KISSIMMEE, Fla. – Kissimmee Mayor Jackie Espinosa will not face a city impeachment trial after commissioners deadlocked 2-2 Tuesday night on whether to move forward.
The vote followed a dramatic special meeting inside a packed commission chamber, where people on both sides carried signs supporting or opposing the mayor. The meeting ended with shouting, Espinosa’s defense team embracing her and police and security escorting the mayor from the chamber through the crowd.
The vote was not a decision on whether Espinosa violated the city’s ethics code. Commissioners were deciding whether to begin a public impeachment trial based on findings from court-appointed Special Prosecutor Mayanne Downs.
Downs found probable cause on three of seven ethics allegations involving the city’s BOOST 2.0 grant program, which used federal COVID-19 relief money to assist Kissimmee businesses.
Three businesses owned by Espinosa or members of her family received a combined $50,000. Records cited in Downs’ report identify Espinosa as the sole owner of Adanse LLC, which received $20,000, and as vice president with more than a 5% interest in Kissimmee Diner Inc., which received $15,000. Another family-operated business received $15,000.
Downs argued Espinosa participated in three commission actions funding and expanding BOOST 2.0 