ;,..... � � dlllllll IIIINIIIIIIII �IIIIIIIIIIIII Illllu nlluuul 'u I II1I �InI �� NIIIIIII IIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII "�" IN II II u;'�� (! I'�I� inl � II � IIIIIIIIIIIIII � 4�I�I��III,� II I' .. t IIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII flu lUl p lui '" I� u � � 1 �' ��� W .................. "I"".................. 0 ` Q oa c W �, 6 II �i�uiill �lll��lll l�i � f`�n i� Q LL 6 � O. r O N p ........... � �- _o 0 U. U.J � C 'inQ No `o W Q � j � o a > 0 3 6 y � � Q ;n V � a E a W � � '^ °° w ° s N � aDU � � U Boa v O x O I, �i iil lilliiillil �Illlu��l�lllllul� ICI � � uuuuuuu: � ii�l ull lllllllllllll �. i � y i �� �` I ' ilili uuuuuuuu III � 1 ili�llll��jii i�uuuuuw ILL���i,� lllli I�i�iil���ll�iii�lllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Z WC L H Q W 0 ' / 1 8 1 1 i� � 1 1 1 d 1� 8 1 1 ® 1 g 1 � tl 9 1 1 ® � d �� 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 / 1 �� � 1 1 �,� 1 1 ,,,, 1 1� I V i 6 /1 ��������� Iql I°1"" 1 1� 1 / 1 1 u � ,� IIIIII I � 1��� ;. 1 pn �„ � IUI ' 9 U /b � I��U ,,,,, ,,, � 1 u � d� ���� ;� 1 u �� ,nnne �I� III 1 1 V 1 i I �I � nMn�i 1 V 1 a �� II V ����� f' ;. / IIII � IUyV I�. lilt, 1 �� �� mm� ��,n HIV � /� o 1 1�I' IIII�IIIIII ���III 1 P „nm U 1 � 1 1 IV lu innni '� I � i limn ;n�iiiii 1�4 / �� �������� 1 1 1 1� i 1 tli 1U 1� �.� 1 I IIIIII IIIIII .� mn IIIIII IIIIII '�. q �P,!.P. "i 1 It / / / 1# / / 1 1 / 1 q / / � 1 / 1 / 1 / / � 1 1 1 1 / 1! 1 1 / 1 1 1 / � g a 1 1 1 1 / / q � / / 1 / / / 1 �® 1 / / 1 •• / 1 1 1 1 / 1 1 1 / 1 1 1 1 / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 1 1 • / 1 q / / 1 / / 1 1 / 1 / . iNlllllllllllll 1 '.W' � n i nun �� N II NMw' 1 1 I I 1 VI awry ul 1 U 111� 1� � 1 U lil III � 1 I��U nnA 1 NIIIIIII MOIL. u^ � �w i'pr� 1V r; 1 �u, �h nnnl IIIIII mll 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 V 1 ' ICI' � Ill�lllu„ 1 iu Illllm� u�nnn� / II nnnnnni wnnni i. ' IIIIII ;n�nn� (IIIIII (IIIIII L.. I ode. ������� 'mllllliiill Vuw• 1 1 (IIIIII mn n (������ mu mm IIIIII IIIIII mw mm 1 1 1 1 1 / / 1 1 1 1 1 / / i Dig �u�� �d Q) aaaoi _ / rrrr iirrrrr rrriorrrrrr r , rr rrrr � • � /aiii r � /ia � rrrr%ail f r °rri / / r 1 r r c i r rri r r r r r , // //r crr, rrrr/, I rr r / „rrrr / rrrr/r/r r rrrrrrrrriii, � i / r � r •� ,.., rr rrr, �, !i/// � � ii/rrrrrrr r i rr rrrrrrr r r a�ii r r / iiiiirrrrrrri �.:+ / rrrr „r i rrrii r�r rr rr, rrrrri r r / ram rrrrr%, / /r r ......................,,rrr, „r,,;.,/ � � �/ , ,, 43 % , QY ,,, r rrrrrrr �-Z Z ' ( • o Q © c O 3Z, L errf�f, �3 +- =� V Z N = M c 1= I t 0 [L cT Q U / 1 / 1 tiyr{$ 1 1 , 1 1 1 IIIIIIIIIW 1 1 1 IIIIIIII�IP " IIIIII VI ' 1 IIII ul } III IINIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIII n I IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII •� u IIIIIIII � U IIWIIIPNI 1� � IIIIIIII III I 1 N 1 1 Illlfl 1 I IIIIII In IIIII IIII 1 I ..........luiii � �� �IIIIIII u 1 IIIIIIIIIIIII � 1� IIIIII �loll, 1 1 IIIIII 1 1 / / 1 O - U � _ 1 a � 1 6 / 1 / / w � � � 1 1 9 1 � 1 1 1 1 ® / � / / IIII ® .a / 1 1 1 / � / # / ilu /i I 1 � / t 1 I Ih 1 1 �� �i / 1 1 1 � ,,,,,,� � 1 ��� 1 1 'llll'h� /� � ' / I>pb i�,n� AiYu wl IIIIIIIIIII IIII I IIIIIIIIIII � ,,,ICI, I�u �' W,I� 1 �� Illiiu� �I 1� �� w u ,-0 � 1 W � III ,I / IIIIII �IIf w111�, q'�, ���m�i � i, �'" , i �n / i 1 U � 5"rY:; / 1 ,,,,, „ ,m, / dU ,,, ,. 1 U �, 1 r IU 1 vi' I��n ' r`� " i � ,,, 1 mom 1 Wf 1 1 l u UIIII„ 1 u 1 1 �,,,,,,, ,,,� ��. „ nn� e 1 u 1 I III w�� �� 1 �I ow. ,� ur,,, / 1 1 �u � ICI ,� �' w 1 u '� �� / � �' 1 ,n � �� � �u 1 lu � 1 1 � (IIII � �� � �I 1 I 1 1 1 1 ® / � � / 1 / / � / "°,� 1 ,� I / 1 / / 1 I 1 1 1 1 / � / / 0 / / / / � 1 � a �n / a 1 II a IIII 1 1 �". / ® / ® / / � .r � �, • • a � 1 � _ e � • s• 1 1 a a � � ® _ / 1' _— 1 _ 1 ®® ® 1 1 ® 1 ®® • ' ® a � / / 1 ® 1 • / 1 J/Ioo43S dol#tl li6am d X X X X X X a tlUiSaWI ¢ -SSJW X X X X K X X X z >uolalalnN O _SSJW X X X X X K K X X X X X x X lF/JI03W 00 X X X K X X -H SNNVd x x x x x ~ SSJW dB H00 x x x x SSJW x x x x x x x x x x x H00 x x x x del�anO oN x x x x x x x x x ° E o v= 3 v v .� E m o o °1E o o - - - ° ul w v m E13 Y E o m = `o > fO E 12 3 E v ti v `° i .o °° E o o .3 o - u 3 s s m ° m c v `6 - a n o N £ m r -O° o o o EE v E - L 3 > - _ y o f6 m '^ a o _ m '^ °m c°� a o s o m °_ ° o f ¢ E N _ o ° ,. °' E E oo`n E > £ o o - o _ E o 0 o o m s= o o v E E Y _ o ,� 3 E °o " o a.°' ev`u m a 1 N -° o m V v fl- c s� o m m v"i m s - w m o m o o - m m «'`o „ V E o o m - s`o w° o 'o¢ £ ° o L o 0 o E L v .� o m y E >v o v 3 N E ° c s _ v o.>. o E v _n „ a t v ° E ooa ¢ v a '3 -o o o >v _ Y a ° E - 3 °- ,m v na o. E o sou c = - ecut> ¢ £ c 3 v 2 o> c o .> � _ E E.� @� oENs Ua � I �� s o ? 3 a ° 3 o LE °' t E °a ° o `'^ ° �. 3 > E Y - o o .. ° o m E z c a a `v - o -o '3'� _ v $ _ - o v `o '>' °'o E 3 0 E .o m o v _ fO °'^' c o o E ° a�,v u ; > o -- d v y - `° @ `m o '3^ w - $ y o E v o m >.y ¢ - -v�o a .�;.Y L u_ ` Q 'o E w a E c v > c - '"Y a -'a °o _ c'.3o o f °o v o v > o v a v a m o 0 - = v - c •� E ` o o - °' m '°> m > ; ° m Q o - m mo °p>o o.m p v m-o o v a m m"o v m Q o o 0 .o v �- o o - N m E v = ° m m a > o m o o v s> 3.�o w t m.m o.� o- o v `a° ° v . m a 5, E '^ E '" o o v -u-° o. - _ o T u @ o ° o a c o a -va o ° - ¢ -vo _ m s u - o � v w E Y . 0E vi ' -° 3° u Lo EEoE E E oaEa E° 2 E ° 3 o E o u o a m u w Y s E cu ¢ s u Im o ll u o m v o c = u o w - - i o 0 0 ¢ u o - v x - - E my > - E u N o Iv E o a �° £ o a o m l9 v o E a o ° i m o i — `o Y = o o m v o E Y o x Y � m 0 o 0 0 o i0 0 o I v o m n I � of I m vI � a m �o 0 0 � �o vi �n n m a o ® o rNi o� � n �o z 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ o 0 0 0 0 ^ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m o 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 0 c0 0 0 0�n o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 "' a m .n ro a cvmi. J O t0 _ _ O u — ~ O _ p o M > N h u ti M N N C h ii i � „II aIrk U iiiiiihilifli N i ill�y��iyltil ' m6 r a � lip�'uuiiliuuuuuum � �I�I I�� ���� � „'' liiiillllllllllllll � �III���U ����I � � i �ti #^ iip �i�ll�llllllllllllllli N II .. � I� i ���lll llllllllllllil� a o � a a Q O z11111111111D 0 c limomilmilmill 2 O � N .0 + � c O_ O � o u � � � KFJ (D CA liIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I-Ilf E Ca ) 2 DO -cc ZZ co a., IC) O JL� .......................... C ............... CO P3 ('rD% C:- I ) tf ) i.G J E, in ...................... ri IS um���������n�nn u� ����� iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiiiimi ����� ;�i 2 4 4 4 - - - - - - - - - - E E 'E T T E E E 2 2 E E L u 0 -o E - 6 ID c z T -5 E E. E. E 'E o c, & 10 R i E—E E E E E E E E E I E E 'E 'E E E E E E E E E E E E E . . . . . . . . . E E E E E E E < < u u j u u . . . . . . E E E E E E E u d 1 0 .c .1 - - - - - - % % % j u oa 0000000000 0006000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 om �.� �.� � � � � � o 0 0 0 0 0 � .� .� .� .� .� .� � m o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � m � � 6 w 3 0 E Q a a a a a a a a a m - c � E E E E E E E E E 9- o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D E E E E E E E .E o o - E o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o E o 0 E E o o E E a m o m m m m E . E E E E E E E E E a 'o `o a 2 2 2 2 2 2 �- z z z >- m o�L o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o x x x x s . . . . 3 3 Q o 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 o b o 0 o o 0 o a o 0 o o o 0 0 0 0 o E i ` . . ` Q ¢ a a a Do. a a a E E E E E E E E E E E E m._`E U m o o m 0 D D °a- - o 0 0 0 0 0 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL o co_ o 0 0 0 0 0 o co_ o o y m a m N o 200000❑ 2...�°�.... `o `o o `o `o `o a a a a o 0 0 0 0 0 o a D a D o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 �' o a u u Q o `o a 0 a 0 a a ________ -o a p a -o 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u 'u "a� 1 0 a > > _ pj 0 0 0 0 0 0 N D N D N D N a L D 6 D O D O N N N N N . . . N ON ON O O O O O O O O O O -I c. ._ 6 , - D 0 aLLo mmmmmm U' � m° m m m° m° m° LL LL LL LL LL LL LE LL LL Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q QQU` U ti U Q Q D_) o 73 m m m o m o m 4 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 � .a _? Z o o `o 0 0 `o G 6 6 6 6 6 D ` m °' m m m m °' m m m m m m m m m m m m m m o m U u O O I E O O O O O O O O O N U U U U U U y L N N N N N N N t O o a U- U U U `o t t t t t t - - t `o `o `o o `o `o `o D D a D D D `o a o o `o a �Nt o a a o U D 6 6 O O 6 O O D O D D D O O D U U U U U U U U U U U w o z E 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 . . . . . . . . . . s o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m �a�a:o1:3: dddada s s 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3<<3 Y°°cE 0 c E c c - - - - - - - - - > > > > > > > D m E - 0 uUUUUUUu,0 0 0 Q Q Q Q Q D D D 6 D 6 > > > > > > > > > u u Y Y Y u Y Y u u u u u Q Qu o N N � V O 6 o o`oo o m --- m m m m m m m C9 C9 C9 C9 C9 a z zzz zz zz zzz d o t t s N dJ N dJ N dJ N N N N 4J Qi N di d N N dJ N > > L L N N OJ 4J N N >> >> E 2 N E 2 N E N V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 D 6 O O O O O 6 O O O 6 O O O 6 b O O D 6 O 6 O b O 6 0 0 0 0 D a O N N O N N O x:5 U:5 U:5 U:5 U:5 U z cy) rn iD r-, CAI a) 0 r-�, k6, CJ1 It'i 6 00 eN vl.� r-i jq In u Lil 40 .!.9 IN 4.0 Lo C4 > ai IN N Ln Ln > al .2 m ai Ln 0 u ai u C: Ln .!.9 4.0 IM ai ai Ln I Lai ai Ln :Ll E aj L; 0 .s ai Ln Ln Ln E ai as L; aj ai i� F s 0 0 YZ —j 1-1 6 W 6 6 Ln Ln u M M ai IM 4-J +,J Ln Ln Ll WLn, Ln W ai CL CL I— r E C: CL 0� as t t M t u -M -M IM `3 -E = `3 u —o —o Lc,:, —o 0 z 41 4�:CD: Z� D D �!D D r 'E 'E 'EE ' EEO 'E 'EE -E u m E E" E E E ai u u = E E E o E o o E E o Erca CL U U U U U, D U, >a; 0 t ai ll% Ooo 0 woo 0 '4— t44 411 44 44 CC 4.4 44 44 immmmmmm -cromI713113 -0 _0 u • 0, cL 0 0 0 cc 0 ! ® 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 o o o 00 o o o o o � o 0 CIS 0 � C C u CL CL CL QJ ul Q V) V) 0 � � � 0 Q 0 Q f CND 0 0 0 V7 0 0 4- �+ o o o 0 0Va V u 0 � Q) f 0 0 0 Q > w ® - B C7 CND # V5 (A V) V7 C`J I Cwl Cwl 0 0 N 0 0 W41 0 L CC Q w I u { 41 � rv� W v) Q U CD o 0 CQ »` U u n Li r Q) U va LLQd uj C o o C Qcc V -0 -0 Q u va U Q LL Qp 0 Q7 _ Q7 �" CC t) m m m (D lli zas as v 0 4� > 0 0 0 ,1- 0 ua a) 0 Cr) C -01,4 -0 4 0 0 0 0 U u U u U u u 0 cj) Ln in rri� rq m rrL 0) nj ram» cj) cl rl eF N rIT h-4 m m In In CJ)9) ul -4 LO in 0 m m a) 4S) Ln Ln Ln 0 0 0 a) 4, c E 0 0 u 0 u u E E Qu c E a) < c c E < < as 0 co as a 0 aJ 0 0 m .2 70 u 0 0 0 0 4� u 4-1 4-1 c c 4bi as as c > > u 0 u .2 a) -C r- 0 4-1 0 4 U 0 o M 4- 13) a) 0 C) W- m 0 'o E o E 0E Co 4� o E < a) ® Y A e, / - � :. i �i ,.. ,,.,, II(( / `� f, ��;, 4,' u �' u�i' �� 4• y�� ;,; ® �,. t � � � i��ir� � ��� �� I uu .� ��, `. G ���� �Y �, oiw �,,, �� , s,,,,, ,,,,, ,„,, ,,:, ,,, ,,,, „ i �. � � �� ;, �;, � �` ,,,, ,,� �; �_ , ,�%" ,� i � � � �, � ;�, � Resolution No. 232 -2022 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CLARIFYING AND UPDATING THE MEMBERSHIP PROVISIONS AND UPDATING THAT STAFF SUPPORT IS PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND FINANCE AND RESTATING THE FUNCTIONS OF THE HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING RESOLUTIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,the Human Services Advisory Board (HSAB) was established on March 13, 1991, to evaluate County needs and agency performances using established guidelines so as to determine where the community could derive the greatest benefit from the expenditure of tax dollars; and WHEREAS,the HSAB,which formerly received support from the Department of Social Services, now operates with the support of the Department of Budget and Finance; and WHEREAS,the resolutions which established and modified the HSAB refer to the Department of Social Services, and are therefore outdated; and WHEREAS,these resolutions contain other language that is outdated or needs clarification; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 077-1991, which established the HSAB, has since been modified by Resolution No. 056-1992 and Resolution No. 093a-2002, and there is no single source containing all current information about the HSAB; and WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners finds that this resolution is warranted to clarify, update, and consolidate prior resolutions; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA that: Section 1. Resolution No. 077-1991, Resolution No. 056-1992, and Resolution No. 093a-2002 are hereby repealed and replaced with this resolution. Section 2.The Human Services Advisory Board (HSAB), established on March 13, 1991, shall continue and shall be comprised of 5 members who are to be appointed by the Board of County Commissioners as set forth in more detail below. The Department of Budget and Finance shall oversee and assist with carrying out the functions of the HSAB as outlined in detail below.The HSAB shall have staff support as designated by the Budget and Finance Director. Section 3.The HSAB may obtain information and counsel from the Department of Budget and Finance.The Department of Budget and Finance will assist with gathering information or counsel from other County, state, or federal departments or agencies as needed. Section 4. (a) The HSAB shall consist of five (5) members, one of whom shall be appointed by each individual County Commissioner.Terms will be for a two (2)year period or the termination of the respective appointing Commissioner's term, whichever shall first occur; provided, however,that each HSAB member shall serve on the HSAB until the appointment of a successor. Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to place any limit on the number of terms, consecutive or otherwise, any individual member can serve. (b) This resolution shall not be construed to alter the terms of HSAB members who hold their positions at the time of this resolution's adoption. (c) Any member of the Human Services Advisory Board who absents himself from any two (2) consecutive regular meetings of said Board, unless excused from such attendance by consent of the Board, expressed by action of record in its official minutes, shall thereby automatically forfeit his position and office as a member of the Human Services Advisory Board, and the name of such person shall be automatically removed from the membership of said Board immediately after the adjournment of any such second consecutive meeting at which such member has not appeared.The HSAB shall thereupon promptly notify the member so removed and the Board of County Commissioners for Monroe County.The appointing Commissioner shall thereupon appoint a new member to serve the remainder of the unexpired term of the member so removed. (d) In the event that a vacancy occurs on the HSAB while the seat of the appropriate appointing commissioner is also vacant,the Mayor may nominate an individual to be confirmed by the Board of County Commissioners.This individual shall serve as a member of the HSAB until such time as the vacant commissioner's seat is filled and the new commissioner selects a new appointee. Section 5. Members of the HSAB shall comply with the Florida Statutes regarding ethics of county officers and employees.The HSAB members are not required to file financial disclosure forms under the provisions of F.S. 112.3144 and 112.3145. Section 6.The HSAB shall establish, monitor, and update eligibility guidelines and application procedures which shall become effective upon approval by the County Commission.The HSAB shall (1) carefully evaluate the County's human services needs, (2) recommend the most cost-effective way of obtaining needed services, (3) develop measures of the services provided, and (4) determine which of those services are appropriate for public funding. Section 7.The HSAB shall hold an organizational meeting annually to elect a chairman,vice chairman, and secretary. Officers may serve no more than three (3) consecutive years in such office. Section 8.The HSAB shall meet at the call of the chairman or the Budget and Finance Director whom acts as the designated staff representative for the Board of County Commissioners.All meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Sunshine Law of the State of Florida and all records shall be maintained in accordance with the public records laws of the State of Florida. The HSAB shall abide by the rules and procedures of the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners. Section 9.The Monroe County Department of Budget and Finance shall provide staff assistance to the HSAB including the preparation of all agendas and meeting notices,taking of all minutes, and scheduling of appropriate meeting places. Section 10. Members of the HSA B shall be compensated for those travel expenses necessarily incurred in the performance of their official duties. Section 11.This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED byte Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida at a regular meeting of said board on the 1711 day of August 2022. Mayor David Rice Yes Mayor Pro Tern Craig Cates -Yal- Commissioner Michelle Col iron Yes �N -C.9mmissioner James K.Scholl Yes sv,k . issioner Holly Merrill Raschein Yes 0 J\ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS t:K ADOK,Clerk OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA By By_ As Deputy Clerk Mayor/Chairperson WNWE COUNTY ATTONGY (MRSTINE LNURT4ARROWS ASSORANTC"TY ATTORMY DATE-W.122 r MONROE COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD GRANTS AND GRANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES August 30, 2012 Monroe County Government Office of Management and Budget 1 Table of Contents Introduction Policies and Procedures The Board The Organizations/Non Profits Process Funding Decisions Contracts Reimbursement Appendices A—Resolutions B—Working Group Agenda Items C — Copy of the FY13 Application D— Copy of the FY13 Agreement 2 z Introduction The Human Services Advisory Board (HSAB) is charged with reviewing funding requests from non-profit,human service organizations and making recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)regarding the distribution of funding for health and human services among individual organizations. Each year the BOCC determines an amount of funding to designate for the HSAB. The five members of the HSAB are each appointed by a County Commissioner. The HSAB meets in Februaiy to open the funding cycle. Applications are required from all organizations requesting funds. The HSAB reviews all applications. The Board meets again in May to discuss the merits of each request and make its funding recommendations to the BOCC. The recommendations are approved as part of the budget process. The HSAB prioritizes funding for organizations that (1)use HSAB funds to leverage outside funding; (2) do not duplicate existing services; (3) demonstrate need for services; and(4) demonstrate sound financial management. The Human Services Advisory Board places applicant organizations into one of three categories, and uses weighted percentages assigned to each category as a guideline to assist in making its funding recommendations: • Medical Services, 65%: medical, mental, and dental care for economically disadvantaged. • Core Social Services, 30%: essential services such as food, clothing, or housing; emergency disaster relief; family violence issues; adult and child daycare; end-of-life support for the disadvantaged. • Quality of Life Improvement Services, 5%: services created to improve the quality of life for individuals or community: educational,preventative, training, recreational and cultural services, etc. As of FY 12, the application of these weighted percentages was suspended for two years, per HSAB Working Group recommendations. 3 3 HSAB Funding History Over the years, the HSAB funding has generally changed with the incorporation or subtraction of certain organizations as direct line-items. Overall, there has not been more than a$600,000 change in the HSAB pot which seems to be dictated by the economy. • FY 2006: BOCC approved a calculation for HSAB funding at 5% of the FY `05 general fund budget: $2,177,280. • FY 2007: BOCC approved a proposed change to that calculation that would require subtracting the HSAB funding from the previous year's general fund budget before applying the 5%. BOCC also changed the percentage applied from 5% to 4%. Later in 2006, BOCC changed the calculation back to 5% of the adjusted general fund FY `06 budget: $2,326,581. • FY 2008: BOCC passed a motion setting the amount of HSAB funding at same level as FY '07: $2,326,581. However, later that year, the Commission reduced this amount by 5%, to $2,210,252. • FY 2009: BOCC passed a motion reducing the amount of HSAB funding by 20%, to $1,768,200. Later that year, PACE and its 68K in funding was temporarily removed from HSAB, reducing HSAB amount to $1,700,200. • FY 2010: HSAB funding amount remained at same level: $1,768,200. (PACE and its $68K returned to HSAB.) • FY 2011: HSAB funding again remained flat at FY `10 level: $1,768,200. • FY 2012: HSAB funding remained flat for the 411'year. Per the Working Group recommendations, 6 organizations/programs were moved from BOCC line-items to HSAB, with their funding of$453,577. Therefore, total amount of FY '12 HSAB funding became $2,221,777. (There was no actual increase in overall funding.) • FY 2013: In March 2012, BOCC approved$2,221,777 for HSAB. At that same meeting, the BOCC also approved a line-item request by Guidance Care Center (GCC) for Substance Abuse Mental Health match funding; moving the organization, with its FY `12 HSAB funding of$609,177, out of HSAB. With GCC's funding moved, the HSAB amount stood at $1,612,600. In May 2013 meeting, BOCC further discussed GCC's match amount. It approved a reduction to GCC's funding by $140,000, and transferred that amount to HSAB, bringing the final HSAB allocation to $1,752,600. • FY 2014: HSAB funding... 4 4 HSAB Policies The HSAB and County staff adhere to all policies and guidelines. All HSAB policies and guidelines have been approved by the Board of County Commissioners and were established through board actions. There are five resolutions that directly relate to the HSAB. • Resolution 077-1991; creating the HSAB, providing appointment of members, enumerating the purposes of the Board, and providing an effective date. (Appendix A-1) • Resolution 056-1992; amending Resolution 077-1991 by providing for the appointment of board members to run concurrent with the terms of the commissioners who made said appointment, providing for removal of a member for excessive absenteeism, providing for travel to be paid to advisory board members, and providing an effective date. (Appendix A-2) • Resolution 093A-2002; amending Resolution 077-1991 by revising the conflict of interest provision. (Appendix A-3) • Resolution 390-2004; limiting funding recommendations by advisory boards to no more than amounts requested by applicants. (Appendix A-4) • Resolution 277-2009; establishing audit and other reporting requirements for not-for- profit organizations receiving grants from Monroe County. (Appendix A-5) In addition to signed resolutions, there were three working groups in 2001, 2006, and 2010. The working groups in 2001 and 2010 each had recommendations that were approved by the BOCC. • Recommendations from the 2001 Human Services Review Committee approved at the February 13, 2002 BOCC meeting; (Appendix B-1) • There was also a Task Force that was convened by BOCC direction at the July 2006 meeting, and whose members were approved at the August 2006 meeting. (Appendix B- 2) • Recommendations from the 2010 Working Group, approved by the BOCC in November 2010. (Appendix B-3) In 2001, the BOCC called for a Human Service Review Committee to be charge with identifying a core group of non-profit organizations to be funded by the BOCC and establish criteria to qualify for funding. The Committee met several times and were able to categorize services into three groups, listed criteria for funding for each group, and established percentage guidelines to assist the HSAB in making its funding recommendations. In February 2002, the committee came before the BOCC with a list of recommendations. They were all approved with the exception of the 6.7% increase of funding for FY03. The Committee's recommendations were: • The overall human service funding of the BOCC was considered. Funding required by law, such as Baker Act services, medical services, and recreational services, formerly funded directly by the BOCC as part of the budget process, will now apply to the HSAB. 5 • The FY02 funding for agencies now recommended to apply to the HSAB totals $1,288,852.00. This will be an increase in both the amount and the number of agencies applying to the HSAB, but not an overall increase in total funding. The amount for FY03 may vary. • The three groups are medical services (physical, mental, and behavioral care services), core services (non-medical but basic essential human needs services), and quality of life improvement services (service to improve the quality of life for any individual or community). A listing of these groups and the criteria for each are attached. • As guidelines for the HSAB to consider in making its funding recommendations, medical services would receive 65%, core services 30%, and quality of life improvement services 5% of total funding. The actual recommendations of the HSAB may vary from these guidelines at the discretion of the HSAB. The accompanying spreadsheet shows the three groups of services and the FY02 totals and percentages of each. • With the recommended decrease in the percentage share of funding for the quality of life group of services, the Committee agreed to request that the Sheriff's Shared Asset Forfeiture Fund Advisory Board increase funding in this area accordingly as well as from the United Way. • The total funding for services under the oversight of the HSAB should be increased by 6.7% for FY03, for a new total of$1,375,205.00, to partially compensate for increases in cost of living and reductions in state funding. It should be notes that the beginning amount of$1,288,852.00 to which this crease would be applied, included the additional human service funding of$79,906.00 (increase from $289,194.00 to $369,100.00) approved by the BOCC at its July 31, 2001 meeting, as well as $45,000.00 awarded to the Health Council of South Florida for a study of Monroe County's health care needs and $150,000.00 for Rural Health Network. The net increase in FY02 was $152,213.00 (from $1,665,544.00 in FY01 to $1,817,757.00) in FY02). In 2006, the BOCC called for a Task Force to eliminate duplication of non-profit services and create better coordination between non-profit agencies. The Task Force was made up of 2 non- profit agencies, 1 HSAB members, and 1 county staff member. The Task Force was to exist for 270 days. The purpose of the Task Force was to "eliminate duplication of services."It is unclear whether the Task Force presented any formal recommendations to the BOCC for approval. It is not in the BOCC agenda minutes or in the August 2006 agenda item itself. In June 2010, Commissioner Murphy requested to convene a committee to examine and possibly modify the HSAB funding process and policies including funding categories, weighting of categories, etc. A motion was made at that BOCC meeting, and a committee of 9 voting members, to include 5 current HSAB members and 4 additional members to be appointed by each of the four commissioners was created. Commissioner Murphy was to participate as a liaison and Lisa Tennyson, Grants Administrator, was to participate as a staff person. The committee was to subset no later than 6 months after created. The committee came back before the BOCC in November of 2010 with a list of recommendations that were all approved with one revision for the last bullet(below) that all funding received by the Monroe County HSAB grants must be spent for the benefit of Monroe County. The group's recommendations were: 6 • To eliminate question#12 of the application: "What does your agency do to address these causes?" (Recognizing that some agencies do no work on "causes"but instead mitigate the symptoms, i.e., food banks that address the symptoms of hunger rather than the cause. • To add a question to the application that specifically asks what the organization did with the funds they received from the HSAB in the prior year, and how it was used to leverage additional funding. • To streamline the application so that for organizations requesting $5,000 or less, the organization does not have to respond to questions 10, 11, 18, 19, 21, 25, and 26. • To not utilize a point system for the evaluation of applications. • To not establish a maximum funding level. • To offer applicants an opportunity to request a change of category if an applicant organization believes it is not properly categorized and request to be changed, then the HSAB has to pro-actively act and make a decision on that request, and the HSAB has the right to make re-categorization decisions, independently of any request, based on the application for that year, and this (these) decision(s) shall be made prior to the funding recommendations. • To eliminate the weighted percentages associated with the funding categories (but not the categories themselves) for two complete funding cycles. • To move the following entities from BOCC line-item funding to HSAB: Big Pine Athletic Association, Heart of the Keys, Kids Come First, Rural Health Network, Upper Keys YMCA, and Guidance Care Center's Keys to Recovery. (It was agreed by the working group that organizations whose funding is not required by statute or otherwise necessitated by County ordinance or function should be a part of the HSAB competitive funding cycle.) • To establish a policy and include as a statement on the application, the following: The vast majority of the funding received by Monroe County HSAB must be spent in and directly benefit Monroe County. Also agreed to but no motions were made on the following ideas: • The application is fair and gleans the appropriate information • Presentations are not required, but applicants should be present for questions from HSAB members. • The three funding categories—medical services, core services, and quality of life services — shall remain in place. • When considering the size or regional focus of large organization, the focus should be on whether or not they utilize a vast majority of their funding in and for the direct benefit of the county. • There should not be term limits applied to HSAB members. There are a few operational HSAB procedures, such as the funding cycle time line, funding availability notices and board liaison that have not been specifically addressed by the BOCC. There are also specifics related to the applications themselves and the evaluation process, such as the ramification of submitting an application that is missing a schedule or an attachment or the relative importance of match, that have not been specifically approved by the BOCC. Our internal staff processes are outlined in this document as well. 7 7 Independence of Human Services Advisory Board The Board has been meeting since it was first convened in 1991 via Resolution 077-1991. (Appendix A-1) The HSAB consists of 5 members, each appointed by a County Commissioner. Resolution 056-2002 indicates that the length of the term of service is 2 years. It does not mention that appointments may not be renewed, or that the same person may not be re-appointed at the end of the two year term. At the end of the two year period for each appointee, Commissioners are prompted to review their appointment and to re-appoint or select a new appointment. In the cases of several of the appointees, the County Commissioner made the determination to re-new the appointment. (Appendix A-2) Effective HSAB members must have a solid working understanding of the non-profit sector in general, the array of federal and state funding entities, the services and capacities of our local service providers, and the needs of our community. Current members, with their years of experience serving on the HSAB, bring a great deal of knowledge in these areas to the evaluation and recommendation process. All of HSAB meetings, discussions and decisions take place in open,public meetings, which are all advertised. HSAB meeting minutes and documents are all public records. It is fully accountable and transparent. 