BRADENTON — A recent audit of Manatee County’s purchasing card program by the county Inspector General found that while the program was generally compliant with policy, more than 200 transactions totaling over $66,000 appeared to lack a clear public purpose or appeared wasteful or unnecessary. Additional audit findings included instances of transactions being split to avoid purchasing limits and inconsistent enforcement of program rules.
The county’s Purchasing Card Program (PCard) is designed for efficiency in the processing of small purchases by county credit cardholders. The program is overseen by the Purchasing Division of the county’s Department of Financial Management. Employees who are issued county credit cards must complete mandatory training on program rules, and the cards may only be used for authorized purchases that serve a public purpose.
During the audit period of December 5, 2022, through April 4, 2025, Inspector General auditors identified more than 71,000 purchasing card transactions totaling over $25 million. The audit included sampling and testing of transactions associated with more than 800 PCard accounts across all county departments.
Purchases identified as lacking a clear public purpose or as potentially wasteful included certain spending on meals, banquet-style events, and employee shirts/apparel. Additional instances of overspending were identified in hotel accommodation upgrades for work-related travel.
Standards and Procedures, Section 3.2, Manatee County Purchasing Card Program Procedures Manual
Food-related spending identified during the audit period included 150 purchases totaling more than $16,000 that did not appear to serve a public purpose, including meals and refreshments provided at routine staff meetings, training sessions, and other employee events.
For example, in 2022, a “holiday party” of the Public Works Department provided meals for 50 people and totaled more than $1,000. In 2023, the Development Services Department spent $180.00 on “refreshments for the entire department,” and the Public Safety Department spent $230.00 for staff lunch with the chief, and another $225.00 for decorative cookies to celebrate the department’s service dog’s birthday.
Noted food purchases in 2024 included a $353.00 purchase by the Department of the Administration to provide lunch for staff attending a BOCC budget workshop and another $149.00 by county administration for a “lunch meeting” with a local mayor and staff.
Chart included in the Purchasing Card Audit Report completed by the Manatee County Division of Inspector General (April 4, 2025)
In addition to food expenditures that appeared to lack a true public purpose, the audit noted, “We also identified 39 food purchases, totaling $19,967, that appeared unnecessary or wasteful. These expenditures were for meals (not just refreshments) for employee appreciation, recognition, team-building, and training-type events. For example, $3,279 was spent over a 3-day period on lunches (4) and a dinner for EMS week in 2023. Over $1,800 was spent on lunches and desserts for a Financial Management Division team-building event in 2023. $1,500 was spent in 2024 on a Development Services team-building luncheon.”
While county ordinances and resolutions allow certain expenditures “to promote efficiency and productivity and enhance the performance of duties by employees,” auditors wrote that although food purchases for some events may be allowable, the items identified appeared to be excessive.
Florida statutes only allow for the “payment of subsistence or meals when an employee is traveling related to a direct and lawful public purpose such as a convention, conference, or business meeting,” according to the audit report. The report also cites guidance from the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), which states, in part, “The general rule is that appropriated funds are not available for personal expenses. Feeding oneself is a personal expense which a government employee is expected to bear from his or her salary.”
The audit also identified numerous instances in which catering, food, or refreshment purchases lacked the required documentation—such as agendas or sign-in sheets—or the submitted documentation was missing or incomplete.
The Manatee County Purchasing Card Manual states, “Only food purchases that are authorized by a BOCC-approved resolution are allowed. All others are prohibited.” Auditors found more than 70 food purchases that either failed to cite an authorizing resolution or ordinance, cited the wrong resolution or ordinance, or referenced one that did not permit the purchase.
Audit data show that food spending declined from FY21 to FY22, then rose in subsequent years. Spending increased by about 152% from $11,000 in FY22 to more than $27,500 in FY23; it remained roughly the same for FY24, but rose another 43% in FY25 to $38,843.
Chart included in the Purchasing Card Audit Report completed by the Manatee County Division of Inspector General (April 4, 2025)
Beyond food-related spending, auditors found that employee clothing and apparel purchases have increased since 2021. Some of that spending raised compliance concerns, including purchases of branded clothing and other apparel that did not appear to be required for official work duties or serve a clear public purpose.
An analysis of purchasing card transactions with a local apparel vendor found that clothing spending rose sharply over the same period, increasing by 187% from about $11,000 in FY22 to $31,769 in FY23. Spending remained at roughly that level in FY24, then increased by nearly 90% in FY25 to $57,204.
The audit report noted that while some of the purchases appeared to be uniform-type clothing consistent with employees’ job duties, others appeared to be more personal work attire.
Auditors found that 43 purchases of t-shirts, logo shirts, jackets, and other apparel for county employees, totaling roughly $26,900, appeared to lack a public purpose.
“The items were for everyday wear and did not look to be a condition of their employment or necessary to perform their jobs. Uniforms and clothing purchased with county funds are the property of the county. Some of the clothing purchased included personal embroidery of names and titles, which would appear to make the clothing property of the employee, not the county, and be a personal benefit to the employee,” wrote the auditors.
The report noted that the cost of the clothing item “varied widely” from $18 Sport-Trek polos to $50 Nike-brand golf polos, adding, “These purchases may be considered taxable under IRS rules.”
The audit cites federal guidance from the GAO and the IRS, explaining that clothing should be purchased with public funds only if it is required for the job and not suitable for everyday wear, while standard business attire is considered a personal expense. “Typically, the purchase of non-required apparel for employees is the responsibility of the employee and should not be paid out of appropriated county funds,” wrote the auditors.
As with the food spending analysis, the report provided a chart of year-to-year apparel purchases by department, noting that many of the purchases appeared to be legitimate work uniforms. The report also emphasized that the data represent only purchases completed via PCard; additional purchases made through other procurement methods would not be reflected.
Chart included in the Purchasing Card Audit Report completed by the Manatee County Division of Inspector General (April 4, 2025)
Other audit findings included broader compliance issues involving travel expenses and event-related spending.
One identified travel-related cost that did not appear to fully comply with county policy included a Washington, D.C. trip in April 2024 involving two commissioners and a deputy county administrator who stayed at a luxury hotel for more than $800 per night, compared to an average of about $440 per night for other travelers on the same trip. The combined cost difference totaled approximately $3,230.
Public records show that the cost difference for the higher-priced hotel accommodations was fully reimbursed to the county by former deputy chief of staff Andrew Butterfield and current Manatee County Commissioner Mike Rahn, who both saw the funds repaid through payroll deductions. The third traveler, former commissioner Ray Turner, still has an outstanding balance of $282.65—his final paycheck was not enough to cover the amount owed through a payroll deduction alone. The report notes that collection efforts are ongoing.
Auditors also reviewed another 2024 travel event, a Geographic Information Systems conference in San Diego, which was attended by administrative staff and employees from multiple county departments. Auditors identified several travel-related policy issues, including ineligible meals, personal expenses, excess taxi tips, and missing documentation for flight changes. The issues resulted in four reimbursements totaling $695.
The report states that, in total, the audit identified 52 minor travel policy violations or documentation errors among the BOCC and administration transactions tested.
Auditors also identified purchases tied to banquet-style or networking events where the public purpose was not clearly documented or appeared to be of personal benefit, such as a Gulf Coast Builders Exchange awards dinner attended by former deputy administrator Courtney De Pol in February 2023.
The county paid $275 for De Pol to attend the event at the Ritz-Carlton Sarasota, where Adam Goodman of Ballard Partners Lobbying Firm—a lobbying firm hired by the county in March 2023—was a keynote speaker.
In total, auditors flagged 13 event or banquet-related transactions totaling $3,157 that either lacked a clear public purpose or lacked required documentation to verify or authorize the public purpose.
Another significant finding of the audit was the number of “split card” purchases identified. Purchasing card procedures stipulate that single purchases are not to be artificially split into two or more transactions by one or more cardholders to circumvent the $5,000 single-transaction limit.
The last Purchasing Card Program audit conducted by the Inspector General as of November 2022 identified 27 split transactions totaling $48,038. Another 17 transactions totaling $25,814 were identified in which multiple cardholders from the same department, on the same day, split a single purchase.
Despite previous recommendations for improvement in this area, the most recent audit identified another 32 transactions that appeared to be “split” transactions, totaling $112,980—auditors noted that six of these transactions ($20,793) were accurately identified and addressed by the PCard Program Administrator.
An additional six transactions totaling $19,832 were identified, says auditors, in which multiple cardholders from the same department, on the same day, split a single purchase into two or more transactions to avoid the single-transaction limit—none of those were identified by program monitoring procedures.
Auditors made several recommendations, including additional employee training, clearer guidance on allowable purchases, improved monitoring of split transactions, and stronger enforcement of existing rules. The report also suggested reviewing and possibly revising or clarifying policies related to food purchases and employee apparel.
Despite the areas identified for improvement, auditors also reported favorably on several areas of the program, writing, “PCards issued during the period were properly authorized and documented, and the cardholders completed the required training. Departments maintained evidence of quotations or a sole source form where necessary. We found that monitoring reports were generated as required in the PCard Manual. Transactions made in excess of the single transaction limit were properly documented and approved for limit increases.”
Because the Purchasing Official resigned in February, a corrective action plan could not be finalized at the conclusion of the audit. This official had led the Procurement Division since 2020 and served as its manager for six years prior. Financial Management will share the audit’s recommendations with the incoming leadership and, at a later date, provide a formal response and action plan.
A county spokesperson confirmed to TBT via email that a formal corrective action plan is being developed and implemented in accordance with the audit's recommendations.
"The IG's audit shows that the purchasing card program is generally sound, while also highlighting the need for greater consistency and discipline in certain areas," wrote Manatee County Communications Manager Casey Zempel. "The county acknowledges that assessment. We are already working on updates to internal controls, documentation practices, and training to strengthen the program moving forward."
Zempel added, "We welcome the audit findings and will use them to strengthen internal controls and support the responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars."
To review the full Purchasing Card Audit Report, click here, or visit the Inspector General Division page of the Manatee Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s website.
Dawn Kitterman is a staff reporter for The Bradenton Times. She covers local government and entertainment news. She can be reached at dawn.kitterman@thebradentontimes.com.
3 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
GLEN GADFLY GIBELLINA
When there are not rigorous audits every now, and then the whole system is compromised and checks and balances go out the window. That was just a small sample of the audit. You could hire someone for 100,000 a year and still be ahead at a game with the money they would find and save. For the really outrageous ones there should be prosecution to set an example and everything over a certain dollar amount should be Supervisor approved.
Saturday, April 18 Report this
rjckeuka4
Certainly, wasteful spending should be monitored and controlled to the extent that is possible, and measures should be taken to train staff to eliminate it, but $66K out of a total budget of $3.5 B is miniscule. It might cost more to control it than the waste that occurred. Just sayin'.
Sunday, April 19 Report this
gatorheel
What a joke. The County is a business and these are extremely common, routine business expenses. I'd be interested in hearing what the cost of this audit was, however. How many hours by how many people, was travel involved, etc. I'd also be interested in hearing the results of this team's audit of the Governor's expenses which I'm sure they did first as a priority to demonstrate leadership and equality. Physician, heal thyself.
Sunday, April 19 Report this