Rick's Blog

Auditor releases preliminary findings on TDC collections

Florida’s Auditor General has sent the Escambia Board of County Commissioners (BCC) three preliminary and tentative audit findings with recommendations that may be included in its report on its operational audit of the Tourist Development Tax collections—also known as bed tax, which is collected from hotel, condo and other short-term rentals.

The audit came at the request of the County’s Tourist Development Council after Clerk of Courts Pam Childers requested TDC members to certify its expenditures. The TDC asked the state auditor to review the Clerk’s and BCC’s administrative costs and certain disbursements for the operation of the Marine Resources Division. Childers and former county administrator Janice Gilley objected to the audit.

Finding 1: The auditors found that several provisions related to TDT administration costs and allowable uses were not consistent with State law. They recommended BCC should clarify that the County may retain a portion of the TDT collected for the administration costs should not exceed 3% of collections, rather than requiring 3% be retained.

Escambia County has two 1% local option taxes commonly referred to as the Professional Sports Franchise Facility Tax and the Additional Professional Sports Franchise Facility Tax (APSFFT). Some ordinances authorize uses of the PSFFT collections that aren’t permitted by State law, and those ordinances need to be changed.

Finding 2: The BCC and DOR should have reviewed the expenditures the TDC believed to be unauthorized by Florida law to the BCC and DOR. If they had, the TDC would not had to ask the Auditor General to do an audit. Auditors recommended the BCC should comply with State law by reviewing TDT expenditures questioned by the TDC and taking appropriate administrative or judicial action. More policies and procedures need to be established to provide guidance.

Finding 3: The audit disclosed TDT projects and expenditures for which BCC and Clerk records did not demonstrate that the primary purpose was to carry out specified provisions of State law and promote tourism. In addition, the BCC did not have policies and procedures requiring a determination of record be made that the primary purpose of a proposed TDT project or expenditure is to carry out specified provisions of State law and promote tourism.

Many of the expenses were unauthorized during the Gilley administration, including $287,265 to Marine Resources Division (six months under Gilley), $73,936 for five ATVs, $29,792 for a truck for Marine Resources Division, $1,425 for a plaque naming an artificial reef, $153,738 landscape maintenance on the beach, $8,000 for temporary staff at Marine Resources Division and $60,000 for bacteria testing of waterways.

Exit mobile version