8 8 BOCC Direct Line-Item Funding and its Effect on HSAB In the past, there have been some non-profit organizations funded through BOCC line-item and others funded through the HSAB. This has affected the HSAB organizations and the funding as organizations move in and out of the pot of funding. BOCC direct line-items are separated in the budget and have generally been stable amounts of funding over the years as a part of the budget process. The funding cycle mirrors that of the HSAB with similar contracts, contract requirements and contract periods (including documenting 501 c3 status and audited financials.) Also, like HSAB, their funding is approved by the BOCC as part of the annual budget approval process. Historically, line-items have included youth and recreational organizations, arts organizations, AARPs, and mandated services such as Baker Act delivered through organizations such as Guidance Care Center. In 2002, the HSRC recommended moving some line-item funded organizations included those providing recreational and medical/mental health services over to HSAB, and keeping those whose funding is required by law, such as Baker Act services and cultural programs as directly- funded line-items overseen by the BOCC. Although this policy was adopted by the BOCC,most applicants were moved back to line item status by the Commission piecemeal over the following years, and new organizations (including bird rescue centers and the Upper Keys Community Pool) were added to line item status. The 2010 Working Group revisited this issue. Like its predecessor, it recommended that those organizations whose funding is not required by statute or ordinance, be brought back under HSAB. Submitting all organizations to HSAB review enhances fairness, transparency and oversight as it requires them to complete and submit to the formal HSAB application and review process. For BOCC line items, there is no formal application or review process. Those organizations that were moved to HSAB include the recreational programs: Big Pine Athletic Association, Heart of the Keys Youth, Kids Come First and YMCA; and the medical and mental health programs, Rural Health Network and Keys To Recovery. They were moved to HSAB with their current funding amounts and therefore did not negatively impact the overall HSAB funding amount; or impact the actual category percentages in FY 12. This 2010 Working Group recommendation was entirely consistent with the Board-approved 2002 HSRC recommendation: Funding required by law, such as Baker Act services, will remain directly funded by the BOCC, as will funding for cultural programs. Mental health services, medical services and recreational services,formerly funded directly by the BOCC as part of the budget process will now apply to the HSAB. 9 In FY 2012, the BOCC approved two major changes to BOCC line-item funding. The first was the transfer of 6 organizations from line-item funding to the HSAB. Their funding ($453K) was also transferred,raising HSAB funding from $1.7M to $ 2.2M. The second was the transfer of funding for Baker Act services ($215K) and transportation ($146K) to a new non-discretionary "Baker Act" category, since the services and funding are statutorily mandated. The organizations that remain in the BOCC line-item category are: • AARPs and Older Americans Volunteer Program, which operate as county programs; • Arts Council, which administers the County's Arts in Public Places program and Cultural Umbrella contract for BOCC and Tourist Development Council; • Historic Florida Keys Foundation which provides professional staff for the County's Historic Preservation program; • Jacobs Aquatic Center which maintains a county-owned facility; and • The 10% local match required for the Community Transportation for the Disadvantaged program, funded through a state grant to the GCC. As the grant amount may vary each year, so does the match amount. 10 10 Funding Process The HSAB funding and contractual timeline is as follows: January • Set date for February meeting of HSAB • Advertise for February's meeting of HSAB • Reserve space at the Marathon Government Center or State Office Building February • Hold HSAB meeting at Marathon Government Center or State Office Building • Inform HSAB and organizations of HSAB funding for the fiscal year • Finalize County application • Establish due date for April as well as grant cycle schedule, May date for HSAB recommendation meeting • Send out Notice of Funding Availability and Applications o Advertise in media, newspaper and website o Email to all past, current recipients and interested parties March • Respond to questions re: applications • Create March agenda item for BOCC to set HSAB funding amount April • Applications due back • Send copies of applications to HSAB • Review applications • Advertise for May meeting of HSAB • Reserve space for 2nd meeting of HSAB at Marathon Government Center, ensure it will be videotaped • Schedule all applicants to speak for 5 minutes at May meeting in the order the applications were received. May • Hold 2nd HSAB meeting • Hear from all applicants • HSAB to make funding decisions June/July • Prepare contracts for all HSAB recommended agencies • Prepare contracts for all BOCC direct funded agencies August • Route contracts to through County Attorney's Office for initial signatures/stamp and with the non-profits for signature • Budget resolutions for all contracts as a part of the County budget process 11 September • Monitor contracts through signature route • Place on October BOCC agenda October • BOCC approves/disapproves HSO contracts, County clerk signs, non-profits get a copy emailed to them, originals are kept in files in the office November/December • Collect all required compliance documents, as noted in the contracts, from non-profits before reimbursement is allowed. *Each month, we ensure contract compliance, answer questions, and work with the non-profits on their reimbursement requests. The February meeting of the HSAB is meant to bring everyone together to accomplish a couple things: (a) to finalize any changes to the HSAB application, (b) to inform the Board and the non- profit organizations of the amount of money that the HSAB will have at their discretion to dole out and (c) to establish a timeline for the next several months to include due date for the applications and a date in May when all the HSAB members will convene to discuss the applications and make recommendations. The May HSAB meeting is meant to discuss the HSAB applications, hear any applicants who want to speak on behalf of their application, and to make final recommendations. This meeting generally last a whole day but all non-profit organizations walk away knowing what the HSAB recommends that they receive. These HSAB funding recommendations are a part of the County budget process in August and September. In October, the County is able to draw up Agreements with each non-profit organization in their specific amount to put before the BOCC for final approval and execution. To reserve a room, contact Kathleen Quinn. To put an advertisement in the Citizen, email legals(�keysnews.com 12 12 Funding Availability Announcements Every year there are two meetings for the HSAB members and the organizations who want to apply. In February, the Board meets to set the schedule and go over the BOCC approved budget for the HSAB funding. In May, the Board meets to discuss and review the applications submitted. In each of these cases, per the Sunshine Law and proper County procedure, a funding availability announcement is sent out in the local newspaper, The Citizen, as well as via email to prior year recipients and anyone else who has made it known to the County that they would like to apply. The funding availability announcements look like this: Public Meeting Announcement- Monroe County Human Services Advisory Board/Monroe County Board of County Commissioners The Human Services Advisory Board will meet Tuesday, May 24, 2013 at 9:00 AM at the Marathon Government Center, BOCC Meeting Room on 211 Floor, 2798 Overseas Highway. The Board will make recommendations on the County Fiscal Year 2014 funding for human services. The public is advised that some or all of the members of the Monroe County Commission may attend the meeting and discuss items that may come before the Commission. For a copy of the agenda or other information, contact Staff Person Name, Grants Administrator; 1100 Simonton Street; Key West, FL 33040; 305-292-Phone; Email. ADA ASSISTANCE: If you are a person with a disability who needs special accommodations in order to participate in this proceeding, please contact the County Administrator's Office, by phoning (305) 292-4441, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., no later than five (5) calendar days prior to the scheduled meeting;if you are hearing or voice impaired, can"711". The Florida Sunshine laws are in Chapter 286 of the Florida State Statutes and they define public meetings and the requirements for public meetings. As this pertains to the HSAB meetings, the meetings have to be public and there has to be public notice of the meeting 10 days in advance for the meeting. County staff complies with these laws for each HSAB meeting. Also, in an effort to further comply with these rules and for the ease of the public, the HSAB, as of May 2012, has decided to videotape their meetings. This is available on the Monroe County website. 13 13 HSAB Applications for Funding The HSAB fiscal year applications include three parts. The application itself with the questions that require answers, the spreadsheet of templates for the board, and financial information required from the non-profit organizations, and an instruction packet to explain both the application and the templates in the spreadsheet. Every year, the application is tweaked slightly to accommodate changes that would assist the applicant or that the HSAB would like to make. The FYI application is available in Appendix C. The Board receives these applications in hard copy within a week of the deadline that they were due to the OMB office in April. The Board generally has about a month to review these documents. Some of the organizations are missing application documents, and if they submit early enough, County Staff might catch the error and let the organization know. However, this is not always the case. Organization's 501 c3 Status Each non-profit who wants to apply to the HSAB grants has to have a current 501c3 status. This is the status organizations get from the government to run as a non-profit. In the applications, the non-profits prove their status with a letter from the IRS determining their status. These letters tend to be older, from many years previous, and this year in an effort to ensure that all the organizations are current and active in their 5016 status, we have required that each organization also submit a printout from a website called Guidestar which shows that they are current. HSAB Match to a grant Additionally, HSAB prioritizes funding for organizations that use HSAB funds to match a grant, but it is not required. HSAB encourages all organizations to seek out additional and diverse funding sources,but organizations, especially the small, very locally-oriented ones, aren't always successful in obtaining it. 14 14 Decision Malting Process and Procedures Weighted Percentages The establishment of the three funding categories, each with an assigned relative weight(65% for medical and mental health, 35% for core services, 5% for quality of life), was one of the original guidelines recommended by the Human Services Review Committee and approved by the BOCC in February 2002. (Appendix 13-1) In 2010, the HSAB Working Group was convened to review HSAB guidelines and policies. Specifically, it discussed the value and application of weighted percentages, and ultimately recommended sun-setting the weighted percentages for two years. The group agreed that given the changes in the current economic environment, there were emergent needs that could be viewed as equally important as medical and mental health services, such as emergency food. HSAB members also reiterated that the weighted percentages guidelines were always viewed as flexible, rather than as firm limitations. The recommendations approved by the BOCC state: As guidelines (guidelines is underlined in the original recommendations) for the HSAB to consider in making its funding recommendations, medical services would receive 65% core services 30%, and quality of life improvement services S% of total funding. The actual recommendations of the HSAB may vary from these guidelines at the discretion of the HSAB. The percentages for medical and mental health, core services, and quality of life categories, respectively: • FY 12: 50.0, 48.3 and 1.7 (new BOCC line items not calculated in) • FY 12: 55.5, 39.8 and 4.7 (new BOCC line items calculated in) • FY 11: 54.6, 45.0 and 0.4 • FY 10: 54.3, 44.4 and 1.3 • FY 09: 57.1, 41.3 and 1.6 In FY 12, HSAB absorbed six BOCC line items. Two were added to the medical group, one was added to the core services group, and three were added to the quality of life category. These organizations came into the HSAB with their funding from BOCC, so they did not impact the funding of any other organization. They did impact the overall distribution among the categories, as you can see from the FY 12 distribution before and after. Performance Measures The HSAB requires that organizations provide performance measure information, in narrative and on a standardized form, and utilizes this information in its evaluation process for funding recommendations. This information helps to demonstrate to the HSAB that organizations are utilizing their public funds in a responsible and efficient way. Each organization certifies that the information it provided to us in the application and all attachments is true and correct. 15 • In the HSAB application, organizations are required to discuss their mission, their overall services, the specific types of services to be funded with HSAB funds, their target population, how many participants or clients will be served in which services, and how much those services cost. They are required to discuss how their HSAB funding was utilized in the past year and how it is to be utilized in the coming year. They are asked to cite reports, studies, and statistics to demonstrate the need for the services they provide. They are also asked to discuss their outcomes and to discuss how they are being effective. • Each organization is responsible for developing its own performance measures and to track and report those measures to the HSAB in order to support their funding request. As part of the HSAB application, each organization is required to complete Attachment C of the HSAB application. This is a standardized form that solicits tangible and quantitative measures, for the past programmatic year, specifically: types of services, frequency of service delivery, geographic location of service delivery, target population for services, unduplicated participant numbers, residency of participants, and a brief discussion of general outcomes. (Attachment C is a part of the Application in Appendix C-3) • Additionally, throughout the year, organizations typically choose to provide more qualitative information that includes more detail and narrative on their own, unique outcomes and their accomplishments; including annual reports,press clippings, editorials, photographs, etc. • County staff monitors performance reports to ensure that organizations are providing the types and frequency of services, and serving the numbers of participants for which they were funded. Non-profits typically produce services that are complex. Performance measures such as clients served, frequency of services, and types of services are easy to quantify, measure, track and report. Developing quantifiable measures for outcomes and longer-term societal improvements, and establishing an absolute connection between program activity and impact are far more challenging. For example, when the Good Health Clinic serves 349 uninsured patients, with primary care health services, who otherwise had no access to medical care, or Grace Jones Day Care Center provides backpacks filled with food to 150 children of impoverished families, or the Florida Keys Children's Shelter provided shelter, food and counseling to 142 abused or runaway Monroe County youth, or the Rural Health Network provides 11,000 subsidized dental care visits for low-income families, we know they are providing the services for which they are receiving funding. We do not know for sure whether or not the uninsured patients of the Good Health Clinic or Rural Health Network have better long-term health outcomes, or whether or not the teens being sheltered do not end up homeless and in our mental health or criminal justice system, or whether or not the little kids with back pack food have better social and academic long-term outcomes. Although we don't know for sure about these long-term effects, we can reasonably assume that 16 these services have a positive humanitarian and societal impact without necessarily having to expend resources to find ways to quantify it. Quantifying, standardizing, and tracking outcomes is difficult given that the different types of outcomes and the fact that different programs and services have varying outcomes. There are physical outputs (like types of and frequency of services, number of classes,number of visits), efficiency outcomes (cost per counseling session), intermediate outcomes (number of clients that participated/attended/completed, number of participants that report satisfaction with service, number of participants who report a better understanding of risk factors, number of participants who report an actual behavioral improvement) and long-term outcomes (participants graduating from high school, clients experiencing improved health,reduction of local breast cancer mortality rates). All of our organizations are asked to articulate outcomes and impacts to help demonstrate their effectiveness and many to them try to quantify and track them, but even then there is considerable uncertainty. What is their data collection strategy? Is it appropriate? Is it reliable? What is the County's role in this, if any? Measuring and tracking outcomes and impacts to try to determine the comparative value and efficiency of services funded by HSAB is especially challenging given the wide diversity of program areas funded(ranging from youth afterschool to emergency shelter to primary medical care), the size of the organizations funded(total operating budgets range from $52,000 to over $10,000,000), and HSAB funding amounts (ranging from $5,000 to over $500,000). Also, because organizations often request funding for different programs and services from one year to another, tracking year-to-year outcomes isn't always possible. Organization-centered measures are measuring the integrity of charitable organizations. Its benchmarks are standard non-profit industry measures for determining financial integrity, and the HSAB already requires funded organizations to provide this information to them as part of their evaluation and funding recommendation process. The HSAB evaluates the financials and boards of each applicant. The funding application specifically requires: • Financial documents including: 5010 status, annual audited financial statements 1, IRS Form 990s for the most recently completed fiscal year 2, By-Laws, and Policies and Procedures Manuals. • Budget schedules including a line item breakdown of the organization's total expenses (for current and past fiscal year), a line item breakdown of the organization's total revenues (for current and past fiscal year), and staff positions with compensation details (for current and past fiscal year), including CEO or Executive Director compensation. Organizations with total operating budgets of less than$150,000 are not required to do annual audited financial report. 2 The IRS permits small organizations to file a 990 EZ,and that is what they are required to provide to us. 17 • Proof of active, independent boards, including an updated Board of Directors list that shows a minimum of 5 directors and their terms, along with the meeting minutes that demonstrate annual elections of officers. HSAB requires that all organizations provide the IRS 990 for their most recent completed fiscal year 5 in their applications and proof of filing that form. Each organization provide, along with the 990 in its application, a current print-out from Guidestar that demonstrates that the 990 they are providing has been filed, so that the HSAB may have this information in their evaluation. Some of the organizations, due to their small operating budgets, currently file 990 EZ, consistent with County and IRS requirements. According to the IRS, beginning in 2010, all organizations that have gross receipts in excess of$50,000 but under $200,000 are eligible to apply for a 990- EZ. The EZ does not contain a Statement of Functional Expenses (which shows the breakdown of program and management costs). The BOCC encourages organizations to take care when assigning their programmatic and management expenses on their 990s, in order to make the 990 a better and more reliable tool in the evaluation process. However, the HSAB does not rely solely on 990s to determine an organization's financial integrity. HSAB require organizations to submit their filed 990s,but it also requires up to date, line-item expense and revenue budgets and staff position titles and salaries. The HSAB reviews carefully reviews each organization's administrative expenses for reasonableness. It expects that financially responsible organizations will maintain a reasonable administrative infrastructure. The HSAB also looks carefully at the compensation level of an organization's CEO or Executive Director and often discusses CEO and staff salaries at its annual funding recommendation meetings. The HSAB applies the standard of reasonableness, reviewing CEO compensation(and all staff salaries) in the context of the organization's annual budget, the scale of its operations, the number of other senior and executive staff, and the overall responsibilities of the CEO/Executive Director(ED). The BOCC does not have a policy on CEO/ED salaries. In the cases where the ED salary percentages appear high relative to the size operating budget, the ED is often the only staff person or only one of two staff members and is performing both ED and staff functions in the organization. In the cases where the ED salary is comparatively high in relation to the number of FTEs, the ED is often managing volunteers, rather than paid employees or FTEs. 5 Form 990,990-EZ,Schedule A,and 990-T must be filed by 15th day of the fifth month following the end of the organization's tax year.The tax year for most non- profits ends on December 31 st,so the normal filing deadline is May l5th. If the deadline falls on a Saturday,Sunday,or legal holiday,the returns are due on the next business day. Non-profits can request an automatic three-month extension of time to file all information returns by submitting Form 8868,Application for Extension of Time To File an Exempt Organization Return(PDT,4 pages).The organization can request an additional three-month extension(not automatically granted)by filing another Form 8868 and filing out the information in Part 11. 18 The HSAB relies on additional metrics for financial performance in its funding evaluations. These include: 1) The ability to leverage outside dollars with HSAB funds (match). The HSAB strongly encourages the use of HSAB funds to leverage other sources of funding. 2) Whether or not HSAB funds are requested for services already performed by another entity(duplication). HSAB members strongly encourage cooperation and collaboration among providers to avoid duplication of services and to maximize HSAB funding. Organizations' service descriptions are carefully reviewed and representatives are often questioned at the funding recommendation meeting. 3) Agency's ability to attract volunteers. Every single organization funded this year reported the use of volunteers. Most of our smaller organizations that are not strong at leveraging outside dollars, do in fact leverage the time of scores (sometimes even hundreds) of volunteers and thousands of volunteer hours. Finally the HSAB funding process has one more additional powerful metric to ensure financial performance. All contracts are reimbursement-based; this means that an organization must first provide the program service, pay the expenses for the program service, and provide the proper documentation related to the expense. The County does not pay any ineligible expense or for program services that are not delivered and documented. Currently, Schedule E in the application asks for a line-item breakdown of expenses from which a reviewer can make a general determination as to excessive administrative costs. Schedule B in the application asks for a list of position titles and compensation for each. From position titles, the reviewer can make a general determination about which staff members are administrative or programmatic. (Appendix C-3) 19 19 HSAB Agreements Each non-profit given HSAB funding enters into an agreement (or contract) with Monroe County to provide specific services to specific residents for the amount agreed upon. The County staff draws up these Agreements, the County Attorney reviews them, the BOCC approves them and the County Clerk and Mayor sign off on the Agreements to execute them. (An example Agreement is attached at Appendix D) After execution and before reimbursement, each non-profit must provide the following documentation (if they have not already). These requirements are specified in the Agreement. • IRS Letter of Determination and GUIDESTAR printout indicating current 501(c)(3) status; • List of the Organization's Board of Directors of which there must be at least 5 and for each board member please indicate when elected to serve and the length of term of service; • Evidence of annual election of Officers and Directors (generally in the form of meeting minutes); • Unqualified audited financial statement from the most recent fiscal year for all organizations that expend $150,000 a year or more; if qualified, include a statement of deficiencies with corrective actions recommended/taken; • Copy of a filed IRS Form 990 from most recent fiscal year with all attached schedules; • Organization's Corporate Bylaws, which must include the organization's mission, board and membership composition, and process for election of officers; • Organization's Policies and Procedures Manual which must include hiring policies for all staff, drug and alcohol free workplace provisions, and equal employment opportunity provisions; • Specific description or list of services to be provided under this contract with this grant (see Attachment C); • Annual Performance Report describing services rendered during the most recently completed grant period (to be furnished within 30 days after the contract end date.) The performance report shall include statistical information regarding the types and frequencies of services provided, a profile of clients (including residency) and numbers served, and outcomes achieved; • Cooperation with County monitoring visits that the County may request during the contract year; and • Other reasonable reports and information related to compliance with applicable laws, contract provisions and the scope of services that the County may request during the contract year. 20 20 Reimbursement All contracts are reimbursement-based; an organization must first provide the program service, pay the expenses for the program service, and provide the proper documentation related to the expense. Only then will the County make a payment to the organization. Attachment C in each Agreement describes the services eligible for funding. County staff, during preparation of the agreements, ensures that the language in Attachment C is consistent with the services that were applied for and approved by the HSAB. Currently, HSAB requests for reimbursement go directly to Finance; a process that has been in place for several years. The Finance Department carefully scrutinizes and documents every expense prior to payment. The Finance Department has copies of all agreements, including all Attachment Cs. Only expenses directly related to those services are eligible to be reimbursed. The basic guidelines and requirements for reimbursement are in the Agreement under Attachment A. These guidelines, as they relate to travel, are from the Monroe County Code of Ordinances and State laws and regulations. A cover letter summarizing the major line items on the reimbursable expense request needs to also contain the following notarized certified statement: "I certify that the above checks have been submitted to the vendors as noted and that the attached expenses are accurate and in agreement with the records of this organization. Furthermore, these expenses are in compliance with this organization's contract with the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners and will not be submitted for reimbursement to any other funding source. " Invoices should be billed to the contracting agency. Third party payments will not be considered for reimbursement. Remember, the expense should be paid prior to requesting a reimbursement. Only current charges will be considered, no previous balances. Reimbursement requests will be monitored in accordance with the level of detail in the contract. This document should not be considered all-inclusive. The Clerk's Finance Department reserves the right to review reimbursement requests on an individual basis. Any questions regarding these guidelines should be directed to the County's Finance Office. Data Processing, PC Time, etc. The vendor invoice is required for reimbursement. Inter-company allocations are not considered reimbursable expenditures unless appropriate payroll journals for the charging department are attached and certified. Payroll A certified statement verifying the accuracy and authenticity of the payroll expense is needed. If a Payroll Journal is provided, it should include: dates, employee name, salary or hourly rate, total 21 hours worked, withholding information and paid payroll taxes, check number and check amount. If a Payroll Journal is not provided, the following information must be provided: pay period, check amount, check number, date,payee, and support for applicable paid payroll taxes. Postage, Overnight Deliveries, Courier, etc. A log of all postage expenses as they relate to the County contract is required for reimbursement. For overnight or express deliveries, the vendor invoice must be included. Rents, Leases, etc. A copy of the rental or lease agreement is required. Deposits and advance payments are not allowable expenses. Reproductions, Copies, etc. A log of copy expenses as they relate to the County contract is required for reimbursement. The log must define the date, number of copies made, source document,purpose, and recipient. A reasonable fee for copy expenses will be allowable. For vendor services, the vendor invoice and a sample of the finished product are required. Supplies, Services, etc. For supplies or services ordered, a vendor invoice is required. Telefax, Fax, etc. A fax log is required. The log must define the sender, the intended recipient, the date, the number called, and the reason for sending the fax. Telephone Expenses A user log of pertinent information must be remitted including: the party called, the caller, the telephone number, the date, and the purpose of the call. Travel and Meal Expenses Travel expenses must be submitted on a State of Florida Voucher for Reimbursement of Travel Expenses. Travel reimbursement requests must be submitted and will be paid in accordance with Monroe County Code of Ordinances and State laws and regulations. Credit card statements are not acceptable documentation for reimbursement. If attending a conference or meeting, a copy of the agenda is needed. Airfare reimbursement requires the original passenger receipt portion of the airline ticket. A travel itinerary is appreciated to facilitate the audit trail. Auto rental reimbursement requires the vendor invoice. Fuel purchases should be documented with paid receipts. Taxis are not reimbursed if taken to arrive at a departure point: for example, taking a taxi from one's residence to the airport for a business trip is not reimbursable. Parking is considered a reimbursable travel expense at the destination. Airport parking during a business trip is not. A detailed list of charges is required on the lodging invoice. Balance due must be zero. Room must be registered and paid for by traveler. The County will only reimburse the actual room and related bed tax. Room service, movies, and personal telephone calls are not allowable expenses. 22 Mileage reimbursement shall be at the rate established by ARTICLE XXVI, TRAVEL, PER DIEM, MEALS, AND MILEAGE POLICY of the Monroe County Code of Ordinances. An odometer reading must be included on the state travel voucher for vicinity travel. Mileage is not allowed from a residence or office to a point of departure. For example, driving from one's home to the airport for a business trip is not a reimbursable expense. Meal reimbursement shall be at the rates established by ARTICLE XXVI, TRAVEL, PER DIEM, MEALS, AND MILEAGE POLICY of the Monroe County Code of Ordinances. Meal guidelines state that travel must begin prior to 6 a.m. for breakfast reimbursement,before noon and end after 2 p.m. for lunch reimbursement, and before 6 p.m. and end after 8 p.m. for dinner reimbursement. Non-allowable Expenses The following expenses are not allowable for reimbursement: capital outlay expenditures (unless specifically included in the contract), contributions, depreciation expenses (unless specifically included in the contract), entertainment expenses, fundraising, non-sufficient check charges, penalties and fines. 23 Information Dissemination Aside from using emails and advertisements to keep everyone on board grants cycle information, there is also the County website to upkeep. 24 1W RESOLUTION NO. 27,7.