The consent agenda includes a resolution accepting a State Funding Grant Agreement with FDOT for elevating a 2,500 ft section of the Overseas Heritage Trail on Lower Matecumbe.  This portion of the bike path has been virtually unusable for a number of years and floods regularly.  The state grant is for $200,000 with a 20% ($50,000) Village match.  Ownership of the first 50 feet of U.S. One right of way, closest to the Bay on Lower Matecumbe, was deeded to the Village by FDOT February 10, 2005.

Typically the Thursday meetings are listed as Village Land Use Meetings.  Not this time.  Land Use issues were on the lengthy Tuesday agenda, leaving just two items for Thursday.

The two items: Approval of a trip for Vice Mayor Horton A baseball update on negotiations between the Village and the School District regarding a revised site plan for the baseball field and proposed agreements for the field’s use and maintenance.  (no tab, no vote, no public comment?) Below is the baseball field layout that is on the School Board agenda (Oct 7) for approval - removing the 2200 sq ft building shaded in pink.  No cost adjustment indicated. Original restrooms, concession, locker room not within work boundary.

Just when we think a meeting agenda is so jammed packed that it will last well into the night, the council rushes through item after item with little or no discussion managing an early adjournment.

The Oct 7 agenda has 27 tabs, 574 pages plus numerous reports. Many critical issues.

Several reports could have warranted a separate meeting or workshop:

• Presentation of the final Founders Park Master Plan by Miller Legg (what - no vote; no public comment?); The contract was approved June 11, 2024 at a cost of $175,750 and was to be completed in 9 months. The original project was to include all of Founders Park but planning for the Marina and baseball field portions of the park were eliminated with no reduction in cost or change in timeline.  

• A $4.5 million wastewater recommendation for a short-term fix for the MM92 pipe leaks to prevent further problems until a long-term fix can be figured out. This issue has been a problem since 2019.  Finally there may be a plan.  

Consent agenda - 16 items, to be approved with a single vote at a potential cost of over $6.5 Million. Competitive bidding was waived for 16 companies, including 7 wastewater companies and 9 fire rescue companies.

Fire/Rescue expenditures, consent agenda - $914,000.

Wastewater expenditures, consent agenda: $1,725,000  

Protecting U.S. One, consent agenda: Approval of $105,000 for Design and Permitting a Breakwater at Sea Oats Beach.  We wonder if a project largely intended to protect U.S. One and the major evacuation route for points south from future storm surge should be paid for and the responsibility of Islamorada.  Shouldn’t FDOT do this?  

Lobbyist Contract extension ($108,000) on the agenda - waiving competitive bidding.  Though not specified in the agenda, the Manager’s letter of September 29 indicates

Legislative issues of concern will be discussed at the October 7 Village Council meeting

Two Quasi Judicial Land Use hearings at the very end of the Council agenda, tabs 26 and 27 appealing decisions of the Planning Department as to the number of building rights on the properties.

We continue to work diligently to educate the public regarding local issues that impact quality of life, our fragile environment and our limited infrastructure.

We continue to make rational suggestions. Is anyone in Village Hall listening?

 We would like to commend Village Manager Ron Saunders for conducting a zoom meeting with our lobbyists to discuss Village priorities and concerns. Though actually the Village let their contract expire 9/30/2025.

The meeting with the lobbyists by V/M Saunders may be a first. In the past the Village has typically paid over $100K per year for lobbying services.  To the best of anyone’s knowledge, we have never given the lobbyists specific issues regarding our Village needs.

V/M Saunder’s list, enumerated in last week’s Manager’s Weekly letter, included clear priorities for the 2026 legislative session coming up in January:

1. Amending the 2025 Senate Bill 180

2. Potential of reducing or eliminating property taxes  

3. Exemption from paying property taxes on homes in mobile home parks (example: 55 homes at Sun Community Islamorada, MM87.5)

4. Failed 2025 legislation that would negatively impact TDC and may be back in 2026

5. State funding for local issues

 

 It is certainly time to get moving.  Almost 100 bills have already been filed for the 2026 State of Florida Legislative session that starts in January.

