HomeMy WebLinkAbout6. Final Report of the Monroe County Grand Jury Winter Term 2026 N THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTEENTH tl.JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MONROE, COUNTY, FLORIDA
FINAL REPORT OF THE MONROE COUNTY GRAND JURY
WINTER TERM, 2026
MEMBERS OF THE WINTER TERM 2026 GRAND JURY
JILL MIRANDA BAKER, Foreperson
JON MARR, Vice Foreperson
DENNIS W. WARD
State Attorney
COLLEEN M. DUNNE
Assistant" SU,'fte Attorney
1. INTRODUCTION
Over the last six months, this grand jury panel continued, as the last grand
jury panel did, to review particular workings of departments within the City of
Key West. Coupled with the retnirn of Indictments against the former CBO
Rajindhar Ramsingh and local contractors Max Hieller and George BeYs for their
fraudulent acts in connection with specificbuilding permitting, we also ex"Unined
the current, structure of the City of Key West, the proce(Wres and prkictices
related to the Planning Board, the Building Department, the Planning
Departincrit, and Code Enforcement.
Over the course of the various, meetings, witnesses were questioned to gather
information, policy language, processes surrounding permitting, building, and
code itaspections, the varianice applietation Process as well as understan,ding the
working relations between the various departments. We also sought to
Understand details of state and local rules and regulations.
The Grand Jury thoroughly reviewed building permit applications, variance
applications, site plans, memos, property appraisal records, staffing reports,
photographs, and aerial maps to enhance our understanding of the Building
permit process,, the Planning D eparb-ne tit's role and process, and, in a more
focused review, the variance applicatio roces,s and. the Planning Board's
procedures.
II. OUR ASSESSMENT
Based upon the accumulation of the facts gathered through our sessions, it
is apparent, that, although, the City of Key West has made changes in response
to the previOLIS issues i-aised by the last grand jui,y panel, there are additional
areas of concern that need to be addressed. They first is the City of Key West's
current organizational structure/organizational chart. The second is the statc,
of' the existing planning and building regulations and building ai"id land
development codes. rtie ti,ird is the currcnt worldrigs and procedures, of the
Planning Boaxd and the vari,,�ince application process.
Current Qi1janization(al-Structom
Froin, the testiniony an(] information gatfiered, the current organizational
chart, specifically the layers of Management and reporting lines, has created
operational bottlenecks wid ambigui(y in dccision making, hindering efficicr)t,
q,ui(,,,k decision-niaking, resolutions, and productivity. Understanding that the
City of Key West has been in the process of making changes to its structure, the
flux in responsibilities, overlap in management, and unclear roles continue to
hinder the City's ability to -jimprove efficiency and procitictivity. The specific
aspects of the current organizational chart that are 1�f concern rrre the multiple
layers of management when taking into consideraLion the
row-iagement/employee ratio.
As described by the various current and former city employees and a, review
of the current strLICtUre, the following, question emerged; with the staff to
n',ianagernent ratio that exists, does the City of Key West need as rnatiy
mangers/directors or stated more simply; are there too, many layers, of
management for the limited number of employees? Having too many managers
or layers ncreases time for decision-iiialdng/'appT.-ovaI processes, raises
management, costs, creates a lack of transparency between emptoyees and
management, and can lead to reduced accountability due to the multiple
m,anagfment layers, which dilLItC r(IISPOT-ISibility and rrurrlrcw it difficult, to hold
anyone accountable.
Existing-Plan nit j d and Lwid Devel op nent Codes
4�Jons a
Understanding that the authority to enact amendmerits to building and land
development codes is limited tothey City Commission and review and approval of
the State Department of Commerce, there is still as need for a, comprehensive
review of the current regailat ions and cades. Based on the information received,
the various regulations arid land development codes, which have been arriended
over the years, are not easily understood due to, incon.sistencies, contradi ct ion S,
and overly confusing language. For example, in one section of the code, it will
describe restrictions such as for a fence and its placerricrit, but in miother section
read a18, LbOUgh thC plaCenlefit of the fence, contrary to Lhe ottier section,
permitted. Unclear, ambiguous language leads not only to delays but also to
increased costs to residents atterripting to comply with planning and building
requirements. City of Key West residents should riot be compelled to retain, costly
land development professionals simply to navigate a. roca ess that ought to be
accessible, transparent, and within the grasp of the very people it is ineal-it to
serve,
The Building_Dtpgltltitlll, the,,I�t rrrtrlltt.l qq��Variwiqes
---------....................
As it stkirids, there are no particular qUalifications for one tio be appointed to
serve on the City of Key West's Planning Board. This is not an. criticism of the
current or past inernbers but a mere observation. With such au important
position tasked with inaking critical decisions that have significmit itripacts on,
individual and co'nimUpity growth, it WOUld seem reasonable and prudent th a,t
there be some type of base knowledge.