- 2009 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING AUDIT AND OTHER REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS RECEIVING GRANTS FROM MONROE COUNTY. WHEREAS, Monroe County annually grants funding to a number of not-for-profit providers of human and community-based services that benefit the health, welfare and safety of the general public; and WHEREAS, for a number of years the grant contracts have required all such grantees to provide audited financial statements regardless of the size of their operations, amount of grant, or the total revenues and expenditures of the organizations; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners recognizes that the audit requirement is a financial burden, particularly for the organizations operating with very limited funds and/or not already obligated to provide audited financial statements to other grantors; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners also recognizes that if independent financial accountability is not required by the grantees, the burden will have to be borne by the taxpayers to cover more extensive auditing by the Clerk's office; and WHEREAS, it is desired to provide a compromise solution that alleviates the financial burden on the grantees which operate on minimal revenues yet retain a level of accountability that minimizes the additional burden to the Clerk and, ultimately, the taxpayers; and WHEREAS, it is also desired to obtain additional information as to the services provided by the grantees in order to assist the Human Services Advisory Board and the BOCC in decision-making regarding grant applications; now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Board OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY that: Section 1. Agreements for the grant of funds to a not-for-profit organization for the provision of services to the public shall require submission to the Office of Management and Budget, Grants Department of the following: A. For organizations with total annual expenditures of $150,000 or more, including the amount of County grant, an annual audited financial statement from the organization's most recently completed fiscal year and an IRS Form 990 also from the organization's most recently completed fiscal year. (If the audit is qualified, the organization must include a statement of deficiencies with corrective actions recommended/taken.) B. For organizations with total annual expenditures of less than $150,000, including the amount of County grant, an IRS Form 990 from the most recently filed tax return (but no more than one fiscal year earlier than the grant award). C. For all organizations, two performance reports; a performance report describing services provided during the prior fiscal year (to be furnished at the start of the grant period) and a final performance report describing services provided during the current grant period (to be furnished within 30 days after the contract end date.) The performance reports shall include statistical information regarding the types and frequencies of services provided, a profile of clients (including residency) and numbers served, and outcomes achieved. D. All organizations receiving funding from Monroe County are subject to a financial audit by and at the discretion of the County Clerk. Section 2. This resolution shall replace any previously established policies on contractual requirements for submissions of financial statements, both audited and non- audited, and shall be supplemental to any requirements previously established for reports regarding services. Section 3. This resolution shall become effective for grants commencing October 1, 2009. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on thel6th day of September, 2009. Mayor George Neugent Yes 7.1 Mayor Pro Tern Sylvia Murphy Yes _ v} Commissioner Heather Carruthers Yes Commissioner Mario Di Gennaro YesCD Commissioner Kim Wigington Yes -u` =• A Attest: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMNUSWN&S::o OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA — y � Deputy Clerk Mayor sHava x x x x C ssow a 'S H00 x x x x ssow x x x x x x x x x x x O HOC] x x x x de�aanp off x x x x x x x x x o `o o - E y Y — L N r 3 _ ol 3 E a E .E o o - - _ - v v mm a 3 lo _ E- E 3 E 0 3 oc 01 E _ ol E tb o y ¢ vi Y Q E y °°`E° Y E o - E o E £ - E _ a .3 _ in o oM y 3 E - o - m U U c N E - o .3`o m N - Y 3 m L c - E O v d - N - dE - m o L U .E v E c a m L v n -_ _ L.� t E M E _� 3 L - c c E 0 oo Zc ovo o "oo 76 tf o Is EI --O m _ v v E o E O fi - v uo od 0 o n m v v c d a o o a f U dai ' ' ov E - ' - dV c " _ i' O F vJ - V m N U U U o ¢ E CU7 U m - N so " E rn o o d E = x o 3 a Y O _ £ zi ¢ o 0 cry Z E o o - Q V o = V Y obi "NO N N N o 2i _ N E Y - E of N � N oo n o o mo N N o a o m � N a N (D m N Ili] it] N � M m N_ r m _ �cl h m � N_ c h "O li 1R Z N O O 0 O O O O I� O' O _ _ _ _ h 1t O _ N O N O c0 N N N f0 N V M O W N N y N3 Hi +H U} fA N3 s3 s3 U3 Y3 N fR fR fA N3 V3 to to U} N ~ � C N q O M � a cD U N y M (O a C "' a lad. TABLE OF CONTENTS • Executive Summary..............................................................................................................3 • Overview of Findings.............................................................................................................4 • Background.........................................................................................................................10 oDOGE Background..................................................................................................10 oFAFO Background...................................................................................................12 • Broad Themes.....................................................................................................................14 o Soaring Property Tax Revenues Enable the Pattern of Excessive Local Spending.................................................................................................................14 o Overspending Reflects Broadly Undisciplined Spending Across NumerousAreas....................................................................................................16 o Many of Florida's Largest Cities and Counties Continue to Practice DEI,With Few Efforts Underway to Undo Years of Indoctrination in Unlawful Practices.................................................................................................................22 o Florida's Cities and Counties Have Wasted Huge Sums in the Pursuit of ESG Ideology and Other"Climate Change" Efforts Without Measurable Benefit....................................................................................................................32 • City and County Examples..................................................................................................36 oOrange County........................................................................................................37 oCity of Jacksonville..................................................................................................43 oCity of St. Petersburg..............................................................................................47 oHillsborough County...............................................................................................51 oMiami-Dade County................................................................................................56 oCity of Pensacola....................................................................................................61 oCity of Orlando........................................................................................................66 oAlachua County......................................................................................................70 oBroward County......................................................................................................74 oPinellas County.......................................................................................................78 oManatee County......................................................................................................81 oPalm Beach County................................................................................................85 oCity of Gainesville...................................................................................................89 • Recommendations for Improved Governance, Fiscal Responsibility,and Streamlined Government Services..........................................................................................................94 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Florida's Department of Government Efficiency(Florida DOGE)was established by Governor Ron DeSantis through Executive Order 25-44 to continue to advance his administration's quest to provide Floridians with efficient, productive state agencies; colleges and universities that educate, not indoctrinate; and local governments that operate efficiently,transparently, and with respect for the taxpayers who fund them. Rooted in the Florida Constitution, law, and implemented through executive action,the Florida DOGE effort at the municipal and county level focuses on identifying overspending,waste,fraud, and abuse,with the ultimate goal of reducing financial pressure on Floridians. The Florida DOGE initiative delivers value to Floridians by"opening the books"on local government spending and applying consistent, data-driven methodologies to evaluate how taxpayer dollars are used. Reviews rely on public records analysis, individual and statewide data requests, on-site evaluations, and advanced technologies, including Al.This approach allows the state to identify spending trends and structural inefficiencies that traditional audits often miss,while maintaining fairness and objectivity.As Governor DeSantis has emphasized,the upward trajectory of local government spending must change to allow Floridians to own their own homes without being squeezed every year in order to continue to live in them. Property taxes are an expense that is entirelywithin the control of governments to rein in, and by ending the era of irresponsible spending, Florida and its local governments can give Florida's homeowners freedom from this burden. To date, Florida DOGE teams(comprised of staff from multiple state agencies) have conducted on- site reviews or initiated formal examinations in multiple jurisdictions, including Alachua County, Broward County, Hillsborough County, Manatee County, Orange County, Palm Beach County, Pinellas County,the City of Gainesville,the City of Jacksonville,the City of Orlando,the City of Pensacola, and The City of St. Petersburg,with additional jurisdictions pending.These reviews have identified broad themes in local government spending growth and a wide array of specific examples of inefficient or excessive spending. In addition, Florida DOGE saw evidence of widespread DEI and ESG activities, both past and present,that contravene state policy. Complementing the Governor's Florida DOGE initiative, Chief Financial Officer(CFO) Blaise Ingoglia's FAFO (Florida Agencyfor Fiscal Oversight) initiative provides a dedicated transparency arm within the Florida Department of Financial Services.While DOGE serves to uncover specific instances of wasteful spending and abuse in local governments, FAFO focuses on excessive local- government spending through budget audits and analysis. Florida DOGE's authority sunsets on July 1, 2026. 3 ,�„Iril11""'r � l,.tip„Ai,, .,,ov, 11111r,S Dil�G OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS Under the leadership of Governor Ron DeSantis,the State of Florida has enacted disciplined budgets, coming in well under the baseline fiscally-responsible budget of$126.69B, based on applying the increase in population and the level of inflation since that time,to the Governor's proposed FY2019-2020 budget.The example of the State illustrates that this level of fiscal responsibility is attainable. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis's proposed $117.3,68 Floridians First budget of$117.36 billionRoridians First Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 spends: $9.33 billion less than Florida's Fiscal Year 2019-2020 budget, adjusted for inflation and population growth. $ 6.690 sawn Sk I nsibie Explainer Florida DOGE calculated the fiscally-responsible budget based on the$91.27 billion "Bold Vision for a Brighter Future" budget that Governor DeSantis recommended in 2019, his first year in office.Since that time, Florida's population has grown by 10.2%(according to the University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research)and inflation has totaled 26%(according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), $126.69 billion is the result of increasing $91.27 billion by both percentages. 4 0 CA 1, ("31 ov, 111111111r,S I G 0 D A D 0 G "r I E E Rapidly Growing Saending in Cities and Counties In contrast to spending restraint at the state level, Florida's local government spending has soared over the past few years from already-high levels,fueled by the ready availability of ad valorem tax dollars from Florida's rising property values. The 10 largest cities in Florida budgeted $6.39 billion to spend from their general funds in Fiscal Year 2025—a 36% increase from Fiscal Year 2021, and a 67%increase from Fiscal Year 2017.While this increase is disproportionate to population and inflation increases,this underscores the need to protect the opportunity for families to own their own home by enacting property tax relief, as Governor DeSantis has urged. Jacksonville Orlando FY17 FY25 FY17 FY25 Miami Tamp ,St. Peters rg FY17 FY25 FY17 FY25 FY17 FY25 Source:DOGEAnalysis of City Budget Documents This increase is not driven primarily by core government functions such as law enforcement, firefighting, and emergency management. Growth in general fund spending in the 10 largest cities, excluding public safety, exceeds population and inflation by$660M since 2017 and approximately $400M just since 2021. Under Governor DeSantis' leadership, Florida has consistently supported the men and women of law enforcement while Democrat-led states have sought to vilify and defund them. Excessive growth in non-public safety spending compromises the availability of taxpayer funds for these core safety functions. 5 l„' I`„1DA')CM O l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;lI VT SIP ID 1, County budgets are also growing at an excessive pace.The five largest counties in Florida—Miami- Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Hillsborough, and Orange—budgeted $10.8 billion in general fund spending in Fiscal Year 2025—a 49% increase from Fiscal Year 2020-21. FY21-FY25 FY 1-FY25 FY21-FY25 FY21-FY25 FY21:- FY25 Hillsborough County Miami-Dade County Orange County Broward County Palm Beach County $2,377,247,222 $2,522,427,000 $1,601,683,714 $1,923,741,690 $2,373,562,814 +49.2% +46.4% +43.8% +36.7% +69.0% Dilf Source:DOGEAnalysis of County Budget Documents Total growth in general fund spending, excluding public safety, exceeded population growth and inflation by over$1 billion in just 4 years.Within these totals,the rate of growth of public safety spending was just 36%,which is nowhere near the rate of growth on non-public safety spending. The absence of budgetary discipline by local governments is clear.And with an ever-increasing flow of property tax dollars into their coffers,they see no need to change course. Even those that have given the pretense of reducing millage rates nonetheless sit atop a much- increased revenue stream, in part due to continually increasing propertytaxes. In Jacksonville, a nearly 95% increase since Fiscal Year 2017. In Miami, almost a 100% increase. In Orlando, an over 108% increase. In The City of St. Petersburg, an over 110% increase.And in Tampa, more than a 130% increase. Il' a MT 1=1 « .. . 6 l„0,"ZJDA')C I 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1 VT SIP ID 1, Growth Across Every Spending Category As part of Florida DOGE's goal of reducing financial pressure on Floridians,the Florida DOGE review of local government spending identified numerous examples of questionable or irresponsible spending across the state. From large, such as an $80M increase in grants to non- profits in Orange County,to not-so-small, like the$175,000 in "virtual art" paid for by Broward County',the priorities of Florida's local governments have been to spend your money like it belongs to them. Y„ ON 11Yf?fYH➢b,7Ul(V7 h IIY NW�M1Yl Y.yI� 1 amwu "' wue � wxm 6N'dWfatayqkN6rNv�baw/M6fWWv6Dyp, p , A view of the "virtual"version of Fort Lauderdale Airport, which Broward County created so that users of Meta's immersive online environment can view"virtual art." The problem goes beyond ill-advised priorities like these. One of the largest contributors to the excessive spending of property tax revenues has been spending to reward local government personnel with higher salaries. Personnel spending has been growing rapidly across Florida's local governments at every level, up to and including department heads and executive leaders. Indeed, across the 10 largest Florida cities, personnel compensation increased by over$1 billion in just 4 years—significantly faster than the rate of population increase and inflation. ' Broward County's"Arts in the Metaverse"is an immersive online experience where users can"visit"on a digital device various"locations"from around the county,such as Fort Lauderdale International Airport,for the purpose of viewing art in those locations. 7 � I„' IFDA')OGI OI 0 C A 0,! P,1 IT S I/ ID 1,G Growth in Personnel Compensation, 10 Largest Cities 4.5 4. $260M in excess of population _..........._._................. �� �J����, Lw.. 'a'ndinflation 3.5 a 1065 . 2.5 2.0 1.5 www 2021 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...........2021 Adjusted wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.......... pr r d i n------- "Adjusted Spending"reflects the 2021 spending level,increased for inflation and population growth between 2021 and 2025.Source:DOGEAnalysis of City Budget Documents 8 „0I,.IFIDA I10G1„ ;�;,I1 '�0 0C A LG 0 a U,l14 JIT S 111 G DEI Remains Prevalent Further, in jurisdiction after jurisdiction, Florida DOGE found that officials have prioritized race- based programs to promote "DEI" in violation of America's core principles. Florida DOGE identified substantial amounts of DEI activities in recent years in a variety of forms: from internal training to external grants to explicit, race-based targets for hiring.While some of the jurisdictions that Florida DOGE reviewed have ended their DEI programs,what Florida DOGE didn't identifywere significant efforts to undo the harms from previous DEI activities. r%/r III°'l w� �` D T I L. x� S4��lAE EC,�t91T"'t � ���) II DIVERSITY.. G AND INCLUSION IN THE WORKPLA1,11, Images from local government training and marketing materials reviewed by the DOGE team The unlawful efforts of local governments to pursue DEI are matched in their folly by the relentless and ill-advised pursuit of Environmental and Social Governance (ESG) by these jurisdictions in the form of an uneconomical and unscientific "green" agenda. Florida DOGE's review found that cities and counties are squandering millions in virtue-signaling about a so-called climate crisis. 9 �� l„0 �D A ',)0 G 1„, 0l''r 0 1, ,.00l h 111,1, IT SIF"I;h AID ",4,a BACKGROUND Florida DOGE Florida was "DOGE before DOGE was cool," as Governor DeSantis has explained, and indeed, Florida's "Free State of Florida" label could easily be re-envisioned as the "DOGE State of Florida." The responsibility to manage tax dollars responsibly is an ongoing one, and it's a challenge that arises anew everyyear given the number of tasks that the people have asked their government to take on and given the complexity of many of those tasks.Secondly, changes in technology, in the Legal landscape, and in the relationship between the state and federal governments mean that state agencies and state institutions of higher education need to consider whether approaches that have been effective and efficient in the past continue to meet those standards.And third,the state exercises limited and indirect control over the spending of local governments, including counties and cities. In recognition of these factors, and in light of the public enthusiasm for DOGE at the federal level, Governor DeSantis decided early in 2025 that a State of Florida DOGE review of spending in the state of Florida would bolster the confidence of Florida taxpayers in their state government and help extend Florida's track record of delivering fiscally conservative governance to local governments. Accordingly, on February 24, 2025, Governor DeSantis issued Executive Order 25-44, establishing within the Executive Office of the Governor(EOG)an EOG DOGE team. Executive Order 25-44 focused Florida's DOGE efforts on three principal sets of governmental units: state agencies; colleges and universities; and county and municipal governments. The EOG DOGE team supports DOGE efforts within state agencies as well as a financial team examining Florida's universities focused on improving the compliance of colleges and universities with state policy and spending, efficiency, and effectiveness of local government activities. In June 2025,the Florida legislature reinforced the DOGE team's authority with provisions in Legislation. Codified as Chapter 2025-199 of the Laws of Florida,this legislation authorized DOGE team members to go on-site at the physical premises of local government entities. It emphasized that local governments are required to provide information when DOGE requests, and it provided enforcement authority for these requests in the form of a potential fine of local governments for non-compliance. Acting in concert,the FL DOGE Team and the Office of Policy and Budget(OPB),with assistance from the Department of Financial Services (DFS), requested information from every city and county in the State of Florida. Subsequently, it carried out visits to the physical premises of 12 city and 10 � l„M"', I;JAI,1O.„ii„, I ril1N' tip„Ai,, .,,OV' 11111r,S Dil�G county governments during late July and August of 2025 to dig deeper into indicators of: (1) overspending and waste; (2), diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives; and (3) duplicative or redundant government functions that were identified through the review of publicly-available data previously directed by Governor DeSantis' Executive Order. DOGE site visits were carried out by staff drawn from across the State of Florida executive branch, including personnelfrom the Department of Revenue (DOR),the DFS,the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT),the Department of Management Services (DMS),the Department of Corrections(FDC), Florida Commerce,the Department of Education (DOE), and OPB.While there were some commonalities in the subjects reviewed, each visit was also distinct—oriented by information requests made to each jurisdiction prior to the visit as well as by the DOGE team's review of public information,tips from concerned Floridians, and information previously provided by the cities and counties.This is the report on those activities required by Chapter 2025-199. 11 „0,"ZJDA')CGI O l,.0C A h f-1,;0,!I„k,l ;l I VT SIP ID 1, FAFO In parallel with Florida DOGE, CFO Blaise Ingoglia established his own initiative to highlight the wasteful, excessive spending practices of local governments. His initiative,the Florida Agency for Fiscal Oversight(FAFO), has reviewed 11 local governments over the last six months and exposed more than$1.86 billion in excessive wasteful spending.These local governments range from large counties like Miami-Dade County to major cities like Orlando and smaller counties such as Alachua County.The FAFO initiative has reviewed many counties that were visited by the DOGE team, in addition to other local governments chosen by the FAFO team. FAFO's calculation of wasteful and excessive spending begins with a local government's General Fund Budget for 2019-2020 and indexes forward for five years, accounting for population growth and inflation,then comparing the 2024-2025 budget to the amount yielded by the calculation. The difference is the amount of taxpayer dollars that FAFO has identified as wasteful and excessive.This jaw-dropping$1.86 billion is not a cumulative total over five years; it is the amount of wasteful spending included in a local government's budget in just Fiscal Year 2025-2026. While Florida DOGE has focused on specific line items, FAFO has focused on overall growth in government, itself wasteful bloat that diverts resources from productive, private economic activities.This is excess beyond what is necessary to serve their residents effectively, and taxpayers are tired of paying for it. 12 % I„0 A")0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C 0 P1111 VT SI 1, OVER $1.86 BILLION IN WASTEFUL SPENDING S E-w D .......................................................... .................................. .VL S.A1*xP;I"tQ VIC k.C............:.:........................_ ,:.:::.... ..:...:,, $190 MILLION $199 MILLION . ,� $278 MILLION $84 MILLION $189 MILLION $48 MILLION $112 MILLION $94 MILLION 0x= $302 MILLION 22 MILLION - $344 MILLION Source:FAFO While many local governments have tried to rebut the FAFO review by using Fire and Sheriff budgets as scapegoats for growth,the FAFO team has consistently disproven their argument. In Palm Beach County,for example, FAFO calculated that the local government excessively spent $344 million in taxpayer funds.When the CFO and the FAFO team used the same calculation on just the budget for the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office (PBCSO),the budget for PBCSO had actually increased less than inflation and population growth over the last five years.While there is no price to place on the safety and security of Floridians,the FAFO team's work, especially in conjunction with that of Florida DOGE, demonstrates that local governments can safely cut their budgets without impacting public safety or essential services such as fire, sheriff and police. 13 f")U LOCAL l I,,,, ,,,, „1 /L,,L I 1 IP,4L,,I-VT '.,,,I'L,,L;ID 1 11,G BROAD TNEMES Soaring Property Tax Revenues Enable the Pattern of Excessive Local Spending As "The Free State of Florida,"the attractive business environment under Governor DeSantis' leadership has once again made Florida a destination for those relocating across America.This helped drive property values to record highs,with the overall taxable value of property in the state rising at least 6%each year from 2017 to 2025, and a total increase of over$1.7 trillion—more than doubling the taxable value during this period. ...I...Ih I axalb[e Value of Il::::: ori1da Property DoubledAfter01„ $5,00 16% 13.0% 14% cu 14.3% i $4,000 10.3% 12(% $3,478 0 $3�12 10°/7 ° 8% 7.3% 7.1% 6.4% $2,913 0 s $3,000 ♦ ♦ 6.7% 8!0 s ♦ ♦ $2,578 ? $2 56 $1,987 $2,121 8.3% 6% °s $2,000 $1,729 $1,855 4% ;* 2% 1,()00 0% 2017 2018 2019 2020 2.02.1 2022 2023 2024 2.02.5 Milli Statewide 1raxalale;\/a[LJe($13) ♦Gi,ou t.h fton,r IPi oi,Yea r Source:DOGEAnalysis of Florida Department of Revenue Data If tax rates remain the same, rising property values provide an automatic boost in revenue to the governments imposing the tax: a stealth tax increase that burdens property owners, particularly young families and retirees.The pattern across Florida is that cities and counties have taken advantage of this,with the amount of taxes levied rising only slightly more slowly than the growth in property values. 14 l„M"', DAI.1O.„ii., J"I"]31 W1'rC' l,.0CA1,, .,3,ov, 11111 ', Dil�G Ad to r it l -taxes levilled h ire in iinea rly $151113 shnce2017 $35.0 $M30.0 $27.4 .00 $2.5.0 $21.7 $2 .4 V) $2O.0 $1 .3 $ . 1 . $1 .2 $ 0.5 0 $1, "0 $10"0 �.r $5"0 $0.0 cts 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 I::::I.urirla.Y c ounties IIIIIII I::::Ioi•ida irrruniciloal.itues Source:DOGEAnalysis of Florida Department of Revenue Data Despite the increased revenue from ad valorem taxes,the 10 largest counties have enacted only incremental reductions in the millage rate, if rates have been reduced at all. rn ii Ilf,,,°t iiriii d a's 10 Ill iirg t in-dies,, my 1113irevaird III,oweired Mitt Mittage 1111ates I[ y % or 11114ore 1113etweein Ilf::::Y 21 aind Ilf°°' 8.000 7..000 6..000 c 5.000 O O O .4. 000 o o o o �a 2.000 j 1..000 Ica C"x p y ' r� 0i �� C.r Gap Cj CO e ■II:::Y2.11 IIIIII111111I:::Y2.2 111111::::Y23 m I:::Y24 II:::Y2.5 To their credit, Brevard County leaders lowered the county-wide millage rate supporting Board of County Commissioners agencies each year during this period, over 20%in total. Pinellas and Polk Counties each lowered millage rates four out of the five years,with Pinellas's overall millage rate declining by nearly 13%during the time period. Broward County raised its millage rate three times between Fiscal Year 2021-22 and Fiscal Year 2024-25. 15 0 I',I;ID A I,10 G L,, '0 I'( „111111,1111 I,,,„i C A L ,,,,0,/L,,L I 1 I i IT I'L,,L 11,ID I G Overspending Reflects Broadly Undisciplined Spending Across Numerous Areas DOGE's review of city and county spending identified a wide array of unrewarding, ill-advised, and excessive spending that stretch into every area of city and county budgets.To achieve the goal of reducing financial pressure on Floridians, and as a best practice, each jurisdiction should begin their budgeting cycle by asking the fundamental questions that taxpayers should insist on: • "What are the programs and activities we must spend money on this year?" • "Which of these programs and activities can we change to deliver better value to our citizens?" • "What are the things we did last year that we could stop doing?" Instead,year after year, most cities and counties begin with three sets of numbers: the prior year's budget;the prior year's anticipated actual spending levels; and anticipated changes (usually increases) in revenue for the coming year.The changes in revenue are distributed across all the things that were done previously, requests from lobbyists, non-profits, and voters for new things to be done, and, if residents are really fortunate, a token amount to be used to reduce taxes or fees. This is how Floridians end up with the examples of excessive spending set out subsequently in this report, including on: • Grants to non-profit organizations for everything from "therapeutic art"to "food justice"to assisting illegal aliens in receiving free public benefits and fighting deportation • Continuing taxpayer subsidies for"public radio"stations to which the U.S. Congress has ended funding, in recognition of their partisan agenda and wide array of private funding sources, including their backing by deep-pocketed multi-billion-dollar global foundations • Tens of millions of dollars of barely used bicycle lanes in pursuit of a vision of pedal- powered commuting that will never be realistic in Florida's long, humid summers • Costly-to-operate and low-ridership transit systems stretching far beyond areas of sufficient density to warrant public transportation • Expensive, consultant-driven "strategic plans" on dozens of topics: sustainability, equity, green energy, electric vehicle procurement, staff compensation, economic development, etc.These plans are often slickly developed, little-used, state the obvious, or provide expensive or unrealistic solutions • Excessive pay for executive and professional staff, receiving substantial contracts and premiums to salaries elsewhere in public service 16 % I„0 A")0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C 0 P1111 VT SI 1, • Oversized human resources and training departments, deeply committed to placing DEI principles ahead of merit and performance • Unneeded taxpayer subsidized "amenities"that compete with small businesses in the private sector:from public yoga sessions to publicly-operated bars and grills • City-and county-owned vehicles serving questionable public needs • Local governments maintaining financial reserves well in excess of the 10 percent of annual operating expenditures that would align budgeting practices with private-sector standards of liquidity management and Florida's state-level Budget Stabilization Fund of 10%of general revenue collections? Every jurisdiction reviewed by Florida DOGE set reserve targets well above this level, often excessively so. For example, in Fiscal Year 2023-24,the City of Orlando targeted a range of 15%to 25%for general fund reserves and achieved 26%. The City of Fort Lauderdale targeted 18.3%(two months of expenditures), and far exceeded that level, reaching 37.9% DOGE observed that uncontrolled spending has proliferated in virtually every department and category. However, several trends are worth spotlighting: 2 Private enterprises limit reserves to encourage efficiency and prevent the accumulation of idle funds that could otherwise be invested or returned to shareholders. For local governments,this would mean returning the funds to taxpayers through tax or tax rate reductions. In addition, it would protect these funds from growing into off-budget pools of money that escape public scrutiny and/or encourage unnecessary spending. In site visits and other engagement with local government officials, Florida DOGE concluded that a major cause of these enlarged reserves is that external recommendations from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA)have trended higher over the years,thereby encouraging local governments to raise their targeted reserve levels. 17 % I„0 A',)0 G 1111 I 0 0 1, I,.0C Ah . 