An Introduction to Budget Turkeys and the Sprinkle List

About the Budget Turkey Watch Report

The Budget Turkey Watch report is Florida TaxWatch's annual review of Florida's upcoming budget. The report was started in 1983 and promotes oversight and integrity in the state’s budgeting process based on the principle that: because money appropriated by the Legislature belongs to the taxpayers of Florida, the process must be transparent and accountable, and every appropriation should receive deliberation and public scrutiny. The budget review identifies appropriations that circumvent transparency and accountability standards in public budgeting.

Budget Turkeys are items, usually local member projects, placed in individual line-items or accompanying proviso language that are added to the final appropriations bill without being fully scrutinized and subjected to the budget process.

The Budget Turkey label does not signify judgment of a project’s worthiness. Instead, the review focuses on the Florida budget process, and the purpose of the Budget Turkey label is to ensure that all appropriations using public funds receive the deliberation, debate, and accountability they deserve. While a project may be worthwhile, Budget Turkeys tend to serve a limited (not statewide) area, are often not core functions of government, are more appropriately funded with local or private dollars, and can circumvent competitive bidding or selection as well as oversight and accountability.

Florida TaxWatch is not recommending that the Governor veto any specific project on the Budget Turkey list. We are providing this report to assist the Governor in his budget deliberations, recommending that he not only consider the value and efficacy of a project, but also if it meets turkey-criteria, if it addresses a core state government function, and if it was selected through a fair process that promotes the best interest of taxpayers statewide.

A project that circumvents established review and selection processes or has completed the established process but is funded ahead of much higher priority projects (as determined by the selection process);
Appropriations that are inserted in the budget during conference committee meetings, meaning they did not appear in either the final Senate or House budgets;
Appropriations from inappropriate trust funds; duplicative appropriations; and appropriations contingent on legislation that did not pass; and/or
Appropriations that may have been in the House or Senate budget, but were removed by agreement in conference, only to be added back at the last minute through the supplemental appropriation (“sprinkle”) lists.
/ Categories: Research, Budget/Approps, Budget Turkeys

$670 Million Added to the New State Budget Through the Sprinkle Lists Deserves Close Scrutiny During the Governor’s Veto Deliberations

There is much to applaud in the new budget. It is record-breaking in many ways, but it is not all positive, including funding the largest number of local member projects in history—more than 1,500. Considering there are only 160 legislators, the number of member projects in the budget is even more remarkable. As we point out in our annual Budget Turkey Watch report, many member projects are worthwhile, sometimes critical. Others are not. Regardless of the value of any project, they should all get the review and deliberation taxpayers deserve when their money is being spent. In addition, they should follow any established competitive selection process that the Legislature has established for similar projects. 

The budget also contains $670 million added at the last minute through Supplemental Funding Initiatives, which have come to be known as the “sprinkle lists.” During the last ten years, it has become routine for the budget conference process to end with each chamber accepting the other’s sprinkle list, worth more than an average of $120 million for each chamber – or a combined average of $285 million. These lists are developed and agreed to in private by House and Senate leadership, and without any public debate or discussion. 

Florida TaxWatch recommends that the Governor fully examine the sprinkle list and member project funding in the new state budget and, in the future, the use of sprinkle lists be discontinued. This practice does not align with sound budgeting processes, fiscal transparency, thoughtful deliberation, or with the best interests of the taxpayers of the state of Florida. 

Documents to download

Previous Article Budget Sprinkle Lists Diminish Confidence in the Budget Process and Should Be Discontinued
Next Article Florida taxpayers deserve transparent budget process
Print
3611 Rate this article:
No rating

About TaxWatch

Quick Links

Copyright 2025 by Florida TaxWatch Research Institute : Terms Of Use : Privacy Statement