V/M Saunders has a solid list of priorities, however, we question why they have not been vetted and prioritized by the public and the Council.  Establishing Village priorities should be a team effort. It is called “representative government.”

We submit the following for your perusal:

• Property Tax relief (#2): Many taxpayers would love to see a major reduction in property taxes implemented statewide. The Village would be forced to truly scrutinize our spending (long overdue) of village tax dollars.

• TDC (#4): Not sure about V/M Saunder’s concern. The TDC revenue for Monroe County in the year ended 9/30/25 is approximately $60 million.  That funding is likely to attract thousands of new tourists to our overcrowded highway. It is time that TDC funds be used to support the communities who house the visitors. TDC funds should be modified to underwrite local transporation, affordble housing for service workers and local public safety measures.

• ·    Local project funding (#5): Wastewater again?

Scope of work in the GrayRobinson (our lobbyist) contract being considered, has wastewater issues at the top of the list of needs from the state. It is basically the same contract as the first contract from 2010.

Should we not update the scope of work to include new priorities? Wastewater, as an enterprise fund, is supposed to be self-supporting now.

We got funding for the initial central sewer system and now we need to figure out how to operate and maintain the system without continuing to expect millions in grant funding to fix our mistakes.

Click here for the scope of work in the lobbying contract. Who wrote and reviewed it?

Monroe County has a Legislative Affairs Director that helps establish the County priorities in conjunction with their various department heads. See the County summary of 2025 priorities.

The County has nearly all the same priorities that the village has. That doesn’t make sense. Our village priorities should be “village priorities”.

Would it not be common sense and fiscally responsible for the county and all municipalities to share lobbyist costs and work together to provide a list of common Florida Keys priorities with a handful of individual municipal priorities.

That would be called good governance.

Elections have consequences.

Tom Raffanello

Reply to: ICA.in.Keys@gmail.com

“Florida Keys: Where they name their streets after trees… and then cut down the trees.”

Anonymous

In 2025 Black Saltmarsh Mosquitoes are more than four times as plentiful as they have been over any of the last 5 years. Mosquito Control is trying diligently to find solutions. Click here to read more about the troublesome Black Saltmarsh Mosquito. Click here to request a site visit and special treatment for your property by Mosquito Control.

Example in Islamorada: Wet Net:  Built by Gorman, a for profit corporation; 36-unit affordable housing complex at MM81 on Upper Matecumbe; all 3 bedroom 2 bath townhouses Subsidies: Inexpensive land lease with Village; 80% construction funding from Florida Housing Finance Corp (Tax Credit grant) Occupants:Low and Very Low Income Rents: Very Low Income - $608/month; Low Income: $1688/month for 3 bedroom twnhomes Benefit to Gorman: Rental project - they manage and get the rent of about $550,000 per year with minimal, maintenance and management expenses, insurance, pay $77,000/yr in property tax Example in County: Southcliff Estates: Purchased by Monroe County, An apartment complex at MM95 with all twelve 1-bedroom apartments,   Subsidies: Purchased in 6/30/25 for $7.3 million with 100% funding from the $35 million TDC excess revenue approved by the legislature; No property taxes for  government owned property. Occupants:Moderate Rate Income Anticipated Rents: $1797/ month minimum up to over $3000/month for 1 bedroom apartments Benefit to County: Approximately $260,000 per year if rented at minimum; insurance, maintenance and management minimal for new construction. $7 million purchase price included land for additional units.