0,!I„k,l1P,1, VT S U!a Across-the-Board Raises and High Leadership Salaries Are Driving Heightened Personnel Costs Across the 10 largest cities, personnel compensation increased by over$1 billion in just 4 years, and nearly$1.5 billion since 2017. Since 2017,that increase has outstripped inflation and population growth by nearly$400 million. Even if compensation increases had been limited to the level of inflation and population growth just since 2021,taxpayers in these cities would have saved over$250 million in Fiscal Year 2024-25 alone. • r � r IIIIII� p ; .cDvb 36. Gk 3 6% Source:DOGEAnalysis of City Budget Data Of the ten largest cities, only Orlando held its growth in personnel costs since 2021 to the level of inflation and population growth. irOwt h i in 0 ira in ge C.",0 u u in ty lPe irs O in in e i S Ip e in d i in g ii in II:::::ii 1[ aind Adirnilinistirative L..4-fl t s $18,0(.xQ),000 $15,804,977 $1 6,c.1()0,C100 $13,452,450 $14,000„000' $11,594,580 $12,000',000' ..,.... »•' $10„0'00,000' $9,096,812 9,843 $8„000„000 $6„000,000 $4,000,000 II Y21 Actual, II Y22 Actual, I:Y23 Actual I:"Y24 I:Y25 11 Wiman Resoui,ces iiiiiiiii N1ainageiTie n t and 1::3udget m l:lsc,al and 1::3usii ess Sei'vic;a s In several jurisdictions, DOGE observed particularly dramatic growth in human resources (HR), management, and legal personnel during the last fewyears. For example,while Orlando held personnel costs in check, Orange County saw personnel spending in HR and two other fiscal and administrative units soar by 75% between Fiscal Year 2020-21 and Fiscal Year 2024-25. 1 l„0I`„IFS A ',)0GI„ �;,I'0l1,'r0 0 CA h ("1';0/,I„k;li,l,4', IT SIF" lD ira In Orange County, as in many of the cities reviewed by DOGE, cost increases were not driven by the hiring of more staff: HR staff increased by less than 10%, and the Fiscal and Business Services and Management and Budget Full-Time Equivalent(FTE)employee levels were essentially flat. Personnel spending per FTE increased by nearly$50,000 per year for the HR and Management and Budget staff. In another example, spending in Broward County on County Attorney personnel increased by$8.5 million—nearly 80%—between Fiscal Year 2019-20 and Fiscal Year 2025-26.While that includes an increase from 79 to 87 staff(with several of the new positions reimbursed by other departments), the per person cost was the principal driver.The average FTE cost in the CountyAttorney's office rose by 61%, over$85,000, during this time.While this occurred, the office discontinued its previous metric for measuring performance, no longer pushing lawyers to meet a 1,900 hour "billable"threshold. I131rowaird COuinty ttoirin y's Personnel[ Costs $19,448,510 $2.0,00(3,000 $19,081,810 $17,318,307 $16,000,000 $15,545,078 $13,855,267... $11,893,454 $12,000,000 $10,919,165 d° $8,000,000 $4,000,000 II:Y20 II Y21 I::Y2.2 II Y23 I::Y24 I::Y2.5 II YY26 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Revised 1::3i duet I13 udg t Source:DOGEAnalysis of County Budget Data Looking at the ten largest cities in Florida, only in two (Miami and The City of St. Petersburg)did the number of non-public safety staff increase substantially faster than the rate of population growth, even while personnel spending soared nearly everywhere. When DOGE team members asked during site visits about exploding personnel costs, local governments frequently asserted that increased benefits expenses were the driver of cost growth. But DOGE found that in general, growth in wages and salaries outstripped the growth in benefits, particularly over the longer term. In Orlando,for example,wage and salary expenses increased by 79% between Fiscal Year 2015-16 and Fiscal Year 2023-24; while benefit expenses increased just 36%over the same time period. Similarly, in Jacksonville, salaries have grown 71%, more than twice the rate of benefits. 19 „0,"ZJDA')C I 0I',' 0 1, l,.0C Ah ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1 VT SIP ID 1, While Governor DeSantis has continuously championed pay increases for law enforcement officers and others performing the essential government function of public safety, collective bargaining, particularly for other employees, is a significant driver of personnel costs in many of the cities and counties examined. Many other states have enacted limitations on collective bargaining for public employees in recent years (often with exceptions for public safety employees), recognizing that the process of collective bargaining does not work well when unions are "negotiating"with the recipients of large amounts of campaign donations.Year after year, city and county leaders have approved generous requested raises and rarely required that these increases be warranted by an improvement in performance. Leadership level pay in local governments has also increased dramatically, often to the benefit of short-tenured executives who have not made a long-term commitment to the communities in which they are serving. In one recent example,the City of Miami has awarded its new city manager a contract that pays$475,000, up from just$275,000 in 2019. It has become routine for small cities to pay their city managers$200,000 or more, only to quickly lose those individuals to still-higher salaries in bigger cities.The salaries of county administrators, enterprise organizations, and department heads throughout local government have often escalated as well. Florida DOGE found that pay increases are often justified by the purported need to be "competitive"with the private sector, but this neglects the principle that public service is a reward in itself and that the responsible use of taxpayer funds mandates caution in compensation. 20 „0,"ZJDA')OG1 O l,.0C Ah . 0,!I„k,l ;l1 LEISIP ID11, Information Technology Spending Has Soared, but Cities and Counties are Challenged to Consistently Demonstrate its Value Many local government officials shared with the FL DOGE team that they find information technology spending to be a significant source of frustration and a major drain on their budgets. Quantifying technology spending is difficult even within a single jurisdiction. Most cities and counties have an information technology or technology services department; however,the scope of the functions within that department varies widely. Many localities do not include technology hardware spending within the budget of that department. In addition, spending of all types can be embedded in services contracts or included in capital spending. Looking at 9 of the 10 largest cities in the state,the DOGE team found that spending on technology departments and selected categories of IT equipment or capital spending increased by over$100 million between 2017 and 2025, at a rate nearly 3x that of inflation. Some of this spending is attributable to cybersecurity and other resilience projects in response to a growing awareness of the threats from bad actors. Many cities and counties were able to point to individual projects—particularly web-based, public- facing, self-service tools that have made interacting with local governments easier—as success stories for their information technology spending. In many cases, however,these were the less- expensive projects.And local officials were less confident about the success of larger-scale projects to improve the IT infrastructure underpinning their office operations. DOGE is mindful that organizations in the private sector as well as in the public sector, including at all levels of government, have struggled with large-scale technology refreshment and replacement projects in recent years. However, local governments should keep aware of whether new, modular software solutions, potentially with A.I. driven efficiencies, and other transformations of software development are enabling the emergence of new options and new competitors.These thresholds that can help address technology costs across the range of software needs, including at the enterprise level should lead local governments to be particularly cautious now in investing large sums in expensive solutions that may,whether formally or practically, lock them in for the long- term. 21 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, Many of Florida's Largest Cities and Counties Continue to Practice DEI, With No Prominent Efforts Underway to Undo Years of Indoctrination in Unlawful Practices The foundational principles of America are equal protection under the law, merit-based governance, individual liberty, and, ultimately,the idea that all Americans succeed and fail as individuals, not as cyphers representing some group broader than themselves. DEI represents a profound departure from these ideals—and yet Americans have faced a divisive series of lies from the so-called "elites" in the bureaucracy, in the media, in Hollywood, and in academia, such as: • That the founding of America—which indisputably set in motion the triumph of the ideals of individual equality and improved the world immeasurably—instead represented an effort to oppress disfavored groups • That the biological reality of"male"and "female" does not exist • That statements of principle such as "I believe in meritocracy" are actually"micro- aggressions"that represent"violence"against others • That the individual members of some races and genders must be deliberately made the victims of conscious discrimination today to make up for discrimination by other people in the past with whom they happen to share a race or gender Collectively, DEI advocates demanded that"DEI" and "equity"function as a comprehensive framework for rebuilding American society along these misguided principles, seeking to have it influence everything from employee training to procurement policies and insisting it be "embedded" in organizations to institutionalize identity politics and defy efforts to remove or uproot it. DEI's flaws are stark. Human beings are all created equal in the image of God.The pronouncement of these ideas in the Declaration of Independence rocked the world and ushered in an era of unbounded human aspiration and progress.The U.S. Constitution and federal law prohibit its practice, particularly in government. Governor Ron DeSantis has consistently rejected this divisive effort to discriminate, exclude,and indoctrinate. Guided by his leadership, Florida has taken numerous actions to eliminate DEI activities, particularly those involving race-based initiatives and gender ideology. In May 2023, Governor DeSantis signed Senate Bill 266, prohibiting public colleges and universities from using state or federal funds for DEI programs, effectively banning such initiatives and requiring reviews of courses promoting identity politics. Governor DeSantis also signed the Stop WOKE Act(HB 7) in April2022,which prevents K-12 educators from indoctrinating children through teachings that imply racial guilt or privilege and prohibits critical race theory(CRT) in K-12 education by defining it as discriminatory instruction.The Stop WOKE Act also protects against the censorship and 22 % I„0 A")0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C 0 P1111 VT SI 1, cancellation seen in other states and at the federal level on these issues, safeguarding employees and students from compelled speech on DEI topics. Governor DeSantis also enacted the Let Kids Be Kids package in May 2023, including bills banning the catastrophic and irreversible chemical treatments and surgeries on minors and ensuring that schools recognize the science that men and women, boys and girls, are different.And Governor DeSantis has tackled the academic fount of these hateful ideas,with Florida's Board of Governors implementing DEI bans and rejecting woke ideologies. May 2021 April 2022 March 2023 January 2024 SB7072:Prohibits March 2025 deplatforming of political HB7:Stop WOKE Act prevents HB1069:Expanded Board of Governors candidates and otherwoke divisive and mandatory race-based prohibitions on issues final approval Gov.DeSantis unveils censorship training gender Identity of rules to implement Florida Holocaust indoctrination ban on DEI in Memorial universities ----------------- -------------------t----------- April 2021 July 2021 March 2022 January 2023 May 2023 January 2025 ,Overhaul of New SB266:Bans funding H 61:Accountability Board of Education HB1557:Prohibition � Board of Governors for rioting led by adopts nation's most on gender identity, College of Florida for DEI in higher approves revised professional agitators thorough standards for indoctrination in board to reorient education general education such as Black Lives Holocaust education grades K-3 academic direction requirements, Matter reducing woke content in curricula The Attorney Generals of Florida and the United States have each recently released memoranda describing how DEI violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law. On January 19, 2026,Attorney General James Uthmeier issued a legal opinion explaining that multiple provisions of state lawthat mandate racial preferences are unconstitutional.AG Uthmeier's opinion focuses on Supreme Court precedents related to "the moral imperative of race neutrality" and concludes that it is"clear that honoring and enforcing the Fourteenth Amendment's promise to root out all forms of racial discrimination must be uniform throughout contexts and circumstances." While AG Uthmeier focuses on the implications for state law, U.S.Attorney General Pam Bondi's July 29, 2025 "Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination" provides a comprehensive outline of how DEI activities at all levels of government violate federal law and the U.S. Constitution.This guidance strips away DEI's veneer of benevolence, declaring that no program, regardless of label(DEI,AEDI, etc.), can justify discrimination and that"[u]sing race, sex, or other protected characteristics for employment, program participation, resource allocation, or benefits is unlawful, except in rare cases meeting strict legal standards." AG Bondi's guidance also documents the illegality of"proxy discrimination,"where facially neutral criteria mask bias. For example, requirements like "cultural competence" or"lived experience" in job postings or other criteria constitute unlawful proxies if they evaluate based on racial backgrounds. Nor is discrimination permissible by replacing racial composition with geographic targeting that corresponds to racial composition, a place where DEI advocates try to hide discrimination. Similarly,sex-separated spaces—bathrooms, locker rooms, orwomen's 23 l„0 �DAL10G 0I ,'r0 iI,.0C A L ("1';0/, '[I„I,I ° ID ,G athletics—must remain intact; permitting men identifying as women to access them breaches Title IX's privacy and opportunity protections. The opinions of AG Uthmeier and AG Bondi are rooted in the opinions of numerous state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.There can be no doubt that DEI and its discriminatory intent and effect are both wrong and unconstitutional. Unfortunately, DOGE's review found that city and county officials across the state unabashedly joined in DEI efforts, deliberately discriminating against their own citizens and subjecting their employees to ritualized brainwashing that would not have been out of place in the Chinese Cultural Revolution. For example: 24 „' I`„1DA')O I O l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;lI VT SIP ID 1, DEI Training Has Been Widespread, and its Effects Continue to Be Felt Virtually every city and county visited by DOGE site teams trained its staff in equity and other DEI principles between 2020 and 2025. In every case,these programs falsely taught city and county employees that discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and gender is not only lawful, but Legally and morally required. DEI focused trainings for local government employees included such misguided topics as: • Making pronouns matter • Unconscious bias • Energy equity • Transgender humility • "Micro-aggressions" • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Workplace • Traits of"Dominant White Culture" Not a single city or county visited by DOGE could identify significant follow-up engagement or training with employees to counter or reject the lessons of prior, DEI-focused trainings. What is a i ""' Example DE/ of trainingslide � � reviewed by unintended Florida DOGE ,, m ,�N, discrimination Florida DOGE's review of DEI materials demonstrates that past DEI training has sought to embed an intent to discriminate among the staff of government institutions by providing training that inflicts guilt on individuals for the past actions of other people who share their skin color, sex, or other innate traits. Public employees have also been taught that they are themselves unknowingly racist. DEI training then has instructed these employees to deliberately discriminate "in reverse"to make up for their so-called guilt and privilege, setting aside the "equal opportunity" required by law in a quest for"equal outcomes." 25 �� I„0 I A A ',)0 G 1 0I�' 0 I i l,.CC A 0,!I„k,I 1",4 I,I ID l U1,; To make their lessons persistent, DEI training sessions have forced participants to recite key phrases like"silence is violence" or"I am a racist,"swear oaths that they will"promote equity," and engage in humiliating role play exercises where others discriminate against them.This kind of psychological conditioning is not designed to educate people, but instead,to make them internalize what is being asked of them.Absent corrective action,this will likely lead some of those trained to, in the future, reflexively apply race and gender-based decision rules in program design, resource allocation, hiring, promotions, and discipline. "Embedded"DE/philosophy in � IU training materials reviewed by ��� 9�� �� Florida DOGE liulllilil lilil�lilllilulllllil�lulu ��� workplace culture. From strategic planning through each level of tactical work execution, DEI should be embedded in what we do not a checkbox to tick Effectively ending DEI based discrimination requires ensuring that public officials are making a commitment to the explicit legal requirements of color-blindness and neutrality,that equality of opportunity is the only lawful goal, not equality of outcome, and that merit, objectivity, and universal standards are the only nondiscriminatory way to operate a workplace. Florida DOGE has found little indication that the city or county governments Florida DOGE has reviewed are taking such steps to undo their recent,wrongful indulgence in DEI training. 2 �� „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;lI, VT SIP ID 1, Multiple Florida Cities and Counties Have Perpetrated Overt Discrimination in the name of DE/ • The City of St. Petersburg established unlawful race and gender-based hiring targets for the vast majority of city positions • Orlando required grant applicants to "explain what efforts you have made or plan to make to address inclusion, diversity, equity, and access in your organization" • Hillsborough County runs a 22 member"Diversity Advisory Council"where members are chosen on the basis of their race, sexual orientation, and/or gender �lraarourdtlax rarurgBi ,,p,y 4`esrirl V^n4G ',fli,�!,ir i [diversity ,advisory Council This Council works to facilitate communication between County government and its diverse populations, addressing matters related to diversity that are important to everyone. J(;.ve DiVm,,1iV Advh iy r rlfIV R QPd 4 i ,rEt2 Membership "Pkue�mrwr¢lSersFu��Z r>f this Grrtsrx:u�shall)Pte a¢'r�varntt^r7&�y the E'4ns+rc'I erb l:;tuui"«4y G;errnormr,w�fersier,aw}cE wily be r,^tarrulara!,�^r�a7P J2 rY�ermd�rr Y,Cw✓tz rr+lfirt�;wrMBatuwa!s frarfra�:itr„rPr r„rf 2Pn€;tr,�6Varsei�{�r,3E�+¢}wrur>,: » Afnc.'an American Carbbean • Fai East AsPan • Gay,Lesbarr,L'semA and Transgeider • Hispanic/Lafino w Ir6an Asian • In August 2025,Alachua County established an Equity Advisory Board tasked with redesigning County programs to deliberately discriminate to undo purported "pervasive racial and gender bias" • Broward County's Cultural Division required participants to have "Diversity goals achieved through intentional outreach efforts and/or partnerships" and a "commitment to diversity in staffing" 27 � l„0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 �;,I�0I�'r01, ,.0' AL ("';0,!I„k,l ;lI, VT SIP ID 1, Law Enforcement and Fire Rescue Have Been Weakened Through a Focus on DEl Rather Than Merit DOGE found multiple jurisdictions that allowed their DEI goals to infiltrate the performance of law enforcement and firefighting activities, including through policies, hiring, and training. • Pensacola recruits firefighters through a cadet program designed "to promote diversity" • Orange County channeled resources to a non-profit to support"race conscious" policing and "racialjustice de-escalation" • Orange County also celebrated the "diversity," rather than the quality, of its newly hired firefighters • Palm Beach Countyjoined the MacArthur Foundation's "Safety&Justice Challenge," obtaining$4.5 million to release convicted prisoners in the name of"eliminat[ing] racial inequities." To their credit,the County Commission swiftly acted to withdraw from this program once Florida DOGE identified it and urged reform • The City of St. Petersburg set explicit race, minority, and ethnicity targets for firefighters, police officers,fire lieutenants, and other personnel • Alachua County distracted its Fire Rescue department with training geared towards persuading personnel"that systemic sexism, racism, discrimination and inequality truly exists" 2 „0,"ZJFDA')C I O l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l I VT SIP ID 1, Local Governments Were Not Full.y Transparent with DOGEAbout Their DEI Activities Floridians are well aware of Governor DeSantis' commitment to ending discrimination in the name of DEI and returning equality of opportunity to its central role in public life.As a result, Florida DOGE teams carrying out site visits repeatedly found that local officials were reluctant to discuss their DEI-related activities, provided implausible answers and explanations related to DEI,or had failed to retain records related to past DEI programs. For example: In November 2024, Pensacola released a$130,000 city-wide strategic plan prepared by a consulting firm that"put[s] racial equity at the forefront" and which directed the city to"prioritize racial equity,"to achieve"equitable outcomes from everyone," and make DEI central to its activities in other ways.While the plan is featured on the city's website, Pensacola's leadership implausibly claimed in the summer of 2025 that the strategic plan has"not yet" been put to any use and that its DEI components would not be pursued. /% 1 , / / City Government O,khnftir.M,Y.Y City .. �C.""'il :: •: . f3f ii Cl &C msins / P7,fOftYI d,,,e N f.Iisnold C,YYaY tnr C1Hices De aft,e ts&DiMsi ,, ... p plr,%�� ,f J:� / /%V,;,li A N/��r�//��/ ,✓���� i INN City f7t W di^tl ., AmulrlYC RCt2YY'dti• ,, ,•. ,�. / /// ��/VIII pGI�I �r II,%/� �/ �/ /// f U n 0 w Re Lcat fJd pit allirui,Yavrarri¢nP Gi.7aroLn , i� S�VAV111V�11I119N(�JG/%/ /O iEntNrprf>:':w:, Similarly, although Pensacola released an "Equity Survey" in 2024 as part of a more than $160,000 consulting project, Florida DOGE team members were told there were no city staff who could provide information on the background, purpose, or intent of the survey or provide the survey's questions and responses. In Orlando, city officials told DOGE reviewers that its "Office of Equity"was dissolved and "had not existed since February 2023." However,the Office of Equity appears in the City's Fiscal Year 2024- 25 budget(adopted a year and a half after its purported elimination)with staffing of 3 FTEs. 23 �� „0I,.IY�DAIJ0G1" IR tmI�'r0 10C G 0/,I„ '[ [l 1D kG During the site visit to Hillsborough County, Florida DOGE team members interviewed representatives of the Diversity Advisory Council,which carves residents up into 10 different identity groups. • When asked how the 22 members of the Council were chosen,they at first denied that selection was based on membership in demographic categories such as"Far East Asian" and "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender," claiming instead that representation was assigned by neighborhood • However, documents provided to DOGE state that representatives are to be chosen based on identity, and when challenged with those documents (and the implausibility of there being neighborhoods organized by sexual orientation or disability status),those interviewed acknowledged that membership was chosen by race, etc. The City of Jacksonville initially told the DOGE team that the city made only one DEI-themed grant, excluding the Cultural Council of Greater Jacksonville(CCGJ)from its responses to DOGE requests. • When confronted, Jacksonville conceded that the CCGJ exercises the grant-making authority of the city • As illustrated by Jacksonville's initial response,this outsourcing of the grant-making function—and the limited information provided to the public by the CCGJ—serves to conceal the city's extensive support of DEI through grants 0 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;lI, VT SIP ID 1, Local Government Grant Programs Across the State Are Used to Fund DEI Over the last decade, hundreds of billions of dollars worldwide have been funneled into nonprofit organizations dedicated to the adoption and propagation of DEI frameworks,with "strings- attached"funding used to recast the work of many previously neutral nonprofits through the lens of DEI. In 9 of the 12 cities and counties in which DOGE conducted site visits, local jurisdictions were continuing to provide substantial support to nonprofits committed to, or structured around race, gender, and DEI ideology.And in many of these instances, DEI-promoting nonprofits remain explicitly preferred in local jurisdictions'grantmaking processes. For example: • The City of St. Petersburg built a high-profile competition to award a$1 million grant project explicitly to "prioritize innovation, inclusivity, and equity" • The City of Orlando required organizations to explain their DEI plans as part of grant applications • Broward County made "a stated and demonstrated commitment to diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion"the top item in its list of qualities sought for funding recipients • The City of Gainesville required grantees to explain the roles of racial and ethnic minorities in their operations and gave out funding to support scholarships that excluded on the basis of race and sexual orientation/gender identity In summary, DOGE identified more than$20 million of taxpayer funds being channeled annually from local governments to DEI-oriented nonprofits across the state of Florida.The statewide increase in property values should be used as an opportunityto reduce financial pressure on Floridians, not to engage in unnecessary spending of tax dollars to support private nonprofits through expanded grants, let alone to support such organizations in discriminating on the basis of race, sex, and other characteristics. 1 „' I`„1DA")CM O l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1 VT SIP ID 1, Florida's Cities and Counties Have Wasted Huge Sums in the Pursuit of ESG Ideology and Other "Climate Change" Efforts Without Measurable Benefit Local governments across Florida have squandered large amounts of taxpayer money on capital investments, and incurred high ongoing operating costs, in pursuit of policies supposedly necessary to combat a so-called "climate change emergency." The July 2025 U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) report,A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate, provides a rigorous critique of the supposed justification for this spending, most of which has long been absent from the public narrative. In particular,the DOE report highlights weaknesses in the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its Executive Summary,the source most widely reported on for unscientific claims that a "consensus" requires this wasteful spending. Global Weather Disaster Losses as Percent of Global GDP;1990-2023 (S—:Mram h Re.W W 8an0 a updue &b Pk* 1010i MCI. HB es 034% t. —amend is u S y( r, k aAu% � .w. A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S.Climate 0,001% g $ •, a m.a a I a a a a a Figure 11.1 Global weather losses as a fraction of GDP.Source:Pielke Jr.(2023) Specifically,there are serious problems both with the claimed science underlying climate change hysteria, and the proposed responses. In terms of the science: • The climate models relied on by the IPCC have failed to accurately replicate the recent past, differ widely in their forecasts of the future, err on the side of too much warming. Moreover,the media, academia, and many government officials indefensibly rely on the most implausible, extreme version of these models 32 411"'Ir�l��`r�1.. I... lI;�r�� /I„I�bU,I�[I„I�Jal ',I'I;,Il�llllkra • Natural factors such as the sun mean that the Earth's climate is constantly changing. Estimates for the sun's impact on observed increases in temperature range from the sun being responsible for most warming to none at all' • There are substantial weaknesses in the underlying temperature measurements used to show warming,which have been biased upwards by their placements in urban and airport locations surrounded by distorting elements ranging from blacktop to jet engine exhaust. While the IPCC claims that temperature data sets have been "adjusted"to account for this, the DOE report casts doubt on this claim • Scientific evidence does not support claims of a long-term increase in so-called "extreme" weather events, including hurricanes,tornadoes,floods, droughts, and temperature records The report also demonstrates that proposals to realign government spending to"address" climate change are ill-advised and wasteful. Specifically: • On balance,atmospheric carbon dioxide increases and any warming that occurs will likely be a net benefit to U.S. agriculture • As long as energy remains affordable, adaptation to changes in temperature means there is little human health risk from such changes • The costs of trying to prevent global warming, if occurring, outstrip the benefits by tens or hundreds of trillions of dollars • Even the most dramatic U.S. "climate policy" actions will have negligible effects on future temperatures DOGE's site visits revealed that local governments have almost entirely ignored questions about the reliability of the science and the costs,trade-offs, and limited benefits of their spending on these initiatives. Expensive actions are often portrayed as unquestionably necessary and virtuous, and their benefits are assumed. Wasteful spending in support of climate initiatives can take a number of forms: • Electric vehicles (EVs) and EV infrastructure,to achieve "decarbonization" of the transportation sector • Membership in, partnership with, and commitment to goals set forth by international organizations or domestic nonprofits,frequently in ways that are at odds with the policies s Similarly,the role of underwater seismic and volcanic activity on ocean temperatures, and through heat transference, atmospheric temperatures, has received relatively little study.The work of Dr.Arthur Viterito has outlined strong correlations between such activity and changes in atmospheric temperature,water vapor,and cloud cover. 33 % I„0",'Z, A',)0 G 1111 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C h . 0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT S 1 1, of Florida or the United States. For example, Miami-Dade County, Orlando, and 10 other Florida cities have joined the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, committing to spend staff time and public funds to develop so-called "greenhouse gas inventories," expensive anti-energy policies that even go beyond the national targets set in the Paris Agreement, and other inefficient and wasteful actions. • Expensive to build, expensive to operate transit projects, based on the idea that "combating climate change" requires limiting the use of private automobiles • Spending on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, animated by the belief that "decarbonization" requires the replacement of mechanical transportation with muscle- powered transportation altogether for many trips • Installation of solar power systems into government facilities • Additional design expense for government buildings to achieve "green" certifications • "Studies," "Plans," and "Strategies"for local government"climate action" • Government staff positions dedicated to"Sustainability," "Green Energy," "Climate," and other similar"functions" DOGE's review of individual jurisdictions identified hundreds of millions of dollars of wasteful spending either being implemented, planned, or considered to accomplish these climate-related objectives. For example: • The City of Jacksonville directed the Jacksonville Electric Authorityto develop a plan for converting 100%of the city's non-emergency on-road vehicles to EVs, at a cost of$105 million • The City of St. Petersburg signed up for a "Climate Challenge" run by Bloomberg Philanthropies, committing 55%of their"Sustainability&Resiliency Director's"time to supporting the program, along with the involvement of dozens of other staff members • In Jacksonville and Pinellas County, DOGE identified sidewalk projects estimated to cost$2 million-$3 million or more per mile—compared to an FDOT average of$900,000 per mile • Broward County entered into a "climate compact"with Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Monroe Counties, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to host climate workshops, an annual"climate summit", and engage in other activities • Miami-Dade County has already massively expanded its spending on Transportation and Public Works in support of climate-based transit initiatives, including a$40 million surge in general fund spending within just 3 years, and is planning new bus and rail initiatives that the County estimates will need $100 million in annual operating revenue subsidies, adding 34 „0,"ZJFDA')OG1 O l,.0C Ah ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1 VT SIP ID 1, to the pressure on the county budget.While Florida DOGE found that some transit programs can be appropriately justified by impacts on traffic and convenience for Floridians, climate should not be central to the design and justification of transit programs When questioned during DOGE's site visits, local government leaders frequently cited other justifications for climate-related projects, such as lower maintenance costs (EVs), poverty reduction (mass transit), and demand for outdoor recreational amenities,'but DOGE's review of public discussions, public statements, and budget justifications revealed this to be after-the-fact rationalization. In reality,the primary justification for most of these projects over the last decade has been the so-called "climate emergency." Further,when DOGE sought documentation that city and county staff or leadership had explored the potential impact of proposed projects on climate, DOGE discovered that such consideration almost never happened. Local officials should by now be aware that most climate ideology is not backed by reliable science.And common sense should tell them that"green" spending at great expense on a small scale is unlikely to deliver any actual benefits on a large scale.They owe it to taxpayers not to spend money for which the only benefit is as an expensive example of virtue-signaling. 