Monroe County Audit Referred to Grand Jury, Tourist Council Faces Scrutiny
On November 19 the Monroe County State Attorney’s Office took findings from a county audit of the Tourist Development Council to a grand jury, following an audit that flagged repeated noncompliance with purchasing policy, weak internal controls, and appearances of possible self dealing. The development matters to residents because it touches county oversight of tourism dollars, public trust in local institutions, and the potential for legal review that could affect future spending and promotions.
The Monroe County State Attorney’s Office moved to refer audit findings to a grand jury on November 19 after county auditors reported significant concerns about management at the Tourist Development Council, the body responsible for promoting tourism and administering related funds. The county audit identified repeated noncompliance with purchasing policy, weak internal controls, and appearances of possible self dealing, prompting the prosecutor to seek grand jury review for potential further action.
County officials also announced that they had hired outside forensic accounting help to assist with the audit follow up and to analyze financial records more deeply. The TDC board scheduled a special meeting to address the audit findings and to respond to the heightened scrutiny. Those steps indicate an escalation from internal review to formal legal and technical examination of processes and transactions.
For residents of Monroe County, the immediate implications are practical and fiscal. The Tourist Development Council oversees funds derived from tourism related taxes and spends those dollars on marketing and events that support local businesses. Concerns about purchasing irregularities and weak controls can undermine confidence in how those funds are allocated and whether they deliver expected benefits to the community. Tourism is a vital part of the local economy, and any disruption to TDC operations or reputational damage could affect businesses that rely on visitors.
The referral to a grand jury does not by itself establish guilt or misconduct. Grand juries review evidence and determine whether formal charges or further legal steps are warranted. The involvement of outside forensic accountants suggests county leadership seeks a thorough and defensible accounting of transactions before or alongside prosecutorial review.
As this matter unfolds residents can expect additional public meetings and records as the TDC board and county offices respond. Transparency around timelines for the forensic review and any grand jury actions will be central to restoring public confidence. The case also underscores broader governance themes about oversight and accountability in agencies that manage public funds.
