Kaufman Pushes Grand Jury Reforms, Transparency In Mayoral Q&A
Key West commissioner and mayoral candidate outlines plans for restructuring City Hall, tightening permitting oversight, protecting neighborhoods and opposing expansion of cruise ship activity beyond
Key West City Commissioner and mayoral candidate Sam Kaufman, who on Thursday sponsored a discussion during the morning session of the City Commission meeting focused on the sweeping recommendations contained in the Monroe County Winter Term Grand Jury report, said the city must move faster on structural reform, transparency and restoring public trust in City Hall.
Kaufman, an attorney who has served on the City Commission since 2020 and has also been involved with Lower Keys Medical Center and a number of local civic and nonprofit initiatives, said the city has taken some positive steps following the indictments of former public officials, but has failed to fully implement many of the broader reforms recommended by the grand jury.
In a wide-ranging question-and-answer session with Above the Fold, Kaufman discussed government restructuring, permitting reform, public oversight, cruise ship limits, privatization of public assets, Cuba and his first 100-day priorities should he be elected mayor.
1. Why are you the right person to fix a system you’ve been part of?
Because I’ve seen exactly where it breaks. I’ve been asking for better transparency, clearer processes and stronger oversight for years. I know what needs to change and I’m not tied to protecting the status quo. I’m running to fix it.
2. Where would you start cutting confusion without cutting services?
Start with the organizational chart and lines of authority. Too many layers, too much overlap. We need clear responsibility for who makes decisions, who is accountable and better communication between departments and the commission.
3. What do transparency and fiscal responsibility mean now?
It means real openness, not just checking a box. Giving the public more time to review the city budget and getting materials out well in advance of the July budget workshops so people can actually understand it and weigh in.
It means encouraging public participation at every step, not after decisions are already made. It means clear, plain-language agendas and backup so everyone knows what’s happening and why.
And it means taking the grand jury recommendations seriously, implementing them, not ignoring them, so we have a government that is accountable, efficient and worthy of the public’s trust.
4. Do you support the resident reorganization committee as written?
Yes, with real independence and a clear deadline. We have incredibly talented residents here with experience across so many fields, and we should be tapping into that.
There are people in this community who want to give back and help fix City Hall and we should welcome that. This is also an opportunity to directly address the structural problems that led to the criminal conduct and indictments of former public officials. We need a serious, honest review that leads to real reform.
5. If it finds City Hall is top-heavy, will you consolidate positions?
Yes. If the facts support it, we should act, but I also believe there’s usually a path forward that works for everyone.
Not every change has to be abrupt. We can look at gradual, thoughtful steps that improve efficiency while respecting the people doing the work. The key is to consider all options openly and honestly, with a transparent process.
I want an open commission discussion focused on what actually works best for the public, and then move forward in a smart, practical way.
6. How do you make land development rules understandable?
I agree with the assessment. We have a real opportunity to review and clean up the code of ordinances with the goal of making City Hall more accessible to our local homeowners.
That means simplifying the rules, using plain language and providing clear, step-by-step guidance so people can navigate the process without needing a team of professionals.
7. How do you balance protecting neighborhoods with fixing the process?
First, the public needs to have confidence in the process and in City Hall. That starts with reforming the Planning Board as recommended in the grand jury report.
Those changes can help bring real balance to development decisions while protecting our neighborhoods. We can get there by taking a fair, honest look at our current processes and making the reforms needed so the rules are clear, consistent and applied the same way for everyone.
8. How would you ensure residents are on the regulation review committee?
Set clear requirements including neighborhood representatives and residents from across the community, not just industry professionals.
Make the process open and transparent so anyone qualified has a fair opportunity to serve. And to avoid conflicts, we should limit or exclude individuals who have active roles in the development industry from serving on this committee.
The goal is a balanced group that reflects the public, not just insiders.
9. Should incomplete applications be pulled from the agenda?
Yes. If it’s not complete, it shouldn’t be heard. That protects everyone.
10. Should there be penalties for false or misleading plans?
Yes, there should be consequences. That can include delays, fines or referral if it rises to that level.
11. Do you support notarized verification forms?
Yes. It’s a basic accountability step.
12. Should active contractors or developers be barred from the Planning Board?
Yes, I think this is very important. Individuals with active professional practices who have applications coming before the Planning Board should not be serving on that board.
That’s a clear conflict, and those kinds of conflicts should be barred from eligibility. This same standard should apply to HARC as well.
We need boards that are independent, fair and focused on the public interest so people can trust the decisions being made.