4 Floridians in several jurisdictions highlighted examples in which cities and counties are increasing their spending on infrastructure for walkers and joggers, including trails,expanded sidewalks, and dedicated spaces within public parks,while having recently implemented new policies to restrict public access to existing, publicly-funded jogging tracks at public schools.The same pattern is occurring with public and school playgrounds for younger children. Many school districts appear to erroneously believe that closure of outdoor school facilities is a requirement of,or intended by,state law,such as the school safety requirements of Florida Statutes 1006.07(6)(f). However, Florida DOGE's review indicated that the Legislature has specifically sought to advance public access to school recreational facilities through Florida Statutes 1013.101 by encouraging the adoption of shared-use agreements,for which there is a specific exemption in the school safety laws. Florida DOGE's review also identified no evidence to support school concerns that such public recreational use would increase vandalism or liability. 5 � I„' I`„lDA")CM O 1, 0' A (1';' ,!I„k,l ;l '[ VT SIP ID 1, CITY AND COUNTY EXAMPLES This section provides information on the DOGE team's findings in the thirteen cities and counties to which DOGE made jurisdiction-specific information requests pursuant to the authority provided in Chapter 2025-199. DOGE teams made site visits to twelve of these jurisdictions. Each chapter begins with one or two illustrative tables or charts related to the DOGE team's review, along with (where appropriate) an example graphic from DEI materials identified during the DOGE review. The chapter then includes identified examples of excessive or wasteful spending and DEI activities. Examples of violations of law or policy noted by DOGE are also included. 36 � l„!,11%I DAI,1',,�o,,ii„ ,�„I�ril;h'rll� l,.tip„/bi,, ., !,1�1„I� IkI '[I„L Orange County • Population: 1,536,045 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$1,601,863,714 • County Employees (FY 24-25): over 8,000 • Millage Rate:4.4347 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $79,053 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 5th and August 61" Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Orange County's General Fund Spending Expanded by Nearly 90%, While County Population Grew Just 17% Population •.. 1,536,045 •,0 •.. :0 +88-.5a/n 800,000 LU • $1,043 000 !,,,, BudgetFiscal Year 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 General Fund General Fund General Fund .• Budget Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 37 IlO� ��I„ ��;,I�0� ''r 0 I,.t�'�,/ h.�O „i „k,I ;I '[I„Il I PI;;V�I111�!a lirainge County's Aininuat Grain-Urnall iiiing Increased Il y Over IIr Ii1111JII1oin Iiinjust seven years. $45 $4M $40 $35.8 $;'35 $30.0 $30 $25 $20 $15 $12.7 1 0 $5.5 $4.9 $4.7 $5 $1.0 $0.8 $1.3 $1.6 $0 $0.0 Citizen's I'll E'll1.1 iealth Y0L1trr an d I::::ai ly Nledic',al Clinic; I Nousing;and I::::c oim and f rade Cczrrri Sian for and 11ioil Cr. rnil Children 1Develaloi'nent 2018 IIIII111111 2.025 1::1,i d ge t DEI Takes Center Stage in Orange County Orange Coursty Government A-Foil ow Orange County F re Rescue Department,F erida ras made history" jeq The eew,rest fire r'ecrd'rts Claw,91,are the tricot diverse Glass f•!reat by tine CREWHealthDepartment,Of the Cq asp;nng firefighters,bra#f are of Hispanic,Pluck or PM I Asian descent are 19 are ferriage,warner now represer+t g percent of aN firefrghters at CUCFPD,a number more thair,twice the rational average°DE PRON, y�f 1J, sa';,poR yranrt A NIGHT OVER G i THE RAINBO i mnsgender JUNE Humnity gmnnm, aa .. 0 Employeer i .6 � / � V�S � Vll�r � ✓ "7 33 rrl„!,ll%IDAI,l!„ G111, 'Gi t,.'ICNIL', 4 JIT'S ,LII),G Ilia innost func-doinal areas, it in County's speindiing has giro win sliginificairvtly sirice IFY 2018 19 2,500 159% 2,000 98% 109% 83% 60% 1,500 66% 600/, 37% 39-/0 47% ,r,Ooo 500 -14% 0 11 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 111 M 10 G C3 0�1 .0 CO 01 4�111 010 m F::Y2018 2019 111111111 F::Y2024 2025 Source:DOGEAnalvsis of Orange Countv budget documents Otv tge Cour,ity FT'E Cl iar ige, 2018-2025 Lffitftles WMANAWK PulNic VVDrkem loom Plaiiiinkig,an,iiJ Enviin)nnientrfl, now F'h'e Rewii.�(,,t Comer;dc m n ISeatth SeMces ull Convention BMW Coii,nrnuri6ty ario,.1 Farffity SeMces, INIM22101mili Aclrn41n' stll"wMQ Sir,,,^,Mces AjlrnIiIflstii'atlon and Rsca�ServioI She,Hff 0 500 1000 15M 20(X) 2500 M2025 N2,018 Source:DOGEAnalysis of Orange County Budget Data 39 31 Orange County Excessive Spending Examples • $6.7 million in growth on personnel spending in the HR, Management and Budget, and Fiscal and Business Services units between the actual spending in Fiscal Year 2020-21 and the budgeted spending in Fiscal Year 2024-25 - This reflects an increase from $9.1 million to$15.8 million - As FTE levels were mostly flat,this represents a 63% increase per FTE in HR, and a 52% increase per person in Management and Budget • $15.9 million in additional spending from the General Fund on Conservation and Resource Management between Fiscal Year 2020-21 and Fiscal Year 2024-25:growth of 136% - Had budget growth in this department been limited to the rate of inflation, population growth, and a 5% buffer, Orange County would have saved $12.2 million in Fiscal Year 2024-25 • $6.6 million in additional spending from the General Fund on Mental Health Services: growth of 71% between Fiscal Year 2020-21 and Fiscal Year 2024-25: growth of 136% - Had budget growth in this department been limited to the rate of inflation, population growth, and a 5% buffer, Orange County would have saved $3.4 million in Fiscal Year 2024- 25 • $9 million+ per year in annually renewed contracts with a security guard vendor that has repeatedlyfailed audits - Despite repeat findings by the county comptroller that the contractor has repeatedly left guard posts unmanned and failed to meet training,testing, and communications commitments, Orange County has not prioritized either addressing shortcomings or replacing the contractor with a new provider • An $80 million+ increase in grants to non-profits since 2018, many with woke, DEI, or "climate change"focused missions.This includes: - $30.0 million in grants for mental health and homeless services budgeted in Fiscal Year 2024-25: an increase of$24.5 million from 2018 - $35.8 million in grants through the Citizen's Commission for Children in the 2025 budget, an increase of$23.1 million from 2018, and awarded on criteria that included the presence of"diversity goals" and DEI approaches • Rapid growth in the reliance on overtime to fill staffing needs - In Fiscal Year 2024-25, overtime pay accounted for more than one-third of total pay in three major departments: Utilities,Administrative Services, and Health Services 40 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, - Overtime pay is growing rapidly: up 171% in the Public Works department since Fiscal Year 2019-20; up 101%in Administrative Services since Fiscal Year 2019-20 - 804 employees made more in overtime pay than in base pay,with 18 employees making more than 150%of their base pay in overtime, likely exceeding the point at which it would be more fiscally responsible to hire additional personnel, even leaving aside the toll on workers of excessive hours in the workplace - With retirement benefits calculated based on five or eight of the highest years of pay (consistent with state law),the long-term costs of extreme overtime can last for decades as this adds to the county's costs for these workers once retired • Extraordinarily large leave payments on separation: up to$129,000 per employee - Over$1.1 million per year in leave is being paid out to employees who receive more than 25%of their annual salary as a lump-sum leave payout Orange County DEI Examples • Years of required or encouraged DEI training, including: - Race and equity training from the non-profit"Race Forward" - DEI included in EMS training - "Transgender Humility Training" • $223,000 for LGBT Youth Services from the Zebra Coalition - Sponsors the"Youth Pride Prom" • $50,635 to the Stono Institute, a "racial justice" organization that promotes race-conscious policing • $322,000 for a "disparity study"to create"evidence" of"discrimination" in government contracting—and Orange County's was used as a marketing tool by the consulting firm to get further contracts with entities like Palm Beach County • Fire Department social media posts emphasizing diversity, rather than quality, in its hiring • County newsletters promoted the#1 reason for adverse health outcomes in minority groups the cause of"perceived discrimination" 41 „0I`„10A')C I 0I',' 0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1 VT SIP ID 1, Other Items of Note • Lack of management discipline - DOGE auditors found that in the management and coordination of grants and county procurements, standard practices and disciplines were lacking or non-existent - In many cases, invoices did not show specifics of what services had been rendered nor whether the recipient had met any required criteria or milestones worthy of reimbursement or payment - In other instances, procurement documents were missing, not included, and/or could not be readily produced when requested.These included executed agreements, scoring sheets, and contract amendments - Even with the assistance of county staff, rarely were any of the grant or procurement expected contract workflows and standard documents found to be complete. For most of the reviewed contracts,there were holes in one or more of the following: procurement process,funding source, recipient information, and invoicing practices 42 l„' I`„IDA")CM 0 ','r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1 VT SIP ID 1, City of Jacksonville • Population: 1,062,593 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$2,069,543,71 • City Employees (FY 24-25): 8,195 • Millage Rate: 11.3169 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $68,069.00 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 7th and August 8th Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Jacksonville's Ad Valorem Revenue Nearly Doubled and General Fund Spending Expanded Over 70%, While County Population Grew Just 16% $2,500 970,562 •.Wion 070 800,000 $1,500 600,000 LU 000 $1, 400,000 142 $741 00 200,000 .0 Fiscal Year 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 Source:Jacksonville Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 43 „0"Z, AI10 G 111, 0l'Ir0 0C,/ 0„il„k,l1",14,I,ll ',.,I°I;h..11 ra Overview of Jacksonville Spending Jacksonville's City Council deserves partial credit for the actions taken during 2025 to approve a millage rate reduction from 11.3169 to 11.1919 mills,with the City Council voting 10-9 to do so, and to impose modest restraints on elements of the Mayor's proposed budget, such as reducing the budgeted number of non-public safety city employees from 3,794 to 3,768.The City Council also established a Special Committee on Duval DOGE to analyze recent growth in City Departments and programs to identify areas for potential savings, evaluate services provided to identify areas for potential savings, and to otherwise review the City's activities. Florida DOGE notes that even with the reduction in millage rates,Jacksonville's budget still projects a $76 million increase in ad valorem tax collections from the prior budget year.The non- public safety city employee count remains 44 above the number in Fiscal Year 2023-24, and this follows on years of substantial budget growth.The city also continues to fund external organizations which make DEI central to their missions. Grant EC==M== Arts for Justice Involved Youth is a visual arks prograrn at the John E.Crusade Pre-lrial Detention Facility for young risen age.s/���°/�� who are jailed while awaiting;trial.Flue tea the severity of their charges,they arc:being prcasecuted as adults,and sorne have been awaiting trial for rnrare than two years. I IL l'IdfV!�I Abstract painting is the prirnary genre of study.As students become rncrre fan°aihar with painti rig techniques,they discover they carr convey rn ood nand th ought thrraut;h color,lime arid scale,and learn when and how to take risks without rieg at,ivt ly irnpactirat,others. Source:Response to DOGE Information Requests;DOGE research and analysis. 44 % I„0',"Z, A")0 G 111, I 0 0 0C/ G 0/,I„ J,l 'll„la l ',.,I G Jacksonville Excessive Spending Examples • $1.9 million in Fiscal Year 2024-25 in "cultural"grants to organizations that have made DEI their central mission.Jacksonville makes these grants through an arrangement designed to insulate these grants from transparency by deputizing the "Cultural Council of Greater Jacksonville" as the awarding agency, excluding the CCGJ's specific spending from public budget documents, and leaving out this spending from responses to initial Florida DOGE requests • $7.5 million for a single, 1-mile sidewalk project. FDOT estimates that a 5-foot sidewalk on both sides of a road typically costs about$900,000 • $54 million more in capital spending for bike lanes and sidewalks than provided for Fire/Rescue in a recent capital improvement plan • Over$500,000 of excessive overtime, including: - 27 Parks and Rec staff who recorded an average of 650+ hours of overtime (equivalent to 16 additional full-time weeks of work) each.This included 4 staff members who exceeded 900 hours of overtime - 8 staff in the Traffic Engineering division who averaged 700+ hours of overtime each - 4 parking staff who exceeded 500 hours of overtime • A part-time Special Advisor to the Mayor paid at a rate of$105 per hour • The Holo-Donna, a hologram of the mayor to greet visitors to Jacksonville International Airport. Originally advertised as a $30,000 purchase,the price tag was closer to$75,000 Jacksonville DEI and ESG Examples • DEI funded through the CCGJ, such as: - $480,000 to the Cathedral Arts Project,which promotes "equity in arts education"for "Justice-Involved Youth" - $57,000+to Hope at Hand,which uses "therapeutic art" and poetry to help youth "overcome barriers" - $538,000 to the Jacksonville Symphony,which boasts of"being featured [as a] case study on DEI" and made a single executive responsible for both DEI and education before changing her title to hide her activities in 2025 • $27,000 grant to the Jacksonville Area Sexual Minority Youth Network(JASMYN),which aggressively supports the transgender agenda for children, primarily serving youth who indicate a 45 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, gender"other"than male or female.JASMYN is also guided by"racial equity" principles and adopted as its logo the rainbow bridge-lighting system that MOT has prohibited • $30 million in police and fire pensions have been invested with Victory Park Capital(VPC), based on a 2022 presentation that highlighted VPC's commitment to DEI.As of 2025,VPC remains one of Jacksonville's money managers and continues to highlight its commitment to DEI and ESG on its website • Jacksonville directed the Jacksonville Electric Authority to analyze the costs and benefits of converting 100%of the city's non-emergency on-road vehicles to EVs 46 „' I`„1DA")CM 0 ','r0 l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;lI �T SIP ID City of St. Petersburg • Population: 266,153 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$393,595,398 • City Employees (FY 24-25): 3,452 • Millage Rate: 6.4525 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $69,414.00 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 111h and August 12th Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Ad Valorem Tax Revenues in The City of St. Petersburg Have More than Doubled and General Fund Spending by The City of St. Petersburg Has Expanded by 66%, While City Population Grew Only 1% 11 Population Population Population 266,153 250,000 263,768 .1 ,778 $4 11 200,000 11 150,000 CL LU 11 :) $196.3 100,000 CO 11 $103.4 50,000 '.1 Fiscal Year 1 1 1 Fiscal Year 2024-25 ommi General Fund Budget �Ad valorem revenues Po p u lati o n Source:City Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 47 � I„' ;�AI1OG111, 0l , I,,� CA, 1, '[ S 11111,G Overview of St. Petersburg Spending Like many Florida cities and counties,The City of St. Petersburg's property tax revenues and spending have grown much more rapidly than population and inflation. In recent years,the city has modestly reduced the millage rate several times, but the city has focused its attention on DEI programs and policies, rather than on spending restraint. Florida DOGE's site visits identified The City of St. Petersburg as having some of the most egregious examples of wrongful DEI among the locations visited, and elected officials have publicly defended these programs. St. Petersburg Excessive Spending Examples • City funds spent to implement carbon reduction and electric vehicle promotion experts, following$307,000 spent on a sustainability action plan • Tens of thousands of dollars spent on small-dollar grants to organizations, many with extreme ideological missions to promote DEI objectives or other inappropriate missions. Beyond the substance of the spending, large numbers of small-dollar grants create particular oversight challenges for the city, and the burdens of meeting compliance requirements often impose costs on recipients that are disproportionate to the benefits provided by the grant • $1.1 million in salary increases in the Mayor's Office since Fiscal Year 2019-20—with two members of the staff receiving 60%+ in raises • 355 new city workers—10%+growth—between Fiscal Year 2019-20 and Fiscal Year 2024-25 budgets i I N1 miii r Source:DOGE analysis of St. Petersburg Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports 43 % I„0',"Z,F�;�A")0 1111 ��;,I�cz,, r�U I,.t C h . ' ,!I„k,l ;l '[I„LEI '.�,I�I;;I�iI11U!a St. Petersburg DEI Examples • Multiple highly-paid DEI executives, including: - $219,000 "Chief Equity Officer" - $87,000"LGBTQ Coordinator" - $102,000 "Cultural Affairs Director" - $123,000 "Community Justice Liaison" • 9 FTEs in the Office of Supplier Diversity,funded in Fiscal Year 2024-25 with $949,000 • Unlawful race, ethnicity, and gender-based hiring targets for 80%of city positions, including firefighters, police officers, public interaction workers, mechanics,water sewage workers, equipment operators,groundskeepers, and cashiers - These targets exist despite having 43%minority staff in the ranks of cityworkers, exceeding the minority share of the city population - City contracts with the "leaders in affirmative action software"to report on the gender and race of city employees to develop these targets • A$1 M, high-profile "competition"to have residents pick"their top choice" project to prioritize "equity," "inclusivity," and "innovation" • City committed staff time for many employees to support Bloomberg Philanthropies' American Cities Climate Challenge, part of the former New York City mayor's anti-carbon agenda • City established specific carbon emissions reduction targets for 2025-40% less than 2016 with little evidence in support of the idea that these emissions targets would affect climate or improve the well-being of anyone • The City of St. Petersburg joined the DEI-infused "Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy," committing public resources and funding towards expensive "climate action" policies • Nearly$100,000 per year spent to fund multiple"Pride" events, including those that groom minors, such as a "Pride Youth and Family Day" 49 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;lI, VT SIP ID 1, ® Petersburg's DEI-focused vision PILLAW........................................... PROGRESS uww lU Niuo aair � � I is tl PRINCIPLES FOR ACCOUNTABLE AND RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT III TOUCH INCLUSIVE INNOVATIVE INFORMED IMPACTFUL INTENTIONAL d':taor naprta o,,xh vv€ll be Everyc'mer FrwC1 have wa wc,will a rvrebrac�e new We will be 4o0ada d %W w 4l vvlk the We will urua:cul hai ds-eauu acdve in w„uR at ow,t aprolu'.. to lnn�csbd„uetie inew r:4a,as, by best,pwuaaatua'ws, (CUCStrwol 'Will it equity uA0 A paaa4lciet, the a`orn muwu it c.,wawad every as nsbtu e nt and d a rei,wi wvc partnerships dads,a bw:uw�vw e,;alwad improve the quaky vad' art a ouunuure tuwt om caafl aborative wwbtMI will by he., d,and to ryj)lervicnI effective our r of V"a hhaory. like for the people 0 gi o wth Cwearrmdrts our ordurowrlty entw, (we",entjiAoyaac WA Audons and inp,pauve St Petersburg errRr`wcauuuaovltolaaty, t'sur vavluaa,,d, ca nsfifto rtt aa.uvicws,. 50 % I„'ull,.lF�;�A")0 111, ��;,I r�l'�`i�UI,.t CA h .l ,!I„k,l1t"'I LEI '.�,I�I;;I��I11U!a Hillsborough County • Population: 1,575,637 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$1,548,454,953 • County Employees (FY 24-25): 5,200 • Millage Rate: 5.6026 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $75,011 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 111h and August 12th Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Hillsborough County General Fund Spending Nearly Doubled, While County Population Grew Less Than 15% ..0 ,374 1,400,000 $2,500 1,200,000 _ k9M42pfo 000 1,000,000 $1,500 800,000 600,000 000 CO 400,000 00 Budget200,000 Fiscal Year 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 General Fund General Fund General Fund .• Budget Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 51 I1�� ��I„ ��;,I�t�I","'r 0 � I,.t�'�,/ h.'/ „i „k,I ;I '[I„Il I PI;;V�I111�!a Ad Valorem Tax revenue makes up about one-third of Hillsborough County's total revenues +r Source:DOGE analysis Hillsborough County's other revenue comes from fragmented sources F' and nd miscellaneous Comnnurn�Btya hnvestnnesnt Tax Interret 1 Sew, Indigent HeeaVthe ame Sur-tax Sys Other useu fe:e, 15% TDT Sth 00herr taxes il`ueI taxes,comm. I txu Water/wastewater combo � � � G. 2% 1% II I i( Sc&reel aanal Traansport,ntlon Impact Fees �f/r/ a m 31b WrBn>travmoter uatidu4y 9% Special Assessments-Nabs Service waterr Utility .„-^— qr _Special Assessments-Cdtltev Locat grno rts Othea Permits snad Fees(duuiWint„prennauts,fire 09l and parks'inrgaacle State a+z5¢5, 1 LocM Government 1/2 sent samles tax w State reveruae shaaire 61ib ecfer7Td+al aunt„w�..�....._......�______....„......_��.�....._._____�w_,.�_....._... ......_. 216 Other state shared lands(daerl taxes,getnersrl and restricted revenue) S Source:DOGE analysis 52 % l„0 /. L10G111, 0I'r`01, I,.t '�,lh.l 0/,I,. �tI„I,I G Overview of Hillsborough County Spending Hillsborough County leaders deserve partial credit for the actions taken during 2025 to restrain the egregious growth in grants pending that the county experienced in recent years by voting to phase out funding for a number of non-profits by cutting their funding 25%each year for 4 years.This laudable action follows the particularly noteworthy efforts of Commissioner Joshua Wostal to expose wasteful grant spending. Many of these non-profits have been identified as paying their leaders high salaries with little accountability for results. Hillsborough County has retained grants to a select group of entities where they are performing a government function—and doing so better, or more efficiently,than the county government can do. Hillsborough Excessive Spending Examples • 22% in base pay increases for city employees from Fiscal Year 2022-23 to Fiscal Year 2024- 25,with an additional$3,500 per employee in "one-time" COLA payments.This followed 3% annual pay increases each year from Fiscal Year 2017-18 to Fiscal Year 2019-20.Average county employee salary of$64,000+ in 2023 puts these households well ahead of the area's annual median wage of$47,000+ • $4.3 million in increased spending on personnel in the Conservation and Environmental Lands Management Department - Despite 35%growth in spending on personnel between FY 2021-22 and the FY 2025-26 budget,this 200+ person department added only 8 additional employees - Meanwhile, cost recovery, one of the metrics the department uses to measure its performance, dropped from 43%in FY 2021 to 25%in FY 2023-24(and projected for future years) • 309 county employees with car allowances totaling$950,000 • $500K in film subsidies for forgettable projects such as "She Wants My Baby," "Mother Nature and the Doomsday Prepper," "1972," and "Romance at the Derby" • Hillsborough County maintains a "Grant Management Dashboard"that tracks actual spending vs. budgeted spending on a variety of major projects.When reviewed during the Florida DOGE on-site visit, reviewers identified numerous grants demonstrating 50%or greater of spending in excess of the budgeted amounts,totaling over$14 million in spending in excess of the budgets. • $204,000 for the"Ferrari"of grand pianos in the new performing arts center 53 0 A',)0 G 1111 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C h . 0,!I„ka ;l1, LEIS 1, • $900,000 in grants classified as "Healthcare Services"that lack a clear link to healthcare, such as$75,000 for"Impact through Empowerment" paid to the National Coalition of 100 Black Women, $175,000 for the Community Initiative for Young Artists, and $20,000 for an Expressive Arts Program Hillsborough DEI Examples • Hillsborough has two senior executives whose high salaries appear attributable to DEI roles. - $170,000 for an "Assistant County Administrator for Equity and Community Impact," a new role created in 2022 to "help guide county policy to make sure all residents, including historically marginalized groups, have equal access to resources and opportunities to succeed and thrive" - $256Kfor the "Assistant County Administrator for Compliance, Communities,and Conservation,"who has received over$100,000 in raises since being promoted to Assistant County Administrator in 2014 • $572,000 for an external contract that included "unconscious bias"training,that taught staff from Human Resources, Libraries, and other departments that"prejudice" is "outside our control"when it comes to "a range of diversity dimensions" such as race, ethnicity, religion, culture, and gender. - This training was administered at least as recently as January 2025 - Other training modules included "Identifying Bias," "Inclusive Hiring," and "Inclusive Leadership" • Thousands of hours of training for staff to receive "DEI In the Workplace." This included many of the most senior executives: - County Administrator - Assistant County Administrator for Equity - Chief Communications Administrator - Chief Human Services Administrator • A"Diversity Advisory Council"that carves up residents into 10 identity groups, such as "Far East Asian," "Middle Eastern," "GBLT,"and "Caribbean" 54 � I„0 IFS A ',)0 G 1 0I1,' 0 U I,.0' A ("'3' ,!I„k,I ;I1, VT S IP ID 1, - In meeting with the DOGE site visit team, representatives of the Counci I seemed embarrassed about the core nature of this race and eth n icity-d riven group, initially denying that council membership is determined by demographic traits instead of geographic area 55 ��M"ZUDA ")CM, 0"',"'r 0 1, 0 C A LK�0V P,1 VT S�P �DK 1,G Miami-Dade County • Population (2024): 2,774,841 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$2,527,422,000 • County Employees (FY 24-25): 31252 • Millage Rate:4.5740 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $79,40 • DOGE Team Site Visit Date: no site visit performed to date Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Miami-Dade County General Fund Spending Grew Over 80%, While County Population Grew Less Than 3% _LoLu a,,on P Population 2,814,927 2,500,000 $2,500 +s2.5�a 2,000,000 1,500,000 LU 00 1,000,000 000 500,000 $500 //, Fiscal Year 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 BudgetGeneral Fund Budget General Fund Budget General Fund Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 55 � I„' ;�A")CG111, 0l , l,,O' CA/ 1 'f S lll11,G Miami-Dade Classifies 20% of its Spending as Financial and Administrative i „ „ r� QA nrA,,WzJ-tl r�ur,�i;��oY p�r� Py�v�✓a ed adn'?r^ �si� , ///i,/i,, i /�/���%ON �,�i�/�iiii� /iii r iiriii /iii/�����%%%iiii Y,; , r ul)�������vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv �� � ��" w N Source:A/Analysis of LOGERx Data 57 0 ID A , 0 GL,, '0l''r 0 ; I,,0 C A L „0 V 11,11,11, 1T S ,I H 1,G Overview of Miami-Dade County Spending The preceding chart, drawn from the LOGERx data submitted by Miami-Dade County, shows that Miami-Dade County classified 20%of its spending as financial and administrative. From Fiscal Year 2021-22 to Fiscal Year 2023-24, Miami-Dade County's property tax revenues soared by$431 million,29%, even after a 2% reduction in the millage rate during this period. Library revenues increased by even more: 31%, representing nearly$23 million more for the library budget each year.The scale of this growth has enabled a remarkable amount of irresponsible spending,when the County should have prioritized limiting the burdens of rising property values on county taxpayers. DOGE has engaged with Miami-Dade County throughout the spring and summer of 2025, identifying areas of spending that warranted attention. Early in the FY 2025-26 budget cycle,the mayor of Miami-Dade County announced a substantial budget gap to be closed for Fiscal Year 2025-26, despite tremendous growth in revenues and spending over the past few years. The DOGE team has substantial concerns about fiscal irresponsibility and the overall approach to financial management in Miami-Dade County. For example, after Miami-Dade County provided DOGE with a list of contracts and associated spending, DOGE requested (for a subset of contracts valued between $75,000 and $5 million)that the County tell DOGE where the authorization for spending on those contracts could be found in the budget.The response: "That would require a Herculean effort," because the County"doesn't think about" spending in that way. Awarding contracts without directly considering whether those contracts support the objectives of the County's elected Board of County Commissioners and have been appropriately funded through the annual budgetary process renders irrelevant the efforts by citizens and elected officials to combat waste and ensure that taxpayer funds are being put to appropriate use. DOGE is similarly concerned about exchanges that occurred during two all-night budget hearings in September 2025. Under questioning from Commissioner Roberto J. Gonzalez, county staff could not explain the purposes for which funds were being proposed and revealed that department budget requests were expanded at the behest of the mayor's office without explanation.This appears to treat the budget process as a method of securing funding that can be spent through the mayor's sole control and with minimal input from the public and other elected officials. Miami-Dade County Excessive Spending Examples • $9.6 million in general fund revenue in Fiscal Year 2024-25 to staff the Office of the Mayor with 50 positions, including 5 added during Fiscal Year 2022-23 • $9 million budgeted as an "Art Allowance"for the county's new detention center 53 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;lI, VT SIP ID 1, • 19 FTEs in the Office of Community Advocacy to support boards and other programs that subdivide residents into racial and ethnic subgroups, inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution's color-blind commitments • $13.7 million in grants to support private sport and cultural activities, often DEI-themed • $10 million contract over 5 years to provide consulting services to assist with federal grants • Growth in the size of the CountyAttorney's office from 146 FTEs in Fiscal Year 2022-23 to 168 FTEs in Fiscal Year 2024-25,justified by purposes such as supporting Miami-Dade County's transition to independent constitutional officers.At this stage in the transition, such expansion should be unnecessary. In addition,the CountyAttorney's office employs dozens of attorneys with salaries that exceed what is reasonable for taxpayers to support and in many cases are over $300,000 • $17 million+ and rising annual cost impact from the Art in Public Places ordinance,which adds a 1.5%tax to the cost of all public building construction. Significantly,the county has a $1 M contract just to provide maintenance and repair to its public art • $4.4 million in general fund support for legal aid programs,which are receiving so much funding from Interest on Trust Accounts (IOTA)that nearly$100M is being rolled over to future fiscal years,while other funds are being spent to support illegal immigrants • $14.5 million in cultural affairs spending from the general fund—over and above the$29M in cultural affairs funding provided by the Convention Development Tax(CDT) and Tourism Development Tax(TDT) revenue sources • $14,000 annual membership in ICLEI,the U.S. branch of an international"sustainability and climate action" nonprofit with a substantial focus on incorporating DEI • $500,000 for"tree equity" • $13 million for curbside recycling purportedly justified by impact on landfill capacity,when recyclables total only 7%of county waste and costs have far outstripped estimates • $2 million for the Office of New Americans,which provides significant support for illegal aliens • $120,000 per vehicle to acquire rides for the Community Action and Human Services Department • $220,000 contract for"extreme weather training,"to provide "culturally competent" training in so-called climate literacy • An ongoing$24.1 million bus cleaning and disinfection contract awarded based on COVID- 19 standards for acute disinfection of surfaces 59 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, • $250K non-competitive consulting contract to plan future mental-health services based on "social justice"for"justice impacted individuals" • $430,000 "mobility reward" program to essentially provide a frequent flyer program for public transit • Excessive structuring of contracts to avoid the need for public transparency and Board of County Commissioners consideration, including dozens of engineering services contracts for $999,999.90,which are designed for use for the design aspects of small construction projects, and for which this amount of design appears to be excessive • Capital spending from the SMART mass transit plan is already burdening Miami-Dade Countytaxpayers by requiring substantial operating subsidies. Further implementation of these plans will add immensely to that burden:forecasts,which are likely optimistic,total an additional $100 million in future annual operating subsidies from taxpayers.The North Corridor's forecasted operating impact is particularly high.The County should reallocate funding from transportation sales surtax funds to support the operational costs of projects built with the surtax, rather than continuing to add to the operating burden • Overall capital spending has more than doubled in less than a decade,from$2.3 billion in FY 2016-17 to$4.7 billion planned in FY 2025-26.This includes eye-popping increases in capital expenditures in areas such as Cultural Affairs ($8 million to$93 million), Library($11 million to$41 million), and without any funds budgeted for the Seaport in Fiscal Year 2025-26($136 million in 2017) • The county has spent capital funds extensively on infrastructure projects justified by purported "benefits"associated with climate change, but that are unlikely to have an impact - Miami-Dade's wasteful climate-related spending includes a project costing at least$125 million to provide shore-based power to cruise ships while docked. - However, cruise lines are reportedly reluctant to use shore power due to high costs relative to ordinary diesel operations, and the County,through the Port of Miami, is on the hook to pay Florida Power&Light revenue guarantees of up to$18 million over four years if there is insufficient usage - This follows the County's procurement of nearly six dozen largely idled electric buses from now-bankrupt manufacturer Proterra at over$1 million each.This forced the County to acquire a different set of buses from New Flyer for use in the South Dade Corridor. Ridership numbers for this line, launched in October 2025 at a cost of well over$300 million, are not yet available; however,the operation of this line adds to the$270 million per year operating subsidy provided from the County general fund to mass transit 60 � I„0 IFS A ',)0 G 1 0I�' 0 U I,.0CAL ('3 0,!I„k,I ;II, VT S IP ID 1, City of Pensacola • Population (2024): 55,030 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$77,932,400 • City Employees (FY 24-25): 867 • Millage Rate:4.2895 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $72,699 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 18th,August 191" Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Pensacola Ad Valorem Tax Revenues Nearly Doubled and General Fund Spending Expanded 52%While Population Grew Only Modestly 11 61111 54,071 , 1111 :1 41111 .1 0 . 