*** From most recent compliance report for the Wet Net: Average family income: $26,801 Average Income Limit Adjusted for family size: $37,089 Total Rental income: $46,351/month Concerns about County Southcliff project : Why only moderate income? With no cost for land or construction, why not help the lower income levels? Minimum income of $71,880 required. Where did that number come from?  We could find no published minimum income, based on HUD standards or in county code, only maximum income. Concerns about Village Wet Net project: Compliance reports (latest reviewed is dated 7/31/25) show no income verification following initial year of occupancy 17 of 36 occupants are original occupant from 2014-2015. Continual reports of multiple occupants, not qualified, and other irregularities In the End: Fewer and fewer members of the workforce can afford the high cost of living in the Keys. Will workers traveling long hours from the mainland find better employment opportunities closer to home?   Will the traffic, lack of service employees, cost of living, eventually impact real estate prices? Will the fragile environment suffer from the over-development? Or will the environment and special lifestyle be enough to sustain the popularity of the Florida Keys?

Islamorada’s Wet Net Monroe County’s Southcliff Most critical issue in the Florida Keys? Perhaps lack of workforce housing - just ahead of traffic and the budget, and over-development.   What is being done about housing costs?  Is it impossible to fix?  Is it even a priority to elected officials? Back ten years ago the Village allocated 14 of the 28 available building allocations per year to affordable housing. After a couple years the formula was changed, providing just 6 affordable allocations and 22 market rate.  A decision that seemed to reflect on Council priorities.

Only projects that spell “big profit” to the investor have been of much interest. No real workforce housing priority has been demonstrated. Buy land and let it sit unused. Allocations unused. No effort at compliance. With the extremely high cost of land and construction who can afford to build and not be allowed to rent or sell at a profit?   The answer - companies getting government subsidies or not for profits benefiting from subsidies and donations.

DOGE: Florida Department of Government Efficiency exists to eliminate waste, ensure accountability and save taxpayers money. Their reviews are typically initiated by local government.  But if the Village Council doesn’t see the benefit in requesting a review, citizens can ask DOGE for help. Citizen-Led Paths to Trigger Oversight from DOGE 1. Direct Petition to the Governor or DOGE Task Force Write a formal request to the Governor’s Office or DOGE, citing concerns about fiscal mismanagement or inefficiency. Include: Specific examples of questionable spending Public records (budgets, contracts, AFRs) A call for DOGE review under Executive Order 25-44 You can reference Jacksonville’s Resolution 2025-0259 as precedent—even if your council won’t pass one. 2. Coordinate with State Legislators Contact your state representative or senator to advocate for a DOGE review. Legislators can request audits or investigations, especially if constituents raise red flags. 3. Organize a Citizen Oversight Committee Form a local watchdog group Monitor spending Publish findings Pressure officials through public forums and media

Via Social Media, Village Manager, Ron Saunders responded to three issues mentioned by Tom Raffanello in his editorial last week.  According to Saunders: 1. The budget process and presentation was improved- it was in my opinion more transparent than ever before. 2. We now have a full time grant-writer on staff to supplement funding as well as our contracted grants consultants. 3. We are in the process of instituting performance-based standards for employee raises. As for me as Village Manager, I have executed the State of Florida’s multi-BILLION dollar budget while serving as Chair of the House Appropriations Committee, and was recognized for my fiscal responsibility and conservatism on behalf on taxpayers in that role.

Our Response to the Manager: Our criticism of the budget process last week was meant to help make improvements in the future. Though our editorial was not about you and your state experience from years ago, Mr. Saunders - you are our hope for the future!   If the process is strengthened - the end result may be closer to what the taxpayers need - relief from high taxes, inefficiencies and out of control spending. To read the full analysis, with statistics, along with suggested improvements we’d like to see in Village budgeting: Click Here.  We found the comparison of Islamorada and Marathon budgets shocking. Islamorada property taxes approved are $8 million more than Marathon!  And they are a larger community and have a huge fund balance.

We appreciate the improvements the Village Manager is instituting - but the Village’s ongoing operating costs cannot continue to escalate.  Using the fund balance and increasing property values is not a good way to reduce and control a bloated budget.  Islamorada is spending too much of the taxpayers’ hard-earned income.