Planning Board members must interpret legal, environnient-al and
developmental frameworks to ensure community f;,7owth aligns with established
regulations. The members should have an understanding of land developnient
and community issvies, but this is riot to any that the board sh,ould be limited. to
experts or professionals, but rather strive for diverse perspectives, that, we
allow for more conirrumity-reflective decisions. A well-co nstitu ted board should
in.chid(:°, non-l)rofessionc-A and professional residents, which would ensure
decisions arc n,olt Only tOChrliCally sound but also representativc of the
community values and align with the public good.
We also looked at the varil ,,tnce application process artd proced,ures followt�d
by the playining boar? In me pardcuWr c,7,vs.e, it wats dJscovered that despRe the
current V&Mcadon Fonns that requke the n't to attest tliat th.e plaris,
drawbags:, arid n"utterials heing provided R',xir are, Lrut,! �ati d a:iccurafe,
lids was Imt tk."� and phi w,,,,,.is only discovered allrr a revie=4 the Fla. nnkg
Departrnent, staff th,,a( was tasked wi,th reviewing tll(.,, vaj.-iamcc What
sYmuld havc, been ,,,in e,,:isy decision, pay (he Planning, Board, to rcmove the
.application f(,)r conshkMon Or Mure t(,.i provide the accunate doctiment itian,
postpcjwt-w, Ar as future date (as was reqttiest,ed 1,)y stai'll, was not followed, aj,"id
a discussion commenced o),,?,(,.,!r the staff.'s otaje(,.,Oon.
The appUcant was pennMed U; proceed "fillt a, 1,,ireseritatioti befai,"c the
Pl,-aniing Board based cn�i, plans that were uldm ate y, revealml to be inaccurate
arid in( cmiplctc% Tits placed staBF in the iantenabic possition ofBatt ern.pting to
resporui to aml an applicadon witt-iout the tx-,,nefit, of r(:wli-able, or
cornprehonsive iinformatim."i. Althnugh the maUer was eventUally C011.61.111ed to a i
Future dattb, thoit dmision, c.aauuaca only aft, r as substantial partion of the meeting
had alrea-,,tdy l,accr,a cons earned k-time that mmuld havc" e,Al-wetwise Ileac, devotei,-i to
properly vetted, agc,,nda, ate rm�,)n
"I"his sequence of events i.-aises a fiindamerjUil concern if application
nuaterials were known to be deficient, why was the Am advanced to the agenda
at M TH absenm cal' coirnplek, and aucc-urate C1O(-1H-tW(N1t,a1jO1-1 Underniines the
inte,grity of the reVrj,C p,W rces os �a"r)r I compron'�iises the ,abllity of both staff and th(,
:Board Lo c ngagc in rneaningRi[ Manned deljben�,,Aion. Lhider such
cirCUn1StaU1C(,S, t hero appears W havx, bem rm) justifia[aIe basis for initiating
ihscus&ion, let alone entertainNg I)OWntial miction, on an -q-)plication tha,t Nva,s
not yrt in as miadition suftable fi-m- reviemi,
The Planning BomA often makes, ir-reversible decislons ma ]and-LISC,
deve�loprne-nt, ,ind zoning. These decishms Mape the cimmmunity"s long-term
safety, economilc vitality -ind character. Although for the most part the pr�-ocesse s
followeed by the Planning Boaird a,re SOUTid, a review of its rnake-up and sotne of
the procedures reveals a few areas that, if modified or irnplemented, could
iniprove overall efficiency and improve the board's fairness, objectivity, and build
community trust.
111. RECOMMENDATIONS,
We make the following recommendations and request that they be added
to the r),ext City Cornmissie°)n, ag(I"nda for discussion and public on
adopting and it the proposed recommendations.
REORGANIZATION COMMITTEE
1, We propose that the City of Key West fonn a committee composed of five
(5) residents of the City of Key West of varied backgrounds, charged with
the task of studying no fewer thari three towns/cities wittlin the United
States that are comparable to the City of Key West, Key similarities ought
to include poprflation, cost of living, and economic activity relative to the
rest of the state.
The committee will study the organizational structure of comparable cities
and form a recommendation for the reorganization of the City of Key West
organizational chart, 'rhe current City of Key West manpower shall then
be compared to, the staffing of several like communities for the purpose, of
making recommendations.
Most importantly, the committee will be tasked with studying, the City of
Key West's existing staffing, including all city departments and appointed
positions, The responsibilities and workload of eacl-I department's
management, and staff positions should be identified and reviewed with a
focus on I lie potential for consolidation to, improve not only work but also
fiscal efficiency, Any department that exceeds 125% of the report, findings
should be required to justify to, top city management the current staffing
levels based upori Linique local, conditions and requireinents, If no strong
Justification exists, staffing shall be further reiriewed to reduce staffing to
a more appropriate level,
All draft recommendations, shall be presented in an open, public forum,
Gmd input from stakeholders and citizens shall I-x solicited. A final re
organizationaJ structure recommendation shall be made within 6 rxionths
of the formation of the committee and presented to the City Commission
at ai public hearing, with citizen comments permitted.
The committee shall consist of five (5) members and can include, but is
not required to have, no raore than three (3) current city cniployces,
excluding directors, departinerit heads, the City Manager, and the City
Attorney.
REGULATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
...............
2. We propo se that the City of Key West form a committee composed of seven
(7) City of Key West residents, charged with the task of reviewing -,dl
building and planning regLflatioris and land development codes.
This committee will be tasked with reviewing the current building and
planning regLilations wad codes with, a focus on identif ring gaps,
inconsistencies, unnecessary, redundancies, strengths, and opportunities
for improvements, The committee will thereafter provide recommendations
that increase trmuisparcncy, expand public participation, better protect
public health, safety and wel-faTe, axe consistent "rith the City of Key West's
Comprehensive Plw-i, and advance the goals and objectives of the State
designated Area of Critical State Concerns.
This coinmittcc shall submit proposed modirications, such as re-wording,
removal of', or clarification to the current plans and codes, due to lack of
clarity, contradiction, or lack Of IICCCS'Sity,
All modifications approved by the committee shall then, be reviewed, b the
City Attorney's office, The review by the City Attorney's office is, limited to
whether the proposed modification is in violation of any other regulation
or legal authority. After review by the City Attomey's office, the approved
propo ed modifications are to be enacted.
Within 60 days of' tbe formation of the committee, a report to the "ity
Manager shall be Provided, indicating than reviews that have beeri d0ne Of
the current building and planning regulations and land development
codes, and. any proposed modifications that, have been submitted.
The committee shall consist of five (5) members who have experience in
land use and development, The committee may be made up of both non-
city employees and city employees, including a reP
, resentative from the
,
Planning Department, Building,Department and m ust include no less than
two (2) non-city employees.
PMLjtDINQ,," G PLAN N BOARD &VARIANT
-9$
& Menibers of the planning Board should be City of Key West residents for
at least one year and also be clear of (.',onflicts (i.e. not be arl active
co�nt'ractor, developer, or affiliated with any such working in the City of Key
West),
All members within 60 days of appointment shall complete an Ethics
training OM SC -and Conflict of Interest course
All members shall complete a minimum of two (2) hours of relevant
training, such as any training provided by The American Institute of
Certified Planners and the American Platming Association, within three (3)
months, from the date of initial appointment to the Planning Board and
one (1) hour of relevant training in each subsequerit year of rnembership.
4 Ex parte communications are prohibited with respect to the merits of any
case between, any party to a proceeding and any member of the Planning
Board.
If' a member of the Planning Board receives -An ex pane communication
concerning Ilie merit's of an application, the member of the Board must
promptly disclose the communication and place it on the record of the
proceeding, with any party wishing to rebut the cx partc communication
given the opportunity to do so.
5 Variance 2plicatiom 5, --- It is recommended that, before any vciriance
application is placed upon the agenda, there must be confirmation frorn
the Planning Department that at].requested dOCUM. ents have been received
to allow as review and recommendation.
If a postponement is, re(p,iested by either party to the application, when tile
matter is called, there is to be no discussion on the merits of the
application by the Board or either party 'unless the request for the
postponement is withdrawn.
6. Planning L)e.p trnent Verification Forms, - To prevent ownCr-3/builders
-_. . ............................................I
from misrepresenting or not providing em accurate representation of what
is sought to be built and approved, it is, recommended that the current
Verification Forms be modified tO include a notariz,,"'Ition requirement and
also give notice that a Use statement may be subject to criminal penalties
as provided in Fl. Stat, 837.06, False Official Statement. It is further
recommended that trionetm-y perialties or, same type of penalty, such as a
waiting period for re-application, be assessed for the subrnission of
inaccurate, false, or misleading documents, such as surveys, site plans,
elevation plans, floor plans, stormwater management plans.
7. )LafireData-To assist Building and Code with inspections of properties
that have been provided a variance, it is recommended that the approved
variance data be printed on. the perinit, so. it can be visible on site.
M. CLOSING
The Grand Jury's review confirms that while the City of Key West ha,S made
efforts to address previously identified concerns, several structural, procedural,
and regulator challenges persist. These challenges -undermine transparency
efficiency, accoUTItability, arid public li ust.
The recommend.a.tion.s set f6rt.h iri this report are intended, to provide
constructive, practical, and achievable steps toward iniproving city government,
strengthening oversight, and ensuring that planning and development. decisions
are trade in a manner that is fair, consistent,, and aligned wiLh the lc ng-terni
interests of the community, Implementing these recommendations will not only
improve operational effectiveness wid fiscal responsibility but also restore
confidence in processes that directly impact residents, property owners, and the
character of the City of Key West.
Ultimately, clear regulations, a strewnlined organizational structure,
qualified and, well-I rain,ed decision-haler , and try rl spare nt procedures ,are
essential to protecting the public wc1fa-re: arid preserving the unique character of
the City of Key West. the Grand Jury respectfully sub�mits this report and urges
the City Cainmission to give due consideration to these findings and
recommendations in the spirit of accountability, good governance, and service to
the public.
SO SAY WE ALL
J&/if kwo(a Baker
,Jill Miranda Baker
Foreperson