1111 41 1111 1 1111 $16.9 $13.8 1 1 Fiscal Year 1 1 1 Fiscal Year 2024-25 smt General Fund Budget �Ad valorem revenues —Go—Population Source:Pensacola Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 61 � I„0 A")0 G 111, 0l11, 0' A (""1'' /,I„ '[ IS 11111,G Overview of Pensacola Spending While Pensacola's budget is relatively modest,the pace of spending growth accelerated after Fiscal Year 2019-20,with spending in the Human Resources department leading the way.This occurred while city leadership gave significant attention to DEI initiatives,which are a major diversion from core human resources activities. In addition,the city launched a major initiative to boost the salaries of city personnel,which in the long term can be expected to increase the already-significant share of spending that is dedicated to pensions. Pensacola's Salary Hikes Will Expand a Significant Pension Burden ',t u, � � �, a0000000000lllllllll000 illl III Ultt fl M, I II nn� ' 'P�(nn111Ylllll�� �4i i i W V4 r Prl�'���6V are i f H r r Source:DOGE analysis of LOGERx data using Al. 02 l„0I`„IF�DA")0GI„ ff-1, 0C A 0/, „L-IT S lD eta Pensacola's Hired Theater Manager Scheduled a Drag Show to Coincide with Christmas Events for Children EmCl ME= �1111�11"I m I1I J111((1�D11111 111� ����1 o x y en r,»Ia1 at�dlo» � ,�e �!;, i VVI II VVV VIIII II��III� �'�11➢A11Y'1�r�ru�tir �r � ,,;� ,rh�rr S� ��Illllllllllllllllllllll�lllllll� III III I�������������������� ��A�Nj i N i ` ';, uulii uu Ills umii it it lul lull uul�l iil uu I I � �° �` ? uIV I " � MECUMUM III IIIII I�Illlln III II @I III "rr1�� !!l1Yll1!l1�1�111�� 1111111������1 11_ 1 w Source:DOGE analysis and research. DOGE's review of spending in the City of Pensacola was complicated by substantial turnover on the part of city officials. Previous, long-time staff—including the city administrator—left in the two years prior to the DOGE site visit, and remaining city leadership claimed a lack of knowledge about a variety of actions undertaken previously, including spending programs and the implementation of DO initiatives. Further,the City Administrator resigned from his post just two weeks after the DOGE team's site visit,with an interim City Administrator taking over. Pensacola Excessive Spending Examples • Major pay increases for city staff - $3.2 million (exclusive of benefits)for workers.This number excludes raises for unionized firefighters and precedes collective bargaining with the police union, potentially limiting the resources available for law enforcement pay - $60,000+for a compensation study with the intended to justify these pay raises— immediately after the lowest-paid workers received a minimum wage increase as part of state law - Despite Pensacola's relatively small population of 53,000, Pensacola set its City Administrator salary at approximately$200,000, nearly four times the median annual salary 63 % l„0 A',)0 G 1111 �;,I�0Ill,"r 0I i l,.0CA 0/,I„ i,I '[I„ItI G for residents of the Pensacola metropolitan area of$55,000. By comparison, Florida DOGE found that the City Administrator salary in the City of St. Petersburg totaled approximately $250,000, despite a higher median annual salary for residents and a population around 250,000 - As shown in the chart above, pension benefits already consume more than 10%of the city's spending. Salary increases will push those spending obligations higher • $1.4 million in questionable contracts, including: - $38,600 for an artist in residence - $618,000+ in lobbying spending in 2023 and 2024—a sum that far exceeds other jurisdictions reviewed on a per capita basis - —$15,000 for radio advertising with Cumulus Broadcasting - $20,000+for recruiting services from Linkedln - $686,515 to update Pensacola's Community Redevelopment Agency plans • $2.58 million increase in "General Government"spending between FY 2019-20 and FY 2024-25, an increase of over 40% • 88%growth in Human Resources spending between Fiscal Year 2019-20 and Fiscal Year 2024-25—an increase of over$600,000 Pensacola DEI Examples • Downtown drag shows at the Saenger Theater—including"A Drag Queen Christmas,"timed to coincide with "Photos with Santa," and events featuring Charlie Brown, Snoopy, and the Grinch taking place less than one block away • City employees have been provided trainings in DEI topics such as: - C.A.R.E.About Implicit Bias - Anti-Bias Policing - Implicit Bias in Action - Understanding and Preventing Microaggressions • In 2024, Pensacola paid a consulting firm $130,000+to develop a DEI-centric"city-wide strategic plan" 64 � I„0 IFS A ',)0 G 1 0I�' 0 U I,.0' A ("'3' ,!I„k,I ;I1, VT S IP ID 1, - While the Mayor of Pensacola claimed the DEI elements of the plan were "not mine," and that he had ordered they"be removed"from all city activities,three City of Pensacola staff members are specifically thanked in the opening of the report and numerous other city staff dedicated time over a year-long strategic plan process - The report lists"Prioritize racial and economic equity"as one of the top two considerations, insists on "Equitable outcomes for everyone," and spotlights responses "from only people of color" • In 2024, Pensacola also stated as one of its goals "develop[ing] equity within all City of Pensacola job classifications," but the Director of Human Resources claimed that this is no one's responsibility • In 2024,the City undertook an "Equity Survey." Current Pensacola staff claimed ignorance as to 1)who created the survey; 2)whether city funds were spent on the survey; 3)whether the results were used to inform future city actions; and 4)the survey's questions and responses • The City's Fire Cadet Program emphasizes that it"works to promote diversity"ahead of any job functions 5 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, City of Orlando • Population: 340,681 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$708,572,543 • City Employees (FY 24-25): 4,135 • Millage Rate: 6.65 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $69,414.00 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 11th,August 12th Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Orlando Ad Valorem Revenues More than Doubled and General Fund Spending Grew By 67%, While Population Increased 22% 000 340,681 •�. ation :00 on . U. 300,000 •e. 0: 79,787 , 200,000 CL 40 000 •. $338.4 100,000 $239.4 $162.250,000 $1 FiscaLYear 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 Source:Orlando Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 66 „0"Z, A I10 G 111, 0 � I,.t C Ah""1 0/,I„k, l I SI ll l ,G City of: Oirl.aindo Property I ax revenues $350,000,000 6.650 6.650 6.650 6.650 7,000 $325,000,000 6,000 $323,906,770 5,000 $300,000,000 �28<466,347 4.000 $275,000,000 3.000 $250,000,000 253,039,089 89 2,000 $225,000,000 $241,849,414 1,000 $200,000,000 II Y21 revenue F::Y22 'evei-we II Y23 revenue II Y24 reverwe mm*�Citywide ad vaLoi'ern « KU.age rate Source:Response to DOGE's July 11,2025 Information Request Orlando is Spending Tax Dollars to Help Illegal Aliens Fight Deportation We curently ptovide direct legal assistance fot immigrant families irroudirrci 6i0d a,Jvocacy in state court, horn anival to natwallzation,assistim,'.4 trafficking survivors aric"'deportation clefense.'Our vision it to continue to grow oul reSCUrces tea SUPPOlt dorrestic and children and to expand to waive in otE'ier areas such as fwnily Isaw matters,We pncvide legal se vrces in Florida to all counties outskle cafe Varrti Dade and Broward. Direct Legal Representation Ourfiiendy knowIrAgabIc tourn i,i eady to I m4) --Political ksylum T'Viaa Farnily Petitions [Deportation DefenFe/Ccuit F)ACA ,e Removal of Conckinns Cancellation of Rerrovai (.;itizenship Mlls/Estate Planning/Legacy VAWA Documents Drafting Sl-,)ecial Irnmigant SUS Small Bus ness lnccrlso nation 01- a'sSitnphfiexl Divorce [ncorporatlon/ U Visa Fihnq for lax Exerript Status A Source:Orlando Center for Justice, recipientof$50,000+1yearin citygrants 67 31 l 0 D A �')0 G 111, l l 0 l T 0 l l 0 C A„ (,3,0 V],""',"',l l 4","l �T'S D G Overview of Orlando Spending Florida DOGE identified examples of excessive or wasteful spending, particularly on functions that are not essential for government to perform. In addition,the City of Orlando's spending on capital projects has exploded since FY 2016-17, a pattern that has been true across each of the funds from which Orlando funds its capital spending. In the overall Capital Improvement Plan across all funds, spending increased from a total of$75 million in 2017 to$133 million in 2026. In the Capital Improvements fund,which is largely funded by transfers from the General Fund,funding increased from$10.0 million in FY 2016-17 to$46.7 million in Fiscal Year 2023-24, before declining to a budgeted $35.5 million in Fiscal Year 2025-26— still 3.5x greater than a decade earlier.This includes a 6x or greater increase in spending on sidewalk repair, even as funding for new sidewalks near schools has diminished. It includes a quadrupling of the amount spent on repaving streets as well as $500,000 in new spending on "Renewable energy"for city facilities. Growth in spending by the Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA) Fund has also been significant:from$3 million in 2017 to$28 million in 2026. Orlando Excessive Spending Examples • $25,000 to have a "poet laureate"write 4 poems • $67,800 in taxpayer funded yoga—with free sessions for city employees • $12.8 million to relocate the Sign and Signal Workshop (for streets and transportation)from a central location near downtown • $800,000+ on partnerships with non-profits to offer free trees, and on an urban tree inventory • $150,000 grant to the Orlando Center for Justice to help illegal aliens avoid deportation • Three city employees (two in finance and one city attorney)with leave payouts of over $100,000 on separation • $1.8 million budgeted for gender-neutral bathrooms in fire stations • $1.0 million for downtown wayfinding fixed street signs • $800,000 for raised medians and bike lanes on a single stretch of roadway • $2.0 million for downtown art projects, including murals and "Fringe" art • Orlando joined the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy,a DEI-infused, "climate action"group,which highlighted Orlando's$1,000,000 public EV charging installation as a case study 68 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, Orlando DEI Examples • Orlando contracted with the Valencia Institute and the "Peace and Justice Institute"to train city staff on alleged "micro-aggressions" - Employees were encouraged to evaluate each other on "23 dimensions"to confront their so-called "implicit bias" • Orlando is running an annual"Academy"that blends DEI and Green New Deal content - Staff apply to participate,then have a graduation - 2025's theme was "Advancing Energy Equity" - Training had a political component as well, such as briefings on the activities of nonprofit Poder LatinX and the NAACP. Poder LatinX has the stated mission of"empowering LatinX communities to build sustained political power. . .to win on environmental, economic, and immigration justice" • $142,000 paid to back an "Art Challenge"for"Food Justice" • Orlando told DOGE its "Office of Equity" had been abolished two years ago—but it was in the FY 2024-25 budget,funded for 3 FTEs - Orlando told DOGE auditors that there was no one to interview from this office because "it has not existed since February 2023" • $230,000 in grants to a race and gender-focused nonprofit,Zebra Youth - Zebra Youth "strives to improve the life outcomes of LGBTQ+youth," "remains steadfast in its support of the Black Lives Matter movement," and focuses on issues such as"the intersection of gender and race" • In Fiscal Year 2024-25, Orlando required all grant applicants to submit DEI statements to answer questions such as"How does your organization honor diversity?" 69 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1, �T SIP ID 1, Alachua County • Population: 298,485 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$321,584,483 • County Employees (FY 24-25): 1,238 • Millage Rate: 7.6180 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $58,354 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 13th,August 141" Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Alachua County General Fund Spending Nearly Doubled, While Population Increased by Only 15% •.. 298,485 .0 •.. 260,003 000 200,000 00 150,000 CL 100,000 .. 00 000 BudgetGeneral Fund .• Budget Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 70 � I„' ;�A")CG111' 0l ,1' 'O' A, 1, 'fl„INIS l G Rapid Growth in Revenue from Multiple Sources in FY 21 to FY 24 Period FY 2023-24 FY 2020-21 $,469„336 953,331 ff'ffaa »,2�'5 5,437,( O �:a.;¢•er.,par�4tR�irekR•KriCurrt,atrt:r�karwaaaaa^i,: � kl��,i�iP;a�wa;kiatirkGaraa°,[rik�°°a "��,r¢^�aakam.a�r.aarr¢�r,ob4ar vuv�r���as.^Yk�a.�^r Source:Response to DOGE July 11,2025 information request. Alachua County is Engaged in Aggressive DEI Indoctrination IIIII IIIII° of � „Aaa,�,? �� �o arV ascX+rasrlr fs apc;,a~wrvE e aursry V'br:R7lmtdw fak,'"rap imrrr9 k�ar�r tl�dkNift 4tlN aaaPwbl� RYo6arA?,4vo� reurnPtil^t r c nKYFC p� G14rfmrflvlgP Opraare��lla ilkt O'amuwvrrc n4 1p;n;;r�p E¢o*rr wrn^at @ o,fia~siuorkrura r ,�rrru+gpa;t Ihuu,rAmiomd ON a'uara�awrOumUs Grir.rkgfrt Handout rrants of L"4aam naat%White �a nu 4, C iu�tm e (n gar Ne Cwo.unat,Ai�-ra.Adapted ?a" tromi Tama Okkin and Kenneth,joaon;s Source:Alachua County training materials 71 % l„0 A ")0 G 111, 1 0 `0 I,.0C A 0 VI„k;l ;I1114 IT',.,I ",4, Alachua Excessive Spending Examples • Substantial annual across-the-board pay increases for county employees, including 6% in FY 2024-25, 4%or$1/hour(whichever is greater) in Fiscal Year 2023-24, 7% in FY 2022-23 plus a mid-year 3%increase, 3% in FY 2021-22 plus a midyear$1,000 annual raise - This is in addition to merit-based pay increases in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and Fiscal Year 2024- 25 that cost a total of$1.05 million • Numerous small grants to which the county provides minimal oversight, such as$3,000 for "Spirit Led Art Therapy"and $2,500 for the Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice's"Art Tag Grant Program" - These subscale grants require that Gainesville either dedicate disproportionate staff time to providing oversight of the awards or leave unsupervised the extent to which these grants are administered well and in service of public objectives. If Gainesville chooses the former, the result is to impose reporting burdens on recipients, even where the amounts awarded are small.And the availability of small-size grants may inflate the volume of grant applications received by Gainesville, meaning that still more staff and nonprofit time is consumed in applying for and reviewing grants, rather than in carrying out actual mission activities. • $124,000 in professional services and consulting contracts with the University of Florida for which no records of invoices or payment specifics were kept • $430,000+ on a variety of"consulting"services and contracts for which Alachua County should review for possible discontinuation • Multiple large terminal leave payouts, ranging from 60%to 120%of base salary, including - $90,500 to the Environmental Protection Director - $58,000+to a Warehouse Manager - —$75,000 to a Construction Inspector - $61,000+to an Accreditation and Grants Manager • $30,000+to Planned Parenthood for"Teen Time" 72 l„0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, Alachua DEI Examples • A multi-day training program that indoctrinates senior County staff to reject"Dominant White Culture" - Included 3-day"onboarding sessions" in 2022 and 2023 - Biweekly meetings continued for multiple years - Staff attended "equity retreats" - At first, outside consultants were hired to conduct this training, but then it was taken over by Alachua County's own "Equity Office" - Staff were urged to reject"debate rooted in Socratic Thought," "perfectionism rooted in Linear thinking," and even any"sense of urgency" in their work • Alachua County's"Energy Efficiency Program" is built around a "Commitment to Equity" - Focus is on ensuring participation by minorities, including"LatinX" • Alachua County Fire Rescue's firefighters were diverted from their mission to study"racial statistics in Alachua County," discuss so-called "systemic sexism, racism, discrimination, and inequality," and comment on images of a protest by onetime quarterback Colin Kaepernick - Focus is on ensuring participation by minorities, including"LatinX" • In 2025, established an Equity Advisory Board with 8 members to advise on an "Equity Action Plan" premised on the DEI concept that"racial and gender bias are pervasive" 73 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;l1, VT SIP ID 1, Broward County Population: 1,993,535 FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget: $1,742,045,440 County Employees (FY 24-25): 6,500 Millage Rate: 5.3260 Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $74,531 DOGE Site Team Visit Date:July 31 st,August 1" Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Broward County General Fund Spending Increased by 61%, While Population Grew by Only 6% $2,500 2,000,000 1,800,000 000 1,600,000 00 CL LU 1,400,000 bD 1,200,000 00 1,000,000 Fiscal Year 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 74 I1�� ��I„ ��;,I�t�I","'r 0 � I,.t�'�,/ h.'/ „i „k,I ;I '[I„Il I PI;;V�I111�!a Broward County is Aggressively Promoting Transgender Ideology The Genderbread Iverson 5P,and,point avM tWopw dont.a cnde^ Cw,iat O.h,wyr it,,it+1fl. eifl , Vwa ht iva troy Ws botlnfmoad A NI of tNro, Ma a r,h aaE thM lM t.a ty UMe re,psusadw os mroawt In hr an aypowtge.o Identity ,..._.._ 1. Al mmeu r^v a rrmkG der rr>, -, ° [nq It ok,) 4 yraor'� linmqu y fw ^ p'fit n fmrtl that"r flr We'), av � � �` -r,� i"how you,uir yow Uweacf egwa Owe H +aard dl,, reow ym�ke[r gender,l afar. d on how m y,r a wi ikrro(aas ttcml<u4 and wu6fir WhM v aa¢a a / k ,J y amrPm¢ r,reEG¢,i the m7attimm'ug,for a utrda$ry 9re I',,aw 4 ?A � m Attraction Nu, v you frrwk yrwrm,4p fef�Anq repo.iwn ew (or wa d{ awutb to Some vt9rewp`pawrepaEv�; w Kn 4aexuv91,tl'CbCBV nl AC AraCdfnitl Whew w4y" (Oftei)rataxjoruatadvsMWro aye^gored, ro Expression b=,dautw grra area <�rr&v'ta„atBr a {tarp"tarn pa Ears„su—tan traareo�., r ,' ., �„ ['' 6te4p0000¢p and refrarea amnrt kr ir,mir,afa wC,dnd bow tltratrru rr w � � �� � � Sex v pi�,%¢ot,rl.id',t'o�,�¢w v(r„wvaV based on�.aro C,a4 w rrdbw r.8 atdt.rwa,. ^' ��, �rt,a dwr•:p;a8�rey4M Yc`sr't,:yr,w"u aw hornvwutfre 06'CPev 6irp'w t6'aL We think vet rb,"WX dhHwtaed'r<,tim�,," as We"a,khe,, a<° ',m�x YOU Grow a x ratu'oe,"mf Dt l'eia�(M¢, a d Broward Excessive Spending Examples • $175,000 for"Virtual Art"that can only be viewed through the "Metaverse" at"virtual places" such as "virtual Fort Lauderdale Airport" • $9.2millionin Fiscal Year 2024-25 budgeted for cultural grants—growth of 65% since Fiscal Year2021-22 - Administrative costs for this program have grown from $1.6 million to$2.7 million over the same time period, meaning that nearly 25%of funds are spent on administration - The program includes over$400,000 in program support grants awarded at$5,000, $10,000, and $15,000 levels, explaining the need to commit substantial administrative resources - A matching requirement is in place for the higher levels, but not the$5,000 grant level, encouraging very-small grants: 84 of the—200 year-to-date FY 2024-25 recipients at the time of our visit had received $5,000 or less - $12,000 in a monthly contract to assist in administration of the program • $3.6 million consulting contract to help the city-funded convention center hotel succeed 75 % I„0 A',)0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.CC Ah . 0,!I„k,l1P,1, LEIS U!a • $2.1 million in increased personnel expenses between FY 2022-23 and FY 2025-26 in Purchasing,supporting an increase of only 2 FTEs,while performance targets have largely diminished - An inefficient purchasing function sets low expectations of responsible fiscal management for other county staff to follow • 78%growth (from $10.9 million in Fiscal Year 2019-20 to $19.1 million in Fiscal Year 2024- 25)for lawyers and other personnel in the County Attorney office—an $85,000 increase in per-FTE personnel cost - Meanwhile, Broward County discontinued its performance metric of"billable hours"for these lawyers,which targeted 1,900 hours per year • $6.2 million in personnel costs for 11 executive leadership positions in the Transportation Department(an average of$564,000 per position) • Over$600,000 of cultural grants made "in trade"for free tickets for admission, distorting the decision-making process • $17 million over 5 years for the Broward Film Commission, including to make movies set in Miami Broward DEI Examples • $890,000 spent directly on DEI trainings since Fiscal Year 2019-20, including$808K with the "Racial Equity Institute," an organization built around the claim that racism is "institutional and systemic" • DEI training content included: - "The Genderbread Person," promoting racial gender identity - "Making Pronouns Matter" - DEI should be a part of everyday conversations - A"to-do list"that had nothing"to do"with serving the public • Cultural grants awarded on the basis of DEI criteria rather than merit - For the$2.8 million in annual cultural grant spending that is awarded for general operating support, Broward County places the organization's commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion atop its list of qualities sought, and makes "intentional efforts"to give money to DEI-oriented programs 76 � I„0 IFS A ',)0 G 1 0I�' 0 U I,.0' A ("'3' ,!I„k,I ;I1, VT S IP ID 1, - Florida DOGE's review indicates that Broward County also awarded some of these grants to county employees • Funding for the Miami Gay and Lesbian Film Festival,which showed grooming films such as an 8-year-old "exploring her gender identity," and the Gay Men's Chorus of South Florida • $44,000 to support the UN Treaty on Gender Equity, which has been interpreted to impose absurd legal requirements such as equality in household chores and/or the cancellation of Mother's Day 77 „0,"ZJDA')OGI 0I',' 0 1, l,.0C A h ("1';0,!I„k,l ;l I VT SIP ID 1, Pinellas County • Population: 966,933 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$1,092,594,660 • County Employees (FY 24-25): 2,161.5 • Millage Rate:4.5947 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $70,768 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 7th,August 8th Pinellas County General Fund Revenue, Spending, and Population Population 962,003 Population Population 966,933 $1,200 964,490 1,000,000 111 800,000 ' :11 600,000 LU .11 400,000 $621.9 1 1 $450.9 200,000 Co $342.2 11 Fiscal Year 1 1 1 FiscaL Year 2024-25 PftIEMas COL111 a1:y Population, Gen erat FLuund E l eindfttires,and Act Valwern Reverw e 800,DOG 650,000 00 k b, ' 6W,000 UM fod MCIe1111C v(°auUCS (;enefa, Reiwemue E':xpendnures looputsuon 78 � l„0I:II,,A")0 GE 0 'r0 CC A 13/0„iI„k,I ;I '[I„I,ll I 1 G Overview of Pinellas County Spending Pinellas County deserves credit for taking advantage of increasing property tax revenues to adopt a series of millage rate cuts, lowering the rate from 5.2755 mills in Fiscal Year 2020-21 to 4.5423 mills in Fiscal Year 2025-26.The Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget also exhibited spending restraint, incorporating a 1.8%growth in budgeted general fund expenditures, below the level of inflation. The Pinellas County Commission was also an early adopter of a resolution of support for Florida DOGE. Long-term comparisons of Pinellas County general fund spending levels are complicated by a reorganization of the county's fund structure prior to Fiscal Year 2023-24, in which previously- separate law enforcement expenditures were rolled into the general fund.The second chart above shows expenditures since FY 2020-21, adjusted for this change. Pinellas Excessive Spending Examples • $1.7 million in growth over three years in spending on the homeless • $13.0 million growth—over 30%-- between Fiscal Year 2022-23 and Fiscal Year 2025-26 in enterprise IT systems, which are billed to different Pinellas County agencies and departments • $466,000 in sports consulting fees to aid the county's relations and negotiations with the Tampa Bay Rays • $2.7 million in large terminal leave payouts, exceeding 25%of salaries - At least one employee each year has received a terminal leave payout of over 1,000 hours of banked leave • $40,000 in contracts for out-of-state executive search consultants to augment the work of the 30+staff in the Human Resources Department Pinellas DEI Examples • $75,000 in annual sponsorship for a "Pride"festival that markets overwhelmingly in the region and in the state of Florida - County is the "Title Sponsor" and "Premiere Marketing Partner" - Every media buy in the marketing and advertising plan except one is targeted locally or at other Florida markets • County staff faced mandatory participation in DEI trainings in 2021 and 2022 on subjects such as the importance of pronouns and so-called "unconscious bias" • County newsletters promoted as the#1 reason for adverse health outcomes in minority groups the cause of"perceived discrimination" 79 % I„0 A',)0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C h . 0,!I„k,l ;l1, LEISI 1, Pinellas County Pushed Aggressive DEI Indoctrination in 2021 and 2022 Examine Unconscious Bias by Pronouns Matter * 160 thoughts per second *20 areas of sub conscious and conscious thoughts Uncontrolled *4 areas of the brain What should we remember? Need to act fast Too much information Not enough information WORKGROKMAJ I ER. WORK GROW,NMI N,1, Source:County training documents reviewed during site visit Other Items of Note 0 In August 2025, Pinellas County selected a vendor to provide a new, $22 million enterprise resource planning(ERP) system to replace legacy ERP systems,with an estimate that the new system will save 11 FTEs over time - $6.0 million has been budgeted for the first-year work on this system in FY 2025-26 - Pinellas County needs to hold itself, staff, and the vendor accountable for delivering efficiency and savings with this new system,which should be feasible given Al-driven advances 80 0 D A ")0 G 111, Il 0 "'r 0 0 C A G 0 V],"I","'I"', 11111J,111114 Manatee County • Population: 466,845 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$658,378,064 • County Employees (FY 24-25): 2,200 • Millage Rate: 6.0826 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): $79,524 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 5th,August 61h Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Manatee County Ad Valorem Revenues Nearly Doubled, Exceeding the 62% Growth in General Fund Spending as Population Grew By 26% $800 500,000 466,845 Population tion .11 , 1. 400,000 •.• 368,782 a $'11 :• I 300,000 LU $327.5 CO 11 200,000 $205.4 $171.1 ' 1 100,000 Fiscal Year 1 1 1 Fiscal Year 2024-25 ommi General Fund Budget �Ad valorem —@--Population Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 81 I1�� ��I„ ��;,I�t�I","'r 0 � I,.t�'�,/ h.'/O „i „k,I ;I '[I„Il I PI;;V�I111�!a Despite Modest Millage Rate Cuts, Manatee County Ad Valorem Revenues Grew By 49% ($9 05M) Between FY 29 and FY 24 WOMMMMMU ry'' . 'Sd MA) rt i k -fi r ,5326 110�1110�1110�111 �1D1D10��I���1D1D10��1�� cc , 40 �`�e�,vlalFi,Iild 333110 lru,,tFLHO RAwm^yOpec uour�s Ulueeeee d::°II°7i6Ndre�rl'S Se"ar..e,�r Pai*s& ujiujiujiujiujiujiujiui EiriJrrorinnrarcerla Luis s -Geo�eiar IFw,rahiii�0,"se uoe, rr'tiMagu :°r to Source:Response to July 11,2025 DOGE Request Manatee County's new water taxi is twice as large and 6x the cost of two existing boats that are rarely at capacity. Introducing the Manatee i ilPoinW!rfiDi �Nuurvw Be' - " ','', 'MnriWkm>n'Wmmy wmrr,!�unati � "�Afft2O +I0 "I! ' m iry ropaNr�Rdytt i. :% 1��/inu✓aulD%%ynWl�i9/GY ;; i I I i r �/�/ �� � i➢�u ay�mi Source:DOGE analysis of documents provided during site visit 82 % I„0 A',)0 G 1111 I 0 0 I,.CC Ah . 