Manatee County Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller Facebook
Posted
Saturday,October 17, 20263:47 pm
BRADENTON —A Manatee County Inspector General audit estimates that about $6.26 million in operating expenses charged to the Environmental Lands Fund exceeded the amount auditors estimated was eligible under the program’s intended use. Auditors also found that the fund covered a range of Natural Resources Department operating costs, including expenses tied to properties the county owned before voters approved the program.
Issued Oct. 9, the audit examined Environmental Lands Program revenues and expenditures from Oct. 1, 2022, through Feb. 28, 2026. Auditors described county staff as knowledgeable and committed but raised concerns about expense allocations, tracking millage-funded spending, and errors in annual financial reports.
Voters approved the Environmental Lands Program referendum in November 2020, authorizing a 0.15-mill property tax levy to fund the acquisition, improvement, and management of land for purposes including drinking water protection, water quality, wildlife habitat, and parks/preserves. The county began collecting tax revenue in fiscal year 2023.
The county collected approximately $36.5 million in revenue from the Environmental Lands Program’s voter-approved property tax through Feb. 28, 2026. According to the audit, the fund covered operating costs, including salaries, for divisions within the Natural Resources Department and Property Management Department, as well as bond debt payments.
The referendum also authorized $50 million in general obligation bonds for the program. Bond funds were used to purchase seven properties totaling nearly 306 acres.
A key part of the audit’s review was a July 2021 opinion from the County Attorney’s Office, issued in response to a Request for Legal Services from the Environmental Lands Program manager. The opinion said the referendum’s intent was to use the millage revenue to acquire new lands and to “manage and improve only those new lands.” It also stated that, to be eligible for the environmental revenue, lands should have been acquired after the referendum. Auditors used that previous guidance in assessing whether operating expenses charged to the fund were consistent with the program’s intended use.
To estimate how much spending may have fallen outside the program’s intended use, auditors compared operating expenditures charged to the fund with the amount they estimated was eligible. From fiscal year 2023 through Feb. 28, 2026, the county charged approximately $12.19 million in operating expenses to the fund. Auditors estimated that about $5.94 million was eligible, a difference of approximately $6.26 million that they said could have been available for environmental land purchases.
Table 4 of the audit report breaks down the difference by comparing estimated eligible expenditures by division versus actual expenditures from FY23 to FY26. The largest gaps were in Conservation Lands Management (about $4.39 million) and Natural Resources Administration (about $1.78 million).
Auditors reviewed a sample of 142 operating transactions totaling $1.06 million. Of those, 117 transactions, totaling $985,253.68, were for “the management and care of lands that the county owned prior to the referendum, or for employees’ salaries and equipment that are not 100% designated for the millage-acquired lands,” the report states.
The audit also raised concerns about nearly $2 million in indirect costs charged to the fund during the review period. These costs covered shared departmental expenses, and auditors said the amount may have been too high because the fund included expenses beyond those related to the voter-approved millage.
Per the report, “Indirect costs are determined using all expenditures, personnel, equipment, etc., for Fund 831, even though some account keys in the fund are not designated as millage-covered, and many of the transactions are not for millage-acquired lands, which has been potentially inflating the indirect cost allocation expenditure.”
The audit also found that combining millage-funded and other transactions in the same fund created accounting and transparency problems. The report said the commingling of transactions “has resulted in a lack of transparency and some confusion for what is and is not covered by the Environmental Lands Program millage.”
According to the audit, Natural Resources Department and Financial Management Department officials told auditors that the arrangement stemmed from a decision made under a previous county administration. Beginning in fiscal year 2023, which began on Oct. 1, 2022, the county shifted payroll and other operating expenses from the Parks and Recreation Fund to the Environmental Lands Fund, according to the report.
“During FY23 a decision was made under previous County Administration to have the Environmental Lands Program millage, rather than the General Fund, support the majority of Natural Resources Department operations,” the audit states, citing statements from department management. Auditors concluded that this action appeared inconsistent with the referendum’s intent, as described in the July 2021 county attorney opinion.
The audit identified 53 employees—including five administration positions from the Department of Natural Resources—whose payroll was charged to the fund during the review period, totaling about $4.29 million.
“For the majority of the employees identified, 50% to 100% of their payroll was allocated to Fund 831 for FY23 through FY25,” the report said. Auditors said this “appeared to be too high,” particularly because the county did not acquire its first property using millage revenue until February 2024.
In fiscal year 2026, auditors said many payroll allocations were reduced to 10%, which better aligned with the time employees spent working directly on properties acquired through the Environmental Lands Program.
The report notes that the county had transferred $5.725 million from its General Fund and Parks and Recreation Fund into the Environmental Lands Fund to help cover expenses not eligible for millage funding. However, auditors said the county lacked accurate accounting for how it used that money. Their analysis estimated that, even after accounting for those transfers, non-millage expenditures exceeded non-millage revenues by nearly $1.6 million as of Feb. 28, 2026.
The report concluded that “the Environmental Lands Program millage is burdened by this negative balance.” Auditors recommended separating non-millage transactions into another fund to improve transparency and allow the county and the public to better track how the voter-approved tax revenue is spent.
The audit focused on whether expenses charged to the fund were consistent with the referendum’s intended purpose and identified weaknesses in expense allocation, accounting transparency, and financial reporting.
In response to the findings, Manatee County provided the following statement:
“Independent audits are an important part of any healthy, well-functioning organization, and Manatee County appreciates the work of the Clerk of the Circuit Court’s Division of Inspector General in identifying opportunities to strengthen financial oversight, accountability, and reporting.
“The audit reviewed the Environmental Lands Program from its inception on October 1, 2022, through February 28, 2026. As noted in the audit, several of the findings stem from decisions made under previous administration, including the decision to shift certain Natural Resources Department operating expenses to the Environmental Lands Fund.
“Under the current administration, the county has been working to address these issues and strengthen financial accountability. Several corrective actions have already been completed, including updates to land acquisition procedures, adjustments to payroll allocations and corrections to financial reporting.
“Additional measures are underway to identify further opportunities to improve transparency, ensure voter-approved environmental lands revenues are accounted for separately from other departmental operations, and make the appropriate financial adjustments identified through the audit.
“The county remains committed to addressing the audit’s findings and ensuring taxpayer dollars are managed responsibly and in accordance with their intended purposes.”
On July 28, 2026, Manatee County Commissionersapproved placing a ballot referendumbefore voters this November for another 0.16 mills in ad valorem tax and up to $75 million in general obligation bonds for environmental lands. This new referendum will not alter or rescind the initial referendum.
Clickhere to readthe Inspector General’s full Property Management and Natural Resources Department’s Environmental Lands Program Audit Report.