13. Should elected officials disclose ex parte contacts?
I support going further than disclosure. For Planning Board and HARC members, there should be a ban on ex parte communications so decisions are made fairly and in the open, not shaped by private lobbying in advance.
That’s basic fairness and it builds public trust.
14. Printing variance data on permits. Any reason not to do it now?
No. That should be implemented right away.
15. What has the commission gotten right, and where has it moved too slowly?
The city has taken some positive steps. Hiring an independent reviewer to look at permits that may have been manipulated by the former building official was the right move, and some other recommendations have been adopted, which is also good.
But overall, the city has moved too slowly and in some cases ignored key grand jury recommendations aimed at preventing future misconduct.
That includes not moving forward on an independent auditor to oversee compliance and efficiency, not making the HR function more independent, and not doing enough to expand meaningful public input on development applications.
Those are structural reforms that go to the heart of accountability, and we need to take them seriously and move forward on them.
16. What safeguards are needed for a clean permitting process?
Stronger internal controls, better documentation and clear accountability at every step.
But just as important is transparency, making permit information easily accessible to the public. We should expand public access to the city’s permitting system so residents can review applications, approvals and conditions in real time without having to dig for it.
When the process is open and easy to see, it builds trust and helps prevent problems before they happen.
17. What can you do now before the election?
I’ve already tried to move the previous grand jury recommendations forward. I’ve raised and pushed for the recommendations the city has been ignoring, but the majority of the commission has not wanted to take them up.
The city manager has also indicated in writing that the latest recommendations will not be implemented and I disagree with that position.
I’ve sponsored a discussion for the next City Commission meeting to put this front and center, and I’ll continue to do that. I’m in full support of the new recommendations.
At the end of the day, the majority of the commission makes the decisions, but I’m going to keep pushing for transparency, accountability and real reform.
18. Will you publish a public dashboard?
Yes. People should be able to track progress in real time with a clear, public dashboard showing each recommendation, the responsible department and deadlines.
In addition, we should have regular updates at City Commission meetings and a series of public meetings to review the citizen committee’s progress.
This needs to be an open, ongoing process, not something that happens behind the scenes.
19. What is your first 100-day plan?
Start by restoring trust through action. Launch the reorganization and code review efforts, implement quick fixes like permit transparency and publish a clear timeline for every grand jury recommendation.
At the same time, I would hold a series of public meetings to develop a real strategic plan with strong public input so our new commission and community are aligned on priorities for the next three years.
That plan should guide our budget and policy decisions and include thorough, department-by-department reviews so we understand what’s working and what needs to improve. We haven’t had a strategic plan for the last two years, and that needs to change.
I also want to focus on employee morale and supporting our workforce because a strong, motivated team at City Hall is essential to delivering better service to our residents.
20. What do you say to voters who are angry but still want experience?
You’re right to be frustrated. We need change, but we also need someone who understands how City Hall works. I bring both: experience and a commitment to do better.
21. Cruise ships. What is your commitment going forward?
Yes. I support the will of the voters and the current limits, including what’s allowed under the Pier B lease. No expansion beyond that.
22. What are your thoughts on privatization of public assets?
We need to protect public assets. I’m very concerned about privatization and will oppose deals that take control away from the public or don’t clearly benefit our community.
23. Thoughts on Cuba? What does that mean to the city and tourism in Monroe County, and what plans are in the works?
Cuba has always been part of the broader story of Key West. We’re only about 90 miles away, and there are deep cultural, historical and family ties that connect our communities. That relationship is important, and it’s something many residents feel strongly about.
From a tourism and economic standpoint, any direct impact is largely driven by federal policy, not local government. Travel rules, ferry service, trade and broader engagement with Cuba are all controlled at the national level, and those policies have shifted over time depending on the administration.
At the local level, our focus is on what we can control, including supporting a strong, sustainable tourism economy here in Key West and Monroe County. That means protecting our natural resources, maintaining our infrastructure and continuing to promote the unique culture that brings people here.
It also means recognizing that our environment and fisheries are shared across the region. Any future changes in travel or engagement with Cuba should include coordination and cooperation to protect our marine ecosystems, water quality and fisheries that are so critical to our economy and way of life.
If federal policy were to change in the future, there could be opportunities for increased travel and cultural exchange, along with the need for thoughtful environmental coordination. But as of now, there are no active local plans that would significantly change that relationship.
So my approach is to stay informed, respect the importance of Cuba to our community, and be ready to evaluate opportunities carefully while always protecting our environment and local economy if and when the broader policy landscape changes.