0,!I„k,l1t",,l LEIS U!a Overview of Manatee County Spending Between FY 2016-17 and Fiscal Year 2024-25, Manatee County's population increased by 26% and general fund ad valorem revenues surged by 91%despite multiple millage rate cuts in recent years. During this period, Manatee County's general fund spending increased "just"62%, so Manatee County leaders deserve partial credit for the millage rate cuts and operating spending growth well below ad valorem growth. Florida DOGE's review of Manatee County also found that the county has done a betterjob than many Florida jurisdictions at eliminating previous-extant DEI programs and has taken recent steps to eliminate wasteful grant spending. Manatee County should act with equal care in its other spending, particularly in initiating major capital expenditures, and in reviewing commitments to supposed "climate-related" policies and activities that do not provide value. Manatee Excessive Spending Examples • $35 million to acquire and move to 100,000 square feet of new county office space - Project executed outside of long-term capital and strategic planning - Limited-to-no advance transparency - County could provide only brief, ex-post justifications for the consideration of alternatives, notwithstanding public statements that the acquisition would be cheaper than alternatives - New building provides only a portion of the County's space needs - Follows$6 million+ in work on existing county administration building in last 5 years, much of which was described as renovations • $3.0 million water taxi expansion, including purchase of 91-passenger boat for$2.6 million, based on questionable assumptions - County could not provide planning documents or operating forecasts to DOGE - Acquisition has been publicly justified by"ridership growth" and the need for a larger boat to weather rough sea conditions. - Service data provided to DOGE identified only 12/110 operating days from January to July 2025, and 15 days in all of 2024, in which the existing service closed early due to sea conditions - Passenger data provided to DOGE for existing service (in 49-passenger boats costing 1/6 the price) indicates that on its busiest days, each trip averaged just 13 passengers 33 % I„0 A")0 G 1111 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C 0 P1111 VT S 1, - $400,000 in 2024 operating cost subsidy to Gulf Coast Water Taxi service exceeds the initial estimates of$350,000/year, and omits insurance, maintenance and equipment costs, and additional investments in land-side infrastructure • Growth of 7 positions and nearly$1 million in annual General Fund spending on expanded "Information Outreach"department.While its emergency communication function is meritorious, DOGE questions the need for the overall growth in this department • $130 million long-term for the countywide trail master plan - Governor DeSantis vetoed funding that included support for this project • Open-ended consulting contract spending on grant writing and program administration - Rates as high as$180/hr. on positions that include a half year or more of work time Manatee DEI Examples • Current learning system records since 2024 indicate that 55 supervisors have attended Instructor-Led Training on Diversity&Inclusion for Management 84 � I„0 IFDA')OG�1 O 1, .0' A ("'3' ,!I„k,I ;I1 VT S IP ID 1, Palm Beach County • Population: 1,566,161 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$2,373,562,814 • Employees(BCC general ad valorem funded FY 24-25): 3,653 • Millage Rate:4.500 • Median Household Income (2023):$84,789 • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:August 17th,August 181" Since Fiscal Year 2016-17, Palm Beach County General Fund Spending Increased by 89%, While Population Grew by Only 10% Population Population Population 1,414,144 1,600,000 $2,500 1,400,000 1,200,000 111 1,000,000 800,000 LU $1,500 ', $1,250 $1,431 •11 111 .. $ 111 400,000 $1,006 $ 11 200,000 $790 Fiscal Year / 1 1 Fiscal Year 2024-25 smt General Fund Budget �Ad valorem Population Source:County Budget Documents;Bureau of Economic and Business Research 85 I1�� ��I„ ��;,I�t�I","'r 0 � I,.t�'�,/ h.'/ „i „k,I ;I '[I„Il I PI;;V�I111�!a Spending in Many County Departments Has Grown at a Rapid Rate Department f"Y20 Budget FY2 Budget Dollar Changes %Growth Housing and Economic Development eelo'pment... $66,468,511 $285„712„195_.. $219,243,684 $ 9.g% ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... ..... ........ ......... ........ .................. ....... ......... .... Office of Resilience nncer $433,085 $1,536,489 $1„103,404 2 4.8% Community Services $41,800,892 $102,669,501 $60,868,609 145.6 Palm Tron $150,020,462 $293,093,104 $143,072,642 96.4% Office of Equal Business opportunity $1,271,029 $2,061,915 $790,886 62..2% Office of Equal opportunity $1,145,202 $1,819,101 $673,899 58.8% County Attorney $5,847,397 $9,131,652 $3,284,255 56.2 Legislative Affairs $489,016 $756,783 $267, 67 54.8% Porky and Recreation $77,939,634 $117,916,092 $39,976,458 151.3 Source:DOGE analysis of county budget documents Policies Like These Have Added DEI and ESG Complexity to Every Project A RESILIENTTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTIntent of the PPM Al (::outity(cipit<a1 ( o t.rr.r tiraro Prr,.)je i ft.:v,e 0 "��ti�fl�f�� c�r'Eu�re �a�irrtrv�air�kire"w�v�� �a�a��8aei�s�c��a� lh"pica �rtr:la,�tlr�rr���l�:���ir�y<�itt� .i,a.,t,:aicrclf,�liPyf��riiz€.ip�fr,atirei:�rr in resource conservation and dirnate change adaptation indudePLAN reso ericcr�.,� t'�ara�J DISCLOSE ay err IICiCtrrCy<:a th andmitigationwhHesupportingadiverse,equitable,and rrk,t,airrp�ak��yiIi'CyirriCi��a'Casa �ru�lr.aCC Iir7t;la�arsHH vibrant community and economy Jars Che` EFL Regiona- ( Hrrna'Ce(.h,wnge€_t,ar7'npact Z[Reduce wrissions andceansurnption Unife(.l`)ec ,i I_a:'av6 fd�se 11r'ola:r(;:tk:C n L Bering Cost Effective Sravirmr.J Money in the fong-run Oerroonsti ii r ho w a C::c ui. ty Elul f lirag r:u,;rnt')ka..a Wth LICr eate an a environment to faster green and 7 ae r(.e( l r.lu t, n , ur x.' I .S. 2`.7:„1,r�5 ) erawrir<.a�uwaeratrally cr�ra�cuaasa Nrad� t G ��StaL Lie<trnche heat and flooding uSSr.aeS providnga cornpk.,�,ed green k7nrifE.Sir��'x �rarrr.,art:d. g C r�ai" f�lr�te anC.Jfflr rya rye f;r5�oliJr�r�ir rt r �t�o((t'fJ"i1t r�r,rr r� Source:Palm Beach County documents 86 % l„0 A',)0 G 111, ��;,I'r� / G 0/,I„ 'fl„lads i llkG Palm Beach County Excessive Spending Examples • $12.8 million increase—a neardoubling—between Fiscal Year 2021-22 and Fiscal Year 2023-24 in the use of ad valorem tax revenues to fund Health Services - The share of this spending coming from property taxes has grown from 45%to 60% - An additional$1.1 million in the local government half-cent sales tax revenue is also being spent on Health Services • $88 million in growth—from $50 million to$138 million, or 176%growth--between Fiscal Year 2022-23 and Fiscal Year 2024-25 in spending on paratransit services - Even prior to this increase, paratransit spending made up 27%of Palm Beach County's transportation spending, compared to just 18%of neighboring Broward County's spending - Paratransit cost per ride in Palm Beach County was$52, compared to$40-$45 in Broward. Both counties charged identical$3.50 fares to riders - Palm Beach County has been taking actions to examine and restrain these costs, including by altering service areas • $70 million+ increase in salary and overtime expenses between Fiscal Year 2019-20 and FY 2025-26, a 37% increase that far outpaced the 26%inflation during the same period - This included annual across-the-board salary increases of 6% in Fiscal Year 2023-24, Fiscal Year 2024-25, and Fiscal Year 2025-26 - Every'/2 year, county employees receive a 1% increase in salary—projected to cost$4.8 million in the Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget alone • $16 million in homeless spending since FY 2020-21 has incentivized an increase, not a decrease, in homeless population,from 1500 in 2020 to over 2000 in 2024 Palm Beach County DEI Examples • To their credit,when FL DOGE identified to Palm Beach County their receipt of over$4.5 million from the MacArthur Foundation's Safety and Justice Challenge—DEI-inspired program—the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners met and cancelled further participation in the grant program • Palm Beach County has previously sought to"infuse all its strategies with a racial equity Lens" 87 „0I`„IFS A ',)0G1 0 �'r0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;lI, VT SIP ID 1, • Since 2019, Palm Beach County has spent at least$151,000 on DEI training across various county departments(the County reported the cost of many trainings to DOGE as "unknown"), including on subjects such as how some employees are "responsible for racism" and "Living While Black" • Over$1.1 million allocated to the Office of Resilience for Fiscal Year 2024-25,with it ranking"Social Equity"first in its list of values o To its credit, DOGE understands that Palm Beach County's new county administrator has reorganized functions to eliminate the Office of Resilience SR � I„' IFDA')OGI 0I',' r U I,.0' A ("'3' ,!I„k,I ;II VT S IP ID 1, City of Gainesville • Population: 364,471 • FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget:$155,368,126 • City Employees (FY 24-25): over 2,200 • Millage Rate: 6.4297 • Median Household Income (FY 23-24): • DOGE Site Team Visit Date:July 31 st,August 1 st Gainesville Budgets and Population Since Fiscal Year 2016-17 Population 151,275 0. .0 40000 129,816 ,0 0000 000 00 :0000 LU :0 60000 .0 40000 4 0000 Fiscal Year 2016-17 Fiscal Year 2019-20 Fiscal Year 2024-25 General Fund Budget General Fund Budget General Fund Budget Source:Budget and Annual Comprehensive Financial Report documents 89 I1�� ��I„ ��;,I�t�I","'r 0 � I,.t�'�,/ h.'/ „i „k,I ;I '[I„Il I PI;;V�I111�!a Gainesville Has Raised its Millage Rate by almost 50% since 2017, even while taxable value has doubled I r / / 11 i i llllll l lllllll ii � o lI llllllllllllllllllllllll I l ll11111111111111110%lllllllllll/llllll � � � of � / l fir( ', I III Il I f l /llllll ll, ,ll/ , (l l � 1 1 , llll lllllllllllll (llllllllll llllllllll;1, 111%, �,llllll f11f�, �I�� 111111 1111 llllllllllllllll�llllllllllllllllllllllllllllll�l,,��lll%1 ��1%ll� 1�f1t�, ��/�l 111111111, 1111�11 . „ I1 I I I IILIL� I I IIIIL� llllll/ IllJllllJll�l�J»�IIIIDI�I »>II��II 111 �11�11111 �ll>llll>1 �lll�llll�l I'�l���lll'�I ((ll(I(111111 1111111 1 „,.,,,,,„f 1 111�1111,, �l>l�l''1 ��l>(�lllll f��l��llll� (lllll(111111111 11.1111111 11 11. r I l/��lll��l/l�I/ i I1l,1l,1l»1�l,l1,lIfl,IlI,lf1ll,�1f.111l,l�l,l,l l�l,�l�,l�,ll l�l,l»l,ll,ll»,l�ii 1II1I1»1»11�W,1111 I1»111�11»1»J i11i11uJI�1�,»l 1l1»1�Ju»111�1,�,,i 4.!I1I1,1�I1»i 1l�'1 l��ll1c1lI�Il�J»1,If.0 1IlII,I�I1,111�U,II,I 4, 1»I1l»»» ui»a»I u;II,:l»-,»l»,i»�»;1-»»;ll»»r 4 /ll lIr„ 1l01i 1 u� I ,.11JJ� �,��! l ug l�I1 J ; , ��� 11111�1 11111�1 11111�1 11111�1 11111�1 11111�1 11111�1 11111�1 11111� 11 o /0 , I 1111 l � Il 1 > > l 11 I Source:DOGE analysis of Gainesville financial reporting,budget documents, and state data Gainesville's Fleet Management Team Felt Unfairly Targeted for DEI Indoctrination by the City's "Office of Equity and Inclusion" GM �r Skr►� calms r + c�C,1PJAL� ,.''•�i 44 tr �" JJJJJJf/1 "—,POWERjj.ft ��Y�n»�toa y ►-- » t a w f " S rrrc� 74 0 rot) t4, otl ,t »t xi Bits,and pmvammmg 0 PA00tokf yy,*Wyly' 4qr, 4511004 3e 1 ° ON � ` Source:Documents provided during DOGE site visit,•Gainesville budget documents 99 % l„' I;IF ,�I, Il��t�,l„ „I'r-,a"r �l I,.t�C h .�' /,I„LbI �,I '[I„L�'��I r,.,l°I';;1�1»IlllkG Overview of Gainesville Spending Gainesville's millage rates and taxable value have soared over the last decade, pushing ad valorem tax collections from $31.1 million in 2017 to$62.8 million in 2024, and a projected collection of $77.5 million in Fiscal Year 2025-26.That's an increase in property tax collections of 150%in just ten years,while the number of residents has increased by less than 20%. Gainesville's Fiscal Year 2021-22 spending was enhanced bythe inclusion of the Gainesville Regional Utilities(GRU), but by Fiscal Year 2023-24, GRU had become an independent entity, not included in Gainesville's budget. Gainesville officials explained to DOGE that the severance of GRU from the city explained the need for increased millage rates because of the loss of GRU profits as a source of city funding. However,the use of utility revenue to subsidize a jurisdiction's ongoing operating expenses is not a best practice, and indeed, can jeopardize the utility's ability to provide reliable and cost-efficient utility services.As the Florida Auditor General observed in an audit released in January 2022,the City of Gainesville's use of GRU to fund "large transfers to the City's General Fund to support general government services," as well as "City overcharges of indirect costs," created serious risks to GRU's financial sustainability prior to GRU's independence.This included high electricity rates, a high level of debt(roughly 5x worse than in comparable utilities in Lakeland,Tallahassee, Orlando, and Jacksonville) and downgraded debt ratings. Notably,the costs associated with these were borne not only by those in the City of Gainesville but by other customers outside the city who are also served by GRU. Moreover, during the Fiscal Year 2021-22 to Fiscal Year 2023-24 time period, in addition to the increase in general fund ad valorem revenues, Gainesville saw a $23 million (or 46%) increase in other sources of revenue apart from enterprise fund transfers, essentially offsetting the previous contribution from GRU.The city's response to losing the ability to tap into GRU's surplus should have been better fiscal stewardship, not a $24 million increase in extractions from the Gainesville property tax base. Gainesville DEI Examples • Gainesville funds a$1.4 million (Fiscal Year 2024-25) "Office of Equity&Inclusion"with 12 FTEs, including: - A Diversity&Inclusion Manager - Equity Specialists - An Immigrant Affairs Manager 1 % I„0 A")0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C 0 P1111 VT SI 1, - The Director of Equity and Inclusion was paid $189,000 in 2023 and received a 3% raise on December 8, 2025, making her salary nearly$195,000 • The$400K+ Equity Toolkit Program in the Office of Equity retained external consultants to embed DEI throughout city departments • This office has implemented a long-term Results Based Accountability(RBA) Model, a multi-year phased equity framework implementation being piloted in Cultural Affairs,with 8-month training cycles • In May 2024,the "Office of Equity"targeted the Fleet Management office(20+staff)for indoctrination through a series of weekly workshops with titles like "Identity and Power," and materials sourced to places like UNESCO,the anti-Semitic, pro-genocide agency that even the Obama Administration defunded - Staff in the office alleged they were "unfairly targeted"for this training - Staff were required to "acknowledge that power and privilege impacts the culture in Fleet at the City, and at all organizations," and to share their gender, race,ethnic, sexual, "(dis)ability" and "body size" identities • DEI training modules reviewed by DOGE contained scenarios that presumed hiring decisions were based on discrimination unless non-white males were hired, or if someone who "changes"from being a woman to a "man" is not hired - Other training content taught that describing someone according to biological reality, including refusing to use made-up pronouns, "is a form of discrimination" - Gainesville training also incorporated the term "cisgender," often described as a made-up, dehumanizing slur,to describe men and women who reject transgender ideology • Gainesville screened for"Resistance" in their staff, creating charts listing staff and their race,gender, age, marital status, and job duties - Gainesville concluded there would be "no pushback" on DEI training from some staff because they were "scared of termination" • Gainesville grant applications provided preference to applicants engaging in racial preference by"serv[ing] a minority or special constituency audience" • Gainesville also made special grants to"artists who identify as LGTBQIA+" • Nearly$170K of taxpayer support from the city has funded the Hippodrome Theatre,which has hosted a recurring series of drag shows 92 � I„0�,"Z,10A')OG�1 O 1, .0CAL ('3 0,!I„k,I ;I1 VT S IP ID11, • Gainesville pays membership dues to, and contracts with, ICLEI USA,the U.S. branch of a global"sustainability and climate action" organization which centers many of its activities around "equity"and even provides DEI training on subjects such as "unconscious bias." Noncompliance with Personnel Policies DOGE's review of the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs(PRCA) Department budget noted the existence of an Administrative Manager reporting directly to the Assistant Director. However, no such position appears in the city's table of authorized positions and titles in the PRCA in Fiscal Year 2024-25.The same dichotomy appears to be true for Fiscal Year 2023-24.The person who holds this role states publicly a similar title,which also does not appear in the city's table. During DOGE's review, DOGE learned that this individual's position was eliminated,the person's responsibilities were reassigned more than two years ago, and the person has not been officially assigned or transferred to another job or a designated position. Further, records provided to DOGE indicate that the person may be receiving"special assignment" pay—a bonus of 5%to 10%-for duties held in the previously-eliminated position. This arrangement appears to violate City of Gainesville Policy C-3, Section D.3,which requires that a staff member on special assignment"continue to perform the duties of his or her regular job." 93 „0,"ZJOA')O I 0I',' 0 1, l,.0C A 0,!I„k,l ;lI VT SIP ID 1, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVED GOVERNANCE, FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, AND STREAMLINED GOVERNMENT SERVICES This report outlines a series of practical recommendations identified through the DOGE team's review and analysis of local government operations.These recommendations are intended to help both state and local officials strengthen oversight, improve budgeting practices, and better align spending with core public services. It is predictable that these proposals will spark opposition. Bureaucracies entrench themselves and create stakeholders who will argue that stronger oversight threatens"home rule,"disrupts operations, risks federal funding, or undermines public servants.They will highlight some recipient that benefits from every expenditure of public funds—ignoring that every dollar spent must also be taken from a taxpayer who is thereby harmed.And they will claim that existing oversight is sufficient,that reserves must remain high,that pay and staffing increases are unavoidable, and that any meaningful scrutiny is somehow"political."These are familiar defenses- not of taxpayers, but of the status quo.They surface whenever government is asked to justify spending growth that outpaces population, inflation, and household incomes. What these arguments ignore is the reality of everyday Floridians. Families and small businesses must budget carefully, prioritize needs, and justify every dollar. Government spending is entirely in our control as government officials—we can make the lives of families more affordable by spending Less and returning the unspent dollars to taxpayer wallets. State government has shown that disciplined budgeting,transparency, and good faith reviews can be done without weakening public safety or core services. If the state can operate under these standards,there is no credible reason local governments cannot. Local governments, like the state, should embrace the opportunity, as some of their counterparts have already done,to leave money in the hands of Floridians,who can spend it more wisely than governments. Florida DOGE's recommendations fall broadly into several categories: - Promoting Governance and Oversight - Ending Unlawful and Misguided Policies - Improving Local Government Efficiency 94 % I„0 A',)0 G 111, I 0 "'r0 il,.0C Ah . 0/,I„Ibli,l114, IT',.,I G Promoting Governance and Oversight 1) Clarify and enhance Florida CFO audit authority over local governments • Consistent with CFO Blaise Ingoglia's FAFO initiative,the CFO should have enhanced power to compel compliance with information requests and audits, including the ability to seek penalties for delayed or absent compliance • Improved definition for when local governments will be subject to CFO audits, including by setting the expectation that such audits will occur whenever local governments seekto increase tax rates or adopt new revenue sources • Clarification that the CFO's audit power includes the ability to conduct substantive reviews of the purposes for which taxpayer funds are being used, in addition to reviews of compliance Florida's DOGE initiative has been intended from the outset to be a temporary undertaking, largely carried out with existing state resources. Carrying out this recommendation will help local governments understand how and when existing state oversight authority will be used to hold them accountable in the future. 2) Promote increased fiscal responsibility by local governments • Florida should: o Extend the statewide local government pay scale (which currently applies to elected county constitutional officers)to elected municipal officers and local government executive staff, such as county/city managers and department heads ■ An alternative approach would be to cap local government pay at a multiple of median household income for the local county or metropolitan area o Prevent rising property tax revenues from being consumed by increases in pay for non-public safety public employees, by limiting collective bargaining for those employees throughout the state. Potential models include Texas Government Code chapter 617(with exceptions for police and fire personnel set forth in the Texas Fire and Police Employee Relations Act) and Wisconsin Act 10 o Expand transparency in public employee pay to local governments to permit Florida residents to view the wage and salary information for any local government employee 5 % I„0 A',)0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C h . 0,!I„k,l ;l1, LEISI 1, Local governments should be encouraged to: o Initiate zero-based budgeting for the upcoming Fiscal Year,with a starting point of $0 in tax revenues appropriated for non-core activities o Freeze hiring and wage levels to return personnel compensation to levels consistent with the increase in population and inflation alone o Enter into shared use agreements pursuant to Florida Statute 1013.101 to make all taxpayer-funded outdoor recreational facilities such as school playgrounds and school tracks available to the public during non-school hours Ending Unlawful and Misguided Policies 3) Reinforce state law prohibitions on DEI and unwind past DEI indoctrination • To prohibit DEI, state law should: o Prohibit the use or reference to race,color, sex, ethnicity, gender identity, religion, or sexual orientation to manipulate employee composition,the provision of benefits or treatment to members of the public, or the award of grants or contracts o Forbid the use of government funds,facilities, or communications to advance, promote, entertain or support DEI concepts, including those focused on critical race theory, "social justice," "privilege," "systemic bias," "institutional racism," "intersectionality," "settler colonialism," "whiteness," "microaggressions," "implicit bias," "environmental justice," and other equivalent concepts or verbiage that rely on the concept that mankind is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, or bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by others based on race, sex, or related characteristics o Reaffirm the core American principle of equality and equal opportunity under the law • Such prohibition should be understood to end: o End local government supplier diversity programs o The use of intrusive demographic questionnaires except where required by federal law o Requirements for"diversity statements" 96 % I„0 A")0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C 0 P1111 VT SI 1, o The provision of grants or contracts to entities that are organized, explicitly or implicitly, along racial or ethnic lines o The use of proxies for race, ethnicity,gender identity, or sexual orientation such as "cultural competence," "lived experience,"the demographic characteristics of a person's residential location, educational institution, or voluntary association o Membership in, and participation by, Florida cities and counties in national and international organizations and nonprofits that engage in DEI practices • To undo the damage caused by DEI and efforts to "embed" DEI practices: o Public employees should be required to take a specific oath not to discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, etc., as a condition of new or continued public employment ■ The context for such oath should include the United States Constitution and the introductory text of the Declaration of Independence o Florida should partner with an appropriate institution, such as the OF Hamilton School,the FSU Institute for Governance&Civics, and New College of Florida, or other institutions,to develop training on counter-DEI principles of equality and non- discrimination to be available to local governments seeking tools to unwind past DEI initiatives 4) Revise Florida law to prohibit"net zero"and other related climate initiatives and current "green energy" mandates on local governments • Florida's landmark HB 1645 in 2024 restructured state energy policyto reject radical "climate crisis" policies that could have weakened the energy grid, promoted foreign adversaries, and compromised Floridians' access to adequate, reliable, and cost-effective sources of energy • Florida should extend this policy to local governments seeking to adopt or implement"net zero" policies such as targets, actions, and policies associated with reducing the use of greenhouse-gas emissions,whether directly or indirectly, or committing to the goals of international or regional entities seeking to restrict or regulate such emissions • To be consistent with these state policies, Florida Statutes should be revised to eliminate the requirement that local governments follow externally imposed "sustainable building ratings" and/or"model green building codes" 97 „0,"ZJOA')OG1 O l,.0C Ah . 0,!I„k,l ;l1 LEISIP ID11, • Florida should bar cities and counties from joining or providing funds or other support to intergovernmental or international organizations that promote policies on climate, health, or other issues that contradict Florida policy. Improving Local Government Efficiency 5) Improve local government budgeting practices • Require that referendum-based ad valorem tax increases, and any other referendum taxes that create ongoing general budget impacts (such as transportation surtaxes), be re- approved by voters every six years • Florida should adopt requirements that set local government financial reserve levels equivalent to the 10%statutory cap on the state's Budget Stabilization Fund, rather than permitting local governments to rely on the excessive reserve standards recommended by the outside Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) • Local jurisdictions should be encouraged to increase transparency by developing better connections between the sources of funds and their uses.This includes additional use of dedicated funds rather than general funds and improved transparency of purpose and pricing around internal transfers and internal service funds. • Create a new,standardized approach for budgeting at the municipal and county level and require that local governments transition from the current multiplicity of budget formats to improve the ability of Floridians and the state government to better compare spending across jurisdictions. 6) Establish a process for streamlining local government structure • Florida should review the 411 municipalities for potential opportunities to provide local government services more efficiently through abolition or consolidation,with particular attention paid to small municipalities and highly urbanized counties • Consideration should be given to creating incentives to encourage the simplification of Local government through the consolidation of municipalities 98 % I„0 A',)0 G 1111 I 0 "'r0 1, I,.0C h . 0,!I„k,l ;l1, LEISI 1, Current Non-Profit Funding Source Funding Type Amount Funded 2025 TDC Grants Grant $7,860,211.00 BOCC Grants Grant $2,619,421.00 Lease & License Agreements Free or Reduced Rent Lease & License Agreements Free Utilities $26,800.56 Use of Property--Facilities Fees Waived $10,518.00 Use of Property--Parks and Beaches Fees Waived $79,172.00 Donations and Other Funding Donations & Sponsorships $135,000.00 Permit Fees Fees Waived $25,311.10 $10,756,433.66 For informational purposes: Non-Profit Agreements for purchase of goods and services Other Agreements Agreements for Services $6,645,296.61 Notes Does not include grants to local government entities. Market Rates not available to determine cost savings to Lessee Does not include sponsorships for Local/Federal government entities. TDC Grant Funding Non-Profit Event Funding Organization Big Pine And Lower Keys Rotary Foundation, Inc. Sloppy Joe's Enterprises, Inc. Island Community Church, Inc. Key West Art and Historical Society, Inc. Pigeon Key Foundation, Inc. Lower Keys Chamber of Commerce, Inc. Key West Track & Field Club, Inc. A.H. of Monroe County, Inc. Keys Area Interdenominational Resources, Inc. Jose Wejebe-Spanish Fly Memorial Foundation, Inc. Monroe County Commercial Fisherman, Inc. Islamorada Chamber of Commerce, Inc. Task Force Dagger Foundation Corp Key West Film Festival Corporation Key West Literary Seminar Inc. Key West Players, Inc. Upper Keys Community Pool, Inc. Key West Tourist Development Association, Inc. Greater Marathon Chamber of Commerce, Inc. IWFFA Inc. The Mark Sorensen Youth Sailing Program, Inc. Key West And Lower Keys Fishing Guides Association, Inc. Marathon Premier Sailfish Tournament Inc Herman Lucerne Memorial Foundation, Inc. Southernmost Post No. 3911 Veterans Of Foreign Wars Of The United States, Inc. Holly Given Fund, Inc. Monroe Association for Retarded Citizens, Inc. Florida Keys Fishing Guides Association Inc. Lower Keys Chamber Of Commerce, Inc. Lower Keys Chamber Of Commerce, Inc. Rotary Club Of Key Largo Charitable Events, Inc. Islamorada Charterboat Association, Inc. Islamorada Charterboat Association, Inc. Marathon Fire Rescue Benevolent Association, Inc. Key West and Lower Keys Fishing Guides Association, Inc. The Cudjoe Gardens Property Owners Association, Inc. Nick Sheahan Scholarship Fund, Inc. The Key West--Harry S. Truman Foundation, Inc. St. Columba's Episcopal Church Performing Arts Centers Of Key West, Inc. Key West Cultural Preservation Society, Inc. Key West Community Sailing Center, Inc. South Florida Symphony Orchestra, Inc. The Studios Of Key West, Inc. South Florida Symphony Orchestra, Inc. Key West Film Society, Inc. The Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Inc. Key West Botanical Garden Society, Inc. Key West Orchid Society, Inc. Key West Impromptu Classical Concerts, Inc. Key West Garden Club, Inc. Red Barn Actors' Studio, Inc. Performing Art Centers Of Key West, Inc. Florida Keys Community Concert Band, Inc. LCARE Corporation Florida Keys Concert Association, Inc Reef Environmental Education Foundation Incorporated The Florida Keys History Of Diving Museum, Inc. Key West Art Center, Inc. Community Arts And Culture, Inc. Islamorada Chamber Of Commerce, Inc. The Marathon Community Theatre Inc. Performing Arts Centers Of Key West, Inc. Walk on White Key West, Inc Morada Way Arts & Cultural District, Inc. Friends of the Pool, Inc. Key Largo Chamber of Commerce, Inc. Key Largo Chamber of Commerce, Inc. Key West Business Guild, Inc. Key West Business Guild, Inc. The Lodging Association Of The Florida Keys And Key West, Reef Environmental Education Foundation Incorporated Reef Environmental Education Foundation Incorporated Key West Business Guild, Inc. Monroe Association for Retarded Citizens, Inc. Queer Keys, Inc. Fringe Theater Of Key West, Inc. Old Island Restoration Foundation, Inc. Key West Promotions Inc. Learn To LambaZouk Inc. San Pedro Catholic Parish In Taverier, Inc. Key West Art and Historical Society, Inc. Non-Profit Capital Funding Project Name Mel Fisher Maritime Museum FY2026 Capital Repairs Reef Renewal - Coral Restoration - Key West 2026 Reef Renewal - Coral Restoration- Lower Keys 2026 Reef Renewal - Coral Restoration - Marathon 2026 Reef Renewal - Coral Restoration - Key Largo 2026 Wild Bird Center Repairs to the Sanctuary's Boardwalk History of Dive Replace and Upgrade Emergency Generator CRF - Coral Restoration - Key West 2026 CRF - Coral Restoration - Lower Keys 2026 CRF - Coral Restoration - Marathon 2026 CRF - Coral Restoration - Islamorada 2026 CRF - Coral Restoration - Key Largo 2026 (.Care - Coral Restoratoin - Islamorada 2026 Emergency Broadcast System and Event Audio Installation Replacement of HVAC System for Museum and Theatre Ingham Maritime Museum: Enhancing the Historical Experience The Turtle Hospital Expand Guest Educational Area DRC Seawall Restoration & Deck Replacements Alligator Reef Light Station Phase III Historic Bridge at the Point Interactive Museum Phase 2 Restoring Flooring For Therapy Building Dolphins Plus Improve Integrity& Reinforce Dolphin Habitat Seawall Repair the Oldest House Lagoon Access Improvements CRF—Coral Restoration — Lower Keys 2026 2nd Round Mote—Coral Restoration — Lower Keys 2026 2nd Round Marine Preservation Society-Anchor Buoys Key Largo Wild Bird Center Extending the Bird Sanctuary Boardwalk CRF—Coral Restoration — Key Largo 2026 2nd Round Mote—Coral Restoration — Key Largo 2026 2nd Round REEF Outdoor Oasis: Visitor Space Improvements 1st Priority IDC Repairing Facility Perimeter Fence John Pennekamp Repairs to Archway at Dagny Johnson Key Largo Hammock Botanical State