Little angels with whiskers, straight from Founders Park! All spayed, neutered, and shots completed - ready to find a new home!  Call Sharon at 305-304-5262.

We get weary of this discussion. The kids just want to play ball.

The basic questions remain unanswered: What are the responsibilities of property owner (Village) versus tenant (School Board) as to schedule for usage, maintenance and future replacement?

We absolutely support the program and understand why a ride-share service is a worthwhile service for a community to provide… It makes it easier to get to and from appointments, stores, restaurant or work.

The real effort is ensuring that the Village is getting the best possible deal for the taxpayer and for riders.

Relax and get comfortable while we look at the facts.

As in any transaction competition - what makes the service better and more affordable should be the deciding factor.

Islamorada has offered ride share services since 2019 using Freebee – but until 2026 we have not selected through a legally required competitive bid process.

Currently, the service is free to Islamorada residents and visitors.

Up until now, the cost, has been split 50 – 50 between Village property owners

via property tax revenue and the Florida Department of Revenue’s transit grant.

The Village plans to add a small charge of $2/ride to help reduce taxpayer cost.

At the May 28, 2026 Ride-share workshop, Jason Spiegel, CEO and Co-Founder of Freebee began his presentation with this introduction:

“The contract for us is really not a profitable contract. We’re not here to make money on this contract. We operate because we truly care about this community. We love this place, we understand it and we’ve demonstrated that through the service we’ve provided since 2018.”

He also indicated their new proposal would actually reduce the cost.

Let’s see.

The $2 rider charge certainly seemed intent on reducing costs to taxpayers. And yet, Freebee’s income would increase by over 20% with their proposal - from $553,330 to $688,330. Islamorada taxpayer cost would be reduced by less than half that percentage, with just $23,330 reduction guaranteed.

The purpose was not to dramatically increase what Islamorada pays Freebee or any other vendor. After all, the proposed service requested by the Village is just a continuation of the same service we’ve had with no changes required.

Our taxpayers should benefit significantly when riders pay just a small amount per ride.

Did someone on our staff do the numbers before they decided on $2/ride in the RFP?

In 2025 Freebee documented 55,806 riders = $111,612 if we had charged $2/ride

Yet with the $2 fee Freebee’s cost proposal reduces our guaranteed taxpayer cost by just $23,330.

Do the math as to the take-home income for Freebee:

• $530,000 from the Village, only a $23,330 guaranteed reduction

• $75,000 in the $2 fees from 37,500 riders/yr

• $60,000 for income for ads on the vehicles (that the staff says violates Florida law)

• Total income for Freebee - $665,000, a $111,670, 20.2% increase

The winner is – Freebee with a 20.2% increase in income with their current proposal.

It is important for the Council to remember that the FDOT grant is not guaranteed. And is available for this one final year, yet we are offering a 2-year Ride Share contract.

To be eligible for future FDOT grant funding we would need to expand the service.

It appears the Freebee CEO was in error in telling the Village that Freebee is not in Islamorada to make money!

What do other communities in South Florida pay for Freebee services?

Seems logical to check on the Village of Key Biscayne.  They are very much like Islamorada in geographic size and income levels; A small island community, though with double the population of Islamorada at 14,000, a popular tourist community, one way off their island, directly into the congestion of downtown Miami, problems with traffic congestion and limited parking, wealthy community.

Key Biscayne’s most recent competitive bidding was in 2023, providing a 3-year contract to Freebee, that was extended for 1 year, on March 26, 2026, with the same 2023 terms.

Because they negotiate an hourly charge instead of a fixed price, with Key Biscayne’s lower hourly cost, they can have 17% more Freebee service hours than Islamorada while paying 9.1% less than Islamorada. And they have significant flexibility in order to increase vehicles used during peak hours.

Does Key Biscayne have a better contract? Take a look.

In Key Biscayne, they currently pay for a portion of their service with an FDOT grant. The balance, according to their current budget, comes from a Transportation surtax. Thus requiring no rider fee and little if any property taxes.

It would be extremely helpful to use the methodology used by Key Biscayne to optimize the service for riders, providing more flexibility with peak hours, if we use an hourly charge instead of fixed charge.

