Florida’s Department of Government Efficiency has singled out the City of Pensacola for what it calls $450,000 in wasteful spending, citing a theater management contract and work tied to the city’s long-range strategic plan. City officials, meanwhile, say they first learned of the allegations on social media and have not received a formal report.
Support Local Stories. Donate Here.
“The City of Pensacola learned of the Florida DOGE task force findings just like everyone else, from social media posts,” the city said in a statement Wednesday night. “While we have not received any formal communications from Florida DOGE, we are currently gathering information and will respond accordingly.”
In the post announcing the findings, Gov. Ron DeSantis said, “Florida DOGE teams alongside @CFOIngoglia have been investigating cities and counties where taxpayers have raised concerns about wasteful spending. These audits have uncovered many irresponsible uses of taxpayer funds.” The post was accompanied by a graphic summarizing items flagged in municipalities across the state.
What the state flagged in Pensacola
DOGE’s graphic lists two Pensacola line items:
- “$150,000 a year to a management company that brings drag shows to the city’s Seanger [sic] Theater.”
- “$300,000 for an equity-focused strategic plan and residential ‘equity survey.’”
The Saenger Theatre is owned by the city and operated under contract by ASM Global, a national venue manager that books a range of touring productions. Earlier this summer, a holiday drag revue scheduled for December prompted calls from residents to cancel the event. The issue reached City Council, where members asked the city attorney about their options. Adam Cobb, the city’s top lawyer, advised that canceling a contracted performance based on its content could expose the city to breach-of-contract claims and potential First Amendment violations. Council took no action, and the show remains on the calendar.
The $150,000 cited by DOGE represents the annual management fee paid to ASM Global for operating the venue. The company is responsible for day-to-day administration, booking, and maintenance, and the city generally does not select or veto acts under the agreement.
The $300,000 flagged by DOGE stems from Strive to Thrive: Pensacola 2035, a 10-year strategic plan completed this year following extensive public engagement, including surveys, workshops, and focus groups that reached more than 1,300 city residents. The plan sets eight overarching goals—from attainable housing and safe streets to resilient neighborhoods and thriving local businesses—and outlines a prioritization framework city leaders are expected to use when evaluating projects.
RELATED: Florida CFO says Broward County overspent budget by $190 million
Equity appears in that framework as one criterion among several, reflecting community priorities that surfaced during the city’s visioning survey. In that survey, “equitable” ranked among the top three themes residents wanted addressed over the next decade, alongside “livable” and “healthy.” The plan defines equity as “an equitable place where every person has the freedom and comfort to explore who they want to be.”
Mayor D.C. Reeves has described Strive to Thrive as the city’s guiding document for budgeting and policy, calling it a tool for fiscal accountability and efficiency. Under his administration, each proposal before City Council is expected to tie back to one or more of the plan’s objectives. The approach, he has said, is intended to impose discipline on spending decisions and ensure they reflect resident-defined priorities.
For Pensacola, the combined $450,000 represents a fraction of the city’s roughly $317 million budget. The Saenger’s management contract is a standard practice among municipalities that own performance venues, while comprehensive strategic planning efforts of this scope commonly cost six figures, particularly when they involve extensive outreach and data analysis.
Other DOGE findings
Pensacola was one of several cities highlighted in the governor’s post. Other examples included:
- Jacksonville: a “$75,000 ‘hologram’ of Mayor Donna Deegan” and “$7.5 million for a 1-mile sidewalk project.”
- Gainesville: “$189,000 on a city Director of Equity and Inclusion.”
- Orlando: “$460,000 since 2020 to count trees as part of the city’s ‘tree inventory.’”
- Orange County: “$223,000 for LGBT youth services that promote gender identity to youth populations.”
- Pinellas County: “$75,000 every year to sponsor annual ‘Pride’ festival.”
- Hillsborough County: “$572,000 for unconscious bias training.”
- Broward County: “$890,000 on DEI training since FY20, including pushing the ‘Genderbread Person.’”
The DOGE task force, created earlier this year in coordination with Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia, has been releasing city-by-city summaries of what it considers excessive costs. Teams began visiting jurisdictions in July, reviewing data systems, facilities, and personnel to identify what they described as “excessive spending patterns.”
The campaign is one piece of a broader fiscal agenda aimed at reshaping Florida’s tax structure — including DeSantis’ push to eliminate property taxes, a proposal that would require deep cuts in local government spending and a new framework for funding schools, public safety, and other essential services. State officials have framed the DOGE audits as groundwork for that shift, arguing that local governments must identify inefficiencies before the state can reduce or abolish the property tax system.
Critics argue the audits are less about rooting out inefficiency than wielding a partisan hatchet, an instrument to purge local priorities conservatives find objectionable — targeting DEI, climate, and cultural programs under the guise of fiscal oversight.
Broader political context
Florida’s DOGE initiative draws inspiration from the federal Department of Government Efficiency, established in January under the second Trump administration and initially led by Elon Musk. That office, which has authority to audit federal agencies, has generated both praise for targeting bureaucratic inefficiency and criticism over transparency, legal authority and politicization of the federal workforce.
The state-level effort likewise aligns with a yearslong preemption campaign that has shifted power from local governments to Tallahassee, limiting municipalities’ ability to set policies on housing, labor, environmental protections, and other local matters. Supporters say the approach promotes uniformity and fiscal restraint; critics argue it erodes home rule and undermines communities’ ability to respond to local needs.