Park Government Entity Funding Project Name Founders Park Pool Resurfacing Project School Board Eleven Time Conch Cafe and Baseball Museum Key Colony Beach Pickleball Tournament Shade Structure (Public Facilities) Event/Project Name Funds allocated Lower Keys Rotary Derby Day Roundup $4,316.00 Hemingway Days & Hemingway Look-Alike Contest $77,833.00 Island Boat Show 2026 $30,000.00 2026 Tennessee Williams Key West Festival $11,833.00 Second Annual Pigeon Key Holiday Spectacular $50,000.00 22nd Annual Nautical Expo $15,000.00 Pole Vault in Paradise $22,167.00 Taste of Key West $10,000.00 Sombrero Beach Run $10,000.00 Annual Spanish Fly Music Festival $10,000.00 20th Annual Florida Keys Seafood Festival $29,500.00 34th Annual Florida Keys Island Fest $20,000.00 Annual Dagger Dive &TLWH Community Event $10,000.00 Key West Film Festival $29,500.00 Key West Literary Seminar $87,000.00 Waterfront Playhouse $24,068.00 Orange Bowl Swim Classic and Winter Training $25,000.00 Fantasy Fest $264,500.00 The Original Marathon Seafood Festival $50,000.00 Kelly McGillis Classic $33,500.00 MSYSP Buccaneer Blast 2026 $15,000.00 Sugarloaf Showdown $15,000.00 Marathon Premier Sailfish Tournament $30,000.00 Herman Lucerne Memorial Backcountry Championship $12,000.00 VFW Fishing Tournament $50,000.00 Fish for Holly Sailfish Tournament $14,000.00 Tour De Keys 2025 $20,000.00 Swamp Guides Ball $10,000.00 42nd Annual Underwater Music Festival $19,612.00 40th Annual Island Art Fair $12,191.00 Take Stock In Children Backcountry Challenge $25,000.00 Islamorada Sailfish Tournament - 2025 Pre Promotion 2026 $22,500.00 Florida Keys Gold Cup Sailfish Championship - 2025 Pre Promotion 2026 $10,000.00 Marathon Fire Rescue Benevolent Wahoo Tounament $20,000.00 March Merkin $20,000.00 Cudjoe Gardens Dolphin &Tail Classic $10,000.00 Nick Sheahan Dolphin Rodeo $33,675.00 Presidential Families Weekend Forum $14,641.00 Florida Keys Celtic Festival $50,000.00 Tennessee Williams Theatre presents $23,442.00 Summer Solstice Celebration $18,532.00 Southernmost Youth Regatta $7,381.00 South Florida Symphony Orchestra $18,251.00 The Studios of Key West $27,447.00 Randy Roberts LIVE! $27,910.00 Tropic Cinema $19,687.00 Mel Fisher Maritime Museum (MFMM) $27,349.00 Key West Tropical Forest & Botanical Garden $28,079.00 Key West Orchid Festival $10,142.00 Key West Impromptu Classical Concerts 2026 Season $17,168.00 Key West Garden Club $19,776.00 Red Barn Theatre $23,153.00 Family Entertainment Series for the Upper Keys $12,529.00 Pops in the Park $15,571.00 LCARE Trash Derby $17,177.00 Florida Keys Concert Association Concert Series $14,621.00 REEF $34,930.00 History of Diving Museum $19,444.00 Key West Art & Craft Festival $17,449.00 Community Arts and Culture Presents $11,516.00 21st Annual Holiday Fest $8,194.00 Marathon Community Theatre FY25/26 $29,700.00 Family Entertainment Series for the Middle Keys $21,350.00 Walk on White $20,016.00 Morada Way Art Walk $13,425.00 Swim for Alligator Lighthouse $65,000.00 Taste the Keys Pre-Promotion $35,000.00 Celebrating Freedom July 4th Parade, Picnic & Fireworks $40,000.00 Womenfest Key West 2026 $39,500.00 Key West Pride 2026 $74,500.00 Key West Holiday Fest $74,500.00 REEF Fest Pre-Promotion $25,000.00 Florida Keys Lionfish Derby and Arts Festival $20,000.00 Tropical Heat Key West 2026 $26,500.00 Tour De Keys 2025 $26,167.00 Kaleidoscopia $5,558.00 Fringe Theater Key West $23,971.00 Conch Shell Blowing Contest $4,474.00 28th Annual Key West Lobsterfest $31,500.00 Key West International Dance Company 2025-6 $98,667.00 Art Under the Oaks $10,000.00 Key West Art & Historical Society Cultural Heritage Series $28,079.00 Total Non-Profit Event Funding $2,350,491.00 Organization Funds allocated The Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Inc. $480,000.00 Reef Renewal USA, Inc. $28,500.00 Reef Renewal USA, Inc. $74,500.00 Reef Renewal USA, Inc. $42,000.00 Reef Renewal USA, Inc. $224,125.00 Florida Keys Wild Bird Rehabilitation Center, Inc. $320,000.00 The Florida Keys History of Diving Museum, Inc. $25,000.00 Coral Restoration Foundation, Inc. $106,125.00 The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc $69,750.00 The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc $80,700.00 The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc $47,325.00 The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc $173,925.00 (.Care Corporation $145,000.00 Pigeon Key Foundation, Inc. $59,565.00 Institute Patriotico y Docente San Carlos, Inc. $215,000.00 Miami-Dade Historical Maritime Museum, Inc. $45,412.00 Hidden Harbor Marine Environmental Project, Inc. $260,000.00 Dolphin Research Center, Inc. $472,500.00 Friends of the Pool, Inc. $130,000.00 Florida Keys Land & Sea Trust, Inc. $195,000.00 Florida Keys Land & Sea Trust, Inc. $263,916.00 Island Dolphin Care, Inc. $60,000.00 Dolphins Plus Oceanside Marine Mammal Responder Inc. $105,000.00 Old Island Restoration Foundation, Inc. $341,600.00 Marine Resources Development Foundation, Inc. $28,100.00 The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc $69,750.00 Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc. $650,000.00 Marine Preservation Society Of The Florida Keys, Inc. $75,000.00 Florida Keys Wild Bird Rehabilitation Center, Inc. $280,000.00 The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc $70,000.00 Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc. $243,127.00 Reef Environmental Education Foundation Incorporated $44,800.00 Island Dolphin Care, Inc. $40,000.00 Friends Of John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park And Dagny Johnson Key Largo Hammock Botanical Park, Inc. $44,000.00 Total Non Profit Capital Funding $5,509,720.00 Total Non Profit Funding 7,860,211.00 Organization Funds allocated Islamorada, Village of Islands $436,800.00 Monroe School Board Leasing Corp $500,000.00 City of Key Colony Beach $178,500.00 Total Government Entity Funding $1,115,300.00 BOCC Grant Funding Organization Grant Funds allocated A.H. of Monroe HSAB Medical Services $50,591.00 Autism Society of the Keys HSAB Medical Services $22,500.00 Fla. Keys Area Health Education Ctr. (AHEC) HSAB Medical Services $98,694.00 Fla. Keys Healthy Start Coalition HSAB Medical Services $55,655.00 Good Health Clinic HSAB Medical Services $50,591.00 Rural Health Network of Monroe County (RHN) HSAB Medical Services $7,551.00 Womankind HSAB Medical Services $80,972.00 Anchors Aweigh HSAB Core Services $7,552.00 Burton Memorial UMC HSAB Core Services $7,500.00 Domestic Abuse Shelter HSAB Core Services $49,448.00 Florida Keys Children's Shelter HSAB Core Services $75,909.00 Florida Keys Outreach Coalition (FKOC) HSAB Core Services $55,655.00 Grace Jones Day Care Center HSAB Core Services $30,000.00 Heart of the Keys/Marathon Rec Center HSAB Core Services $25,273.00 Heron/GCC HSAB Core Services $22,742.00 Independence Cay Transitional Housing HSAB Core Services $22,500.00 Keys Area Interdenominational Resources (KAIR) HSAB Core Services $22,500.00 Kids Come First in the Fla. Keys HSAB Core Services $19,066.00 Monroe Assoc for ReMARCable Citizens (MARC) HSAB Core Services $103,758.00 Samuel's House HSAB Core Services $55,654.00 Star of the Sea Foundation (SOS) HSAB Core Services $45,527.00 The Hammock House at St. Columba Episc. Church HSAB Core Services $2,500.00 Wesley House HSAB Core Services $57,174.00 A Positive Step HSAB Quality of Life $27,805.00 Boys and Girls Club HSAB Quality of Life $42,996.00 Key West Community Sailing Center Inc. HSAB Quality of Life $3,532.00 Keys to Be the Change HSAB Quality of Life $21,223.00 Literacy Volunteers HSAB Quality of Life $22,742.00 Special Olympics of Florida HSAB Quality of Life $14,003.00 Substance Abuse & Mental Health Medical Guidance Care Center Services $902,000.00 Baker Act Guidance Care Center Transportation Medical $210,740.00 Jail in House Program BOCC Direct Funding Guidance Care Center Quality of Life $248,768.00 Jail in House Program Funding from Opioid Settlement Quality of Guidance Care Center Life $107,847.00 Coordinated Transportation Quality Guidance Care Center of Life $31,953.00 AARP Lower Keys Quality of Life $4,000.00 AARP Middle Keys Quality of Life $4,000.00 AARP Big Pine Quality of Life $4,000.00 AARP Upper Keys Quality of Life $4,000.00 Older American Program Quality of Life $500.00 $2,619,421.00 Leases and License Agreements Organization Just Older Youth, Inc. (JOY) AARP Florida Keys Children Shelter, Inc. Lower Keys Chamber of Commerce Key West Art & Historical Society Key West Art & Historical Society Key West Garden Club Monroe County of the Arts d/b/a Florida Keys Council of the Arts Pigeon Key Foundation, Inc. Matecumbe Historical Trust Corp. Islands Flying Club Habitat for Humanities Key West & Lower Keys Habitat for Humanities Middle Keys Habitat for Humanities Upper Keys Purpose Lease Amount Licensee Agreement for the management and operations of community and cultural programs at the Plantation Key Monroe County Community Center $0 per annum License Agreement for the management and operations of community and cultural programs at the Big Pine Key Community Center $0 per annum Lease agreement in Tavernier for services and sheltering for homeless children. $1 per annum Lease agreement in Big Pine Key for chamber operations $1 per annum Lease agreement East Martello $1 per annum Lease Agreement Key West Lighhouse $0 per annum West Martello $0 per annum Lease agreement office in Gato $0 per annum Lease agreeement for Pigeon Key $1 per annum $1 per annum paid for Sublease agreement for museum, rest station and parking sublease. MC pays FDOT$1 facilities. County leases the parcel of land from FDOT. per annum for lease. Private Hanger Land Lease $3,811 per annum (estimate) 16-99 yr @ $1 per annum; 1-99 yr @ $10 per annum; Ground leases 2-100 yr @ $0 per annum Ground leases 2- 99 yr @ $10 per annum Ground leases 2-100 yr @ $0 per annum Keys Energy FKAA Total Utilities N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 $7,024.36 $11,861.11 $18,885.47 $7,915.09 N/A $7,915.09 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 N/A N/A $0.00 $14,939.45 $11,861.11 $26,800.56 Additional Information While their lease requires they fund their repairs and improvements,they often use TDC grants for that purpose. Use of Property--Facilities Location Organization Murray Nelson FDOT Murray Nelson Keys Mosquito Control District Murray Nelson Florida National Parks Asso Murray Nelson Department of Health Murray Nelson Keys Jewish Community Center Murray Nelson Oneblood Murray Nelson Oneblood Murray Nelson Oneblood Murray Nelson Oneblood Murray Nelson Oneblood Murray Nelson Oneblood Harvey Key West Cultural Preservation Society Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey AARP Harvey Fair Insurance Rates Monroe (FIRM) Harvey Fair Insurance Rates Monroe (FIRM) Harvey Fair Insurance Rates Monroe (FIRM) Harvey Fair Insurance Rates Monroe (FIRM) Harvey Fair Insurance Rates Monroe (FIRM) Harvey Fair Insurance Rates Monroe (FIRM) Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey United Way of Collier and the Keys Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West Charter Boatmans Assn Harvey Key West English Congregation Harvey AWRA Harvey AWRA Harvey Key West Assn of Realtors Marathon Gov't Center FL Keys Healthy Start Coalition Marathon Gov't Center Marathon and Lower Keys Assn of Realto Marathon Gov't Center Greater Marathon Chamber of Commerc Marathon Gov't Center Turtle Hospital Marathon Gov't Center Turtle Hospital Note: Gato has not been used due to the construction. Organizatio Description of Use Amount waived District 6 Meeting $356.00 Public Info Meeting $184.00 FNPA Board of director meetings $200.00 Outreach $320.00 Menorah lighting $78.00 Blood Donation $280.00 Blood Donation $280.00 Blood Donation $280.00 Blood Donation $280.00 Blood Donation $280.00 Blood Donation $280.00 General Membership Meeting $180.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Meeting $160.00 Board of Directors Meeting $100.00 Board of Directors Meeting $100.00 Board of Directors Meeting $100.00 Board of Directors Meeting $100.00 Board of Directors Meeting $100.00 Board of Directors Meeting $100.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Free Tax Preparation for limited income MC residents $260.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Association monthly meetings $100.00 Religious Ceremony $400.00 Annual Meeting $320.00 Annual Meeting $320.00 General Membership Meeting $140.00 Childrens Group Meetings $120.00 Self Defense Class $160.00 Candidate Forum $120.00 Annual Sea Turtle Workshop $80.00 Annual Sea Turtle Workshop $440.00 $10,518.00 ins have been using Harvey during this time. Y N L t on 3 m 3 r� N06 i E O `i 00 i N H Q 0 a) i L p t c Ln O Z E � 'i N 00 Ln N CN a) m m E p E ? Ln C) d M CL d O 0 CL LL O O O- p M s V} M lD u *' X i v a) O O O_ O x V U O ro C) O O E Ln a0. In O -Zt -C N M v m :-! V) c-I c-I N lc Ln Il Ln m Vl m a.+ C 0 O E -a Q w X R O O'a O O O O O Ln a 0 0 1D �D o 0 0L 0 oN 0 0 0 v oN m 0 0 lD Ln rl .--I 't c-I c-I lD 'I M 'zt M M c-I rl N lzt v} an tr� V} v'� v-t v'� V} an an v� v� vt v-} an v� tr� v} v 'E v � t E E Q d v u bn D m w b O w on .� O 0 c c C N C t N O (U O u v rn rn N 2 a) N Y � bA C: ra > U Ln c > Q - - U `v w c o m v v C) c CD VI VI 0 ai .y (UQ G v _ E E @ E a ` @ v m w u E p v p O O a� E o o 0 u m a u Q x v x x u O v Q Q Ou J J +� N 0 v m X �' 2- Ou U iz L S u v v L u V) c L Y L -CU C C U L/) 7 7 4 u u C 7 u O 7 v @ > O O O ra O O O O O Y O ra O O E V) E H U } T H m m m } m Ln U 2 } .� u u n O O aj aj n n Y Q Q Q1 i i C C aL � O O O 0 ° 0 ? ro co O O +v v v c v v V) o o _ c N v c p v p K v v '� rya rya t a a — Q LL ,� u^i a o Q Q s t C C J J ++ J J �_ V V N Y ro V u O O ++ 0 N o u u v u u v Q 3 m o o D_ a MW Y co v v x O O > t > 0 d >' ra r}v x v'^ Q m ro ww m mNl- p > m mp O 0 s uv(U v Q Q O_ Q CO O O O 01 O O xN Na a `L m m LL m cn H U J m H H Y n 0 v al �X m O O LL 0 K K C C C co E E E E E O O ro O O O Y J J ro ro ro ra ra ra ro 0 0 K K 0 Y K O_ CO N VI A U C C c C C C C C C > > Y > > > y, a J �. 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 .0 u U u u C ar i i E E E E E E E Q Q o ¢ Q a v a ra ro ro ro E E E E E E E Y Y Y U a p O 0 O 0 O O v ra v ra co ra Y u u u u u u u o Y o o a E v v v v v v v v v v ai v v v v v v O N N N c c c c c c c c c c c c c E v c c c c a a a a a a a a a a a a a @ aj v a a uo un uo on on uD ce cn on on on on on o _Na m m m m m 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm U Q � � L L L s L m V L L L OD OD v� L vt)D 0) OO bU b17 7 Q \ \ N L L \ \ \ 3 c-I rl c-I c-I c-I CL 7 7 1.0 L O O co 0 O LO MO u7 N � LnM N N 'T LP i M m m m m m m a0 ao Q O E O m m m m 00O 00 06 0 06 0� 06 06 u aaaaa 0- 0- 0- = Qm a o o 00� o o o L o 0 0 0 u u N u u u u Y YO E -le O u u u u i 1 i Li E m O i 0 m L .� m .i .� .i .L (1 0) fE0 N of a! a! Q 'O M > M L ^ o) OLn m w of of w In V) 00 In V) V) V) l0 M V)w I, -i to V) V)- I, In V) V) V) O O V) O O O I� O O V) O O � O) O Ln ^ O O O O O O M O O 0 O O Oc � O m V) O O w m O O 't O O Z* N O O O 00 M to I, m cl to N 00 It ZT N M 00 M It cl M ' ci ci 't C) N It Ln Ln -Ln V� V)- V� V)- Ln In Ln N N tn t/)- tn -Ln tr� N N V'� -Ln -Ln �J'l Ln Ln v T T m C Q 7 'E a E L 7 C i E 7 — LL 7 0 m E U > O cu v of 3 = V i N of of 7 v E E E o 7 C m O m m �n Y 0 OD (V OD OD t�6 v u N u LL C OD b0 L v 06 `. aJ 021 v 3 � `-^ .� v � `=� °� v o2S o21 v �n v C m -a v ,n u m Q) E v v E Y w u cu + u u v C L v) v V C ° u c m 3 v � u � Cl -O 7 a c`na m 7 � 7 f0 u u L 2 � 2 E 2 7 of L C O C Q O OD > O L m cu m m . L m N w m m m LL m O fL 7 O 4 m m m v v u +� s L v > v v v C7 L n > 0u Y '� Q) QJ 4) Y Y O Y Y�[ -6 Y � Y 7 vVi vOi vOi v bfl ti N ca m 7 m U V V C in N C m m v m m m m 0 3 o m m 7 m o 0 m m m LL w m m V) w m m m > V) V) D_ w w d CO d LL m V 0 m m m v m O � U aj is N O is E L z E -22 m 2 0 E 7 Q v M T T U u U m ut O w Y Y N O = m C — L m m m m LL LL LL O i Y 7 m m m V) S L — J S N vaj 0) N LL m V L N vl V v Y N 7 U N VI Vf v Y Y 0 _ > V V i 7 — of N N 0 C m m m — — — u v Q m 0 m m m m 7 7 m > m m m E o 0 m m Y v_ > �^ n m m m a > > aE a > avo w s > a s ' v E � T a > U > N Y v v N LL N N N ;� }' Q 7 O Y O C m N N OJ u Y m v C L m tjo OD Y Y Y O O O O m C m m v v > Y Y Y (DN 7 0 u -O N N N U U � � 7 L O ,aY+ Q O '0 7 L O O_ O_ Q ccO L L o/ v C a u N N o/ O J O_ fl_ O_ J -LZ J m V -Z D D D G Y Y V) O Y LL J Y V) LL W v X_ X_ C C 7 C C O a� fD O Y Y Q u a a cu — v m m v v m O v y.r y.r m U v m m a a a a a a a a L T T d a L L L L L d d d d d d d d d L o o m rs rs a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C t t m m m m m m N 0) v v v v OA OD OO UD 00 OD OD OD O.0 7 in in 2 2 2 2 2 2 m m no m m m i i L i L L v1 of H H H VI J J J J J J J J J E E N v i i i i i i OO b0 b0 CIO to w > > > >- > > > > > 0 �6 0 m m m m m m W oA oA L a! a! a) a) v (U al v a) U O_U O_ LL LL 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Y Y Y Y X ]L Y Y Y N N t L � OA — 3 3 A N N N L L L Q) O O En o7J N co E o2S o CL E r o LL Q N i .2i c L O O o V1 m V) c-I V1 V) O O O O O O O O O O O CD O 00 00 O O O O CD O ut O O O O O O O 00 O O O N r, O I O Vl IZ3- to a O O O O O O O 00 00 00 IZT m cl cl ci N cl cl 00 cl N cl N 00 cl Izi- ci N V1 Ul c-I cl cl 00 Ln -Ln N N -Ln -Ln -Ln V'� iA tn N tA Ln tn tn tA N N N -Ln -tn Ln V'� -V� Q Q co O O L L N O O i m 4:5 6 0 N - O V) V7 i C mo 0.0 �..' N U U V C C N N +-' O_ Q C N O O Y E E bn O O N i i N U U N _T _T to O a a E U 2 2 N N L \ OA 0o O O J O O O O sT+ sT+ N 61 61 L! C Q 00 u N v p 'E 'E 61 � K 0 M CU cu[6 N 0 ++ o w N N Y i i d Q O O -0 v U E E a v v ns s s col LA � 3 3 v N U NE E O f6 (6 N w w ++ a+ V w w w w r6 O O 0 O L L C 3 f6 f6 O m Y O N ra m ca ca m U U U H H H Q O Vl N T CO V1 T VI VI J c%7 V7 H C C O O N Y (6 Q N L -O U t]D L 6J C O CY) C O 7 N N N O N y O U -0 -O v o Q o o V) V) v o o LL v V T LL O L j b.0 U LL LL T 6! 61 V) V) Nai N i N E V N N O v T T T J N N O V V E C C N v ai o a `' i 3 Q n E v v T �N v LSO, V E cT6 cT6 c E f6 i6 i6 6�i 06 � o E E Y o v o � a a o � 2 2 2 u o LL C O O ac u u LL V T T E 6) T a1 C Q N N f6 > > > N N OL t n3 c0 O- CL > > p 6J 6J tv O O Y Y Y V ~ C CO 7 N N > Y Y 61 9- 0— f6 m 6) U L L cc u J J J O 7 c O Q Q 61 D d> d Y V) F- � G CL VN LL LL LL CL `L C V) V) Vl Y LL LL 6) 6) 4) 6) 6J 61 O v v 6) C C C C C C O C C C u u u u u u E E E v u u u 0 0 0 L L L Y_ Y_ Y_ Y_ Y_ Y_ Y O O 0 Y C C C C C C i K cc K J i a d d C C C E E E E E E a U E > _ _ _ E E E E E E E E E _ Y y N 0 Y C E E E O O O O O O O2 U U U C OC C Y 3 O O O O O U U u u u u Q Q Q 0 E E E u u u T > > T T T v E d E E E T T T a) a) 0) v v v 6, v a)d Y Y Y Y Y le Y f6 d d d d 0- EO 'n U U U le Y Y O C C C C C C C C C C C C U r6 O O O C C C (6 O O O O O O f6 O O O .O .O 'v 'N 'N N = LO LO LM m .+P P .++ J u ice+ +�+ +�+ ice+ +�+ ice+ N Vf Uf N N N L J J J u ice+ +�+ +m+ T C C C C C C ?) C C C C C C CL T T T C C C 61 N (6 2 (6 (6 (6 (6 O N 41 6J 61 N 6/ � f6 N N N 61 m 0) (6 Y LL LL LL LL LL LL Cl. K m co m m m m m 2 Y v v LL d d d N n a--I 61 n N Donations and Sponsorships Organization Purpose Support its advocacy to lower property Fair Insurance Rates for Monroe (FIRM) insurance rates for Monroe County KWIA Sponsorships--NonF American Youth Soccer Organization (AYSO) 2025 AYSO National Games Sponsorship Key Largo Chamber Of Commerce 2025 4th of July Sponsorship Key West Rotary Club Foundation 2025 4th of July Sponsorship Lower Keys Rotary 2025 4th of July Sponsorship Marine Resources Devlmt Foundation 2025 Haunted Lagoon Sponsorship Rotary Club of Key Largo Sunset Foundation Inc. 2025 Sponsor Key Largo Boat Parade Rotary Club of Marathon 2025 4th of July Sponsorship Task Force Dagger Special Ops Foundation Dagger Dive 2025 Sponsorship United Way of the Florida Keys Sponsorship Key West Resource Guide Upper Keys Rotary Foundation Sponsorship of 2025 4th of July Event Key West Military Affairs Committee 2026 Soldier Ride Sponsorship Total Donations & Other Funding For informational purposes only; not included in total: KWIA Sponsorships--GovernmE Key West High School 2025-WSSPONS Sponsorship Morale, Welfare & Recreation Division, United Commercial Sponsorship NAS Key West 2025 States Navy Southernmost Air Spectacular Funds allocated (Votes $50,000.00 )rofits--CY25 Events $1,000.00 Also sponsored $2,000 in 2023 $15,000.00 Also sponsored $15,000 in 22, 23 & 24 $15,000.00 Also sponsored $15,000 in 22, 23, & 24 $15,000.00 Also sponsored $15,000 in 22, 23, & 24 $500.00 Also sponsored $500 in 2024 $2,500.00 Also sponsored $15,000 in 23 $15,000.00 Also sponsored $15,000 in 22, 23, & 24 $2,500.00 Also sponsored $3,000 in 24 $500.00 Also sponsored $500 for an event in 24 $15,000.00 Also sponsored $15,000 in 22, 23, & 24 $3,000.00 Also sponsored $3,000 for 23, 24 and 25 $85,000.00 $135,000.00 2nt Entities--CY25 Events $5,000.00 Also sponsored $5,000 in 23 and 24 for other athletic sponsorships $50,000.00 Also sponsored $25,000 for 23; this event is held every other year $55,000.00 Waived Permit Fees Project/Applicant Name Habitat for Humanity of the Upper Keys, Inc. Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Keys Inc. Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Keys Inc. Florida Keys Community Land Trust Inc. Habitat for Humanity of the Upper Keys, Inc. Florida Keys Community Land Trust Inc. Florida Keys Community Land Trust Inc. Conch Republic Housing Alliance, LLC Habitat for Humanity of the Upper Keys, Inc. Habitat for Humanity of the Upper Keys, Inc. Florida Keys Community Land Trust, Inc. Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Keys Inc. * Fees due at acceptance considered waived at time of permit submittal while all other fees are due at is Amount of fees Actual Amount Waived Year Waiver specifically waived at September 2015- Approved by BOCC issuance in 2025* December 2025* $8,855.83 2015 $81,127.18 2017 $210,956.18 2018 $37,371.22 2018 $6,608.13 2018 $26,702.59 2018 $9,274.70 2018 $192,922.76 2019 $6,062.80 2019 $7,895.63 2021 $9,645.92 2022 $25,311.10 $92,296.50 2024 $25,311.10 �suance and considered waived at issuance. Other Agreements with Non-Profits For informational purposes--contracts are for purchase of goods or sery Organization 3406 North Roosevelt Corporation d/b/a Visit the Florida Keys Humane Animal Care Coalition, Inc. Florida Keys Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc. Florida Keys Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc. Star Of The Sea Foundation, Inc Guidance Care Center /ices Purpose Operating an executive office for the Tourist Development Countil and tourism promotion Operation of Upper Keys Anmal Control and Shelter Operation of Marathon Anmal Control and Shelter Operations of Key West Animal Control and Shelter Provide hot congregate meals to meal site in Key West Transportation Services Contract Cost $4,087,341.62 $399, 956.23 $557,319.50 $994,952.49 $162,720.00 $842,963.00 $6,645,296.61 Notes Not a specific amount--salaries, benefits, and corporate expenses. Current annual cost with increase annually until end of contract 6/30/30 Current annual cost with increase annually until end of contract 9/30/30 Current annual cost with increase annually until end of contract 4/30/34 Cost based on consumption. Contract dates 7/16/2025-6/30/2026 Annual cost for contract dates 10/1/25 to 9/30/26 Liz Yongue From: Hunt-Kacey <Hunt-Kacey@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 2:21 PM To: Liz Yongue Subject: FW: AHEC and HSAB Hi Liz, This is for the record, agenda item S8. Kacey Fount, Executive Assistant Michelle Lincoln Mayor Monroe County, District 2 7280 Overseas Hwy, #2 Marathon, FL 33050 Courier Stop#14A (305) 292-4512 Monroe County, Florida "The Florida Keys" PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD RECORDS LAW. MOST WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM THE COUNTY REGARDING COUNTY BUSINESS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA UPON REQUEST. YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATION MAY BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. From: Hurley-Christine<Hurley-Christine@ Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov> Sent:Thursday, April 9, 2026 6:18 PM To: Lincoln-Michelle<Lincoln-Michelle@ Mon roecounty-FL.Gov>; Boan-Tina <Boan-Tina@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>; Quinn-John <Quinn-John@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>; Hunt-Kacey<Hunt-Kacey@ Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov> Cc: Fry, Carla A<Carla.Fry@flhealth.gov><carla.fry@flhealth.gov>; Roby, Mark A<mark.roby@flhealth.gov> Subject: RE:AHEC and HSAB Carla and Mark: Please see below. Christine Hurley,AICP Monroe County(Florida Keys)Administrator 1100 Simonton Street Key West, Florida, 33040 From: Lincoln-Michelle<ILincaal_n-IMi h_nll ( IMaanraancaa anty-FL.Gov> Sent:Thursday, April 9, 2026 6:16 PM To: Hurley-Christine<I'ILArl_ey-Christine@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>; Boan-Tina < n-Tiny( IMaanraa Caa anty-FL.Gov>; 1 Quinn-John <t �ainn-Jaahn( IMaanraa Caa anty-IFL.Gov>; Hunt-Kacey<lJLAnt-lKacnyC Mon roeCounty-IFL.Gov> Subject: Fwd:AHEC and HSAB FYI Michelle Lincoln Mayor Monroe County BOCC District 2 7280 Overseas Hwy, #2 Marathon, FL 33050 (305) 292-4512 (Office) (305) 360-7666 (Cell Phone) PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD RECORDS LAW. MOST WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM THE COUNTY REGARDING COUNTY BUSINESS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA UPON REQUEST. YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATION MAYBE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. Begin forwarded message: From: Michael Cunningham <M_is_ha_nl( knyshnceaarg> Date:April 9, 2026 at 4:12:09 PM EDT To: Lincoln-Michelle<LincoIn-IMich_ell�(�rnnnrngj cgunty-fl:gov_> Subject:AHEC and HSAB CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the County. Whether you know the sender or not, do not click links or open attachments you were not expecting. Michelle, Thank you for the opportunity to share what Keys AHEC means to the children and families of Monroe County. We are proud of the work we do every day, and we want to make sure you have a full and accurate picture of how our services are delivered, work with our county health dept., and why they matter so much to our community. A UNIQUE AND ESSENTIAL MEDICAL HOME Keys AHEC Health Centers operate seven Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs) across 10 school sites, providing primary care to children who would otherwise go without. Our current patient population is 87.5% uninsured or Medicaid-enrolled being the most medically vulnerable children in our county, coming from working-class, low-and moderate-income families. To put that in context: the three pediatricians in Monroe County do not operate uninsured patient programs and have capped their Medicaid enrollments.There is simply no other provider in this county with our reach, our focus, or our commitment to these children. FULL-SERVICE DENTAL CARE — WHERE NO ONE ELSE GOES 2 Our dental program is equally distinctive with 99.8% uninsured and Medicaid.Through a board-certified pediatric dentist, we deliver comprehensive restorative treatment and preventive dental care through three access points: • A mobile dental unit rotating across 10 schools •The Marathon Dental Center • A dental clinic at HOB School No other provider in the county offers this level of pediatric dental care. It's worth clarifying a point raised in the recent BOCC presentation:while we deeply value our partnership with the Monroe County Health Department and their school health nurses, their role as defined and limited by the Florida Department of Health is traditional school health programming (mainly screenings).They do not treat, diagnose, prescribe, provide orders, or arrange specialty referrals.They do not offer full-service dentistry, and historically never have. A note on history: the county's Dental Sealant Program actually began with a grant I wrote on behalf of Tally Anne Reeb. Once funds were secured, the program was contracted to AHEC to operate which is a reflection of the trust and collaboration we share with the Health Department. We are proud of that relationship and see it as complementary, not duplicative. BREAKING NEW GROUND:THE ECG PROGRAM FOR STUDENT ATHLETES Keys AHEC is stepping up once again to fulfill a state-mandated ECG screening program for student athletes a service no other local provider has offered or agreed to provide. For the children whose test results identify cardiac concerns, access to a pediatric cardiologist is critical.That specialty does not exist locally, and private practices that might otherwise help typically do not accept Medicaid or are unwilling to accommodate uninsured patients at reasonable rates. To bridge this gap, we are working to establish a formal relationship with Nicklaus Children's Hospital to provide pediatric cardiology services here in the Keys at our sites, via telehealth, and at their main facility when needed.This is the kind of innovative, mission-driven solution that defines who we are. A PROMISE TO EVERY CHILD Should the BOCC be in a position to provide support for these services, we would welcome the opportunity to formalize our partnership with the County Health Department under a contract ensuring continuity, accountability, and the best outcomes for our kids. We are deeply grateful for the time, attention, and thoughtful consideration you and your colleagues are bringing to this conversation.The children we serve don't always have advocates at the table, but with your support, they do. You will help us keep our promise:that every child will be seen, heard, and cared for. With gratitude and respect, Michael Cunningham 3 Liz Yongue From: Hunt-Kacey <Hunt-Kacey@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 2:21 PM To: Liz Yongue Subject: FW: Ahead of Wednesday's HSAB discussion Liz, This is for the record, agenda item S8. Kacey Fount, Executive Assistant Michelle Lincoln Mayor Monroe County, District 2 7280 Overseas Hwy, #2 Marathon, FL 33050 Courier Stop#14A (305) 292-4512 Monroe County, Florida "The Florida Keys" PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD RECORDS LAW. MOST WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM THE COUNTY REGARDING COUNTY BUSINESS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA UPON REQUEST. YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATION MAY BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. From: Hurley-Christine<Hurley-Christine@ Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov> Sent:Thursday, April 9, 2026 6:16 PM To: Lincoln-Michelle<Lincoln-Michelle@ Mon roecounty-FL.Gov>; Boan-Tina <Boan-Tina@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>; Quinn-John <Quinn-John@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>; Hunt-Kacey<Hunt-Kacey@ Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov> Cc: Fry, Carla A<Carla.Fry@flhealth.gov><carla.fry@flhealth.gov>; Roby, Mark A<mark.roby@flhealth.gov> Subject: RE:Ahead of Wednesday's HSAB discussion Carla and Mark: Please see below. Christine Hurley,AICP Monroe County(Florida Keys)Administrator 1100 Simonton Street Key West, Florida, 33040 From: Lincoln-Michelle<ILincaal_n-IMi h_nll ( IMaanraancaa anty-FL.Gov> Sent:Thursday, April 9, 2026 6:14 PM To: Hurley-Christine<HUrl_ey-Christine@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>; Boan-Tina < n-Tiny( IMaanraa Caa anty-FL.Gov>; 1 Quinn-John <t �ainn-Jaahn( IMaanraa Caa anty-FL.Gov>; Hunt-Kacey<lJLAnt-lKaceyC Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov> Subject: Fwd:Ahead of Wednesday's HSAB discussion FYI Michelle Lincoln Mayor Monroe County BOCC District 2 7280 Overseas Hwy, #2 Marathon, FL 33050 (305) 292-4512 (Office) (305) 360-7666 (Cell Phone) PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD RECORDS LAW. MOST WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM THE COUNTY REGARDING COUNTY BUSINESS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA UPON REQUEST. YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATION MAYBE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. Begin forwarded message: From: Cali Roberts<crobertsC2Aq r. nk%ndkeywest.or > Date:April 9, 2026 at 4:17:19 PM EDT To: BOCCDIS2< o.ccd.is2_(2_rn_aanraa caa. nty-flegcaa_v> Subject:Ahead of Wednesday's HSAB discussion Some people who received this message don't often get email from croberts@womankindkeywest.org. Learn why this is important CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the County. Whether you know the sender or not, do not click links or open attachments you were not expecting. Good afternoon, Michelle, As I prepare for Wednesday's discussion regarding potential changes to HSAB funding, I wanted to address the County's meeting summary that identifies Womankind and the Health Department as providing duplicate services. Womankind provides comprehensive women's health care throughout the Keys. We are the only provider offering sliding scale access to gynecological services, prenatal care management, and diagnostic procedures. Our care is overseen by a board-certified OB/GYN, which allows us to provide a level of specialty care not available through the Health Department. While there may be overlap in preventive services, many Health Department patients are referred to Womankind for a level of care they do not provide. I will be at Wednesday's meeting and look forward to discussing this further. Cali 2 Cali Roberts Executive Director direct phone 305.320.0608 -.mew... .I...ail Mi AIm01p11 III fly �uw �fl' IWV� � w mu Key West • Marathon 3