01
Review standard
Legal authority
Can the office of mayor execute the proposal directly under current Florida law, charter authority, and city code?
Evaluation Standards
The criteria behind every classification.
Every pledge in the audit is run through the same six tests: mayoral authority, delivery ownership, recurring funding, implementation timeline, overlap with existing programs, and legal or fiscal exposure. A classification changes only when one of those answers does.
01
Rubric Summary
One rubric, applied to every record.
6Review standardsapplied across every published classification
01Shared rubricacross inventory, barriers, and fiscal review
03Pressure testsauthority, delivery ownership, and recurring funding
02
The Six Standards
Each standard measured on its own terms.
02
Review standard
Operational ownership
If the city does not own the function, which board, agency, county partner, or state office actually controls delivery?
03
Review standard
Recurring funding source
What recurring revenue stream pays for the proposal after pilots, grants, or one-time funds expire?
04
Review standard
Implementation timeline
Does the proposal identify the staffing, procurement, permitting, or interlocal agreements needed to move from announcement to operation?
05
Review standard
Existing program overlap
Is the city already running a related program, and if so, what change in budget, scope, or performance is actually being proposed?
06
Review standard
Exposure and litigation risk
Could the action trigger state preemption, delayed enforcement, personal liability, or loss of intergovernmental funding support?
Applied in the live audit