It would be sound business for our Village manager and staff to explore these revisions. FDOT provides the transit grants expecting communities to maximize the use of the funding. They have always allowed FLEXIBILITY with their funding requirements as long as the money is used according to their goal - to improve transit services.

Currently, Freebee’s proposal suggested a number of interesting improvements they would like to implement in the coming year.

Freebee has had a contract with the Village for 7 years with no competition. I would ask where were these suggestions for improvements several years ago? Competition for the contract is the motivation.

It appears Village has conducted no oversight on the Freebee contract over the past 7 years! Please tell us that it is not the case.

The single sample of data from the Freebee dashboard, provided by Freebee, for 7am – 8am April 1, 2026, a Wednesday, suggests that only two of the three required vehicles were in service, creating an 18-minute average delay.

Who regularly checks to assure that all vehicles we are paying for are actually available? The data is available on their “dashboard” but apparently we never check!

The Freebee graphs in the RFP demonstrate a lack of vehicles during peak hours with many requests for service canceled because of wait times. Why haven’t we asked to have more vehicles during peak hours, less during non-peak times?

Freebee is not giving us a great deal. The facts speak for themselves.

And just think what this proposal would do to taxpayers if we don’t get the grant or the Council decides against a rider fee!

The selection committee met for 15 minutes to rank the proposals of Freebee and Circuit.  Not enough time to say hello!

Residents, as I have stated before, should participate in any contract selection process. I have done it. It is not complicated.

We need to make changes in our procedures and have regular reporting for every contract we execute.

Good management is a key to competent governance.

We continue to sign flawed contracts with no regular status reporting or oversight. I don’t think we currently meet the high standard the residents deserve.

Council, let’s take another look at this contract.

It is the right thing to do.

Remember, elections have consequences.

Move transit to the front burner. We can do much better with just a little more effort.

Tom

With such a brief land use agenda, it seems like a perfect opportunity to have the planning staff brief the public and council about the complex Comprehensive Plan process we are facing with the rewrite by Able City East. Explain the critical issues and  make a serious effort to engage the public.  

In another Florida county, last Thursday commissioners voted to delay the county’s proposed comprehensive plan after residents packed the chamber with concerns about growth and development.  We should be packing our community center - but do people even understand what a rewrite of the comp plan could mean to them - their children and grandchildren over the next 20 years?  

We thank the Village for extending the public comment deadline to March 13!  Now encourage the public - let them know why it is important to get engaged in the process!

Could there be a single meeting of the Village Council without controversy?  Doesn’t look like this will be it!  Check the administrative relief for 183 E. Ridge Road.  The owner wants a BPAS allocation for a prior Councilman’s former property - on a narrow jetty creating an oceanside boat basin and park.  

Administrative relief can be provided when an applicant for a BPAS allocation has been on the waiting list for 4 years without getting an allocation.  A hearing is then scheduled before the Village Council.  

From Village Code: Action by village council. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the village council may take any or a combination of the following actions:

1. Grant the applicant an allocation award for all or part of the allocation       requested in the next succeeding allocation period or extended pro rata       over several succeeding allocation periods.

2. Offer to purchase the property at its fair market value.

3. Suggest such other relief as may be necessary and appropriate.

The Council has consistently provided an allocation when they have administrative Relief hearings.

There are 6 administrative relief allocations remaining and no market rate allocations… with 38 Applicants looking for allocations. A majority are eligible for administrative relief.  Those 6 should be used judiciously by the Village.  The property in question is contiguous to other properties purchased together by this owner. This property does have a significant use - boat dockage. The market value is listed as $98,039 by the County Property Appraiser with 75% of the value being the improvements and 25% being the land.  

According to the plat, a portion of the “platted lot” is listed as a park with another portion as the 20’ easement for access to the park.

The Village should either…

1. deny the administrative relief as not necessary as the owner has a significant use of the property for dockage.  

2. Offer to purchase the property at just (market) value listed as $98,039 to return the “park” and park access easement for the originally intended public use, based on the designations on the plat map.  

Save valuable Administrative Relief for more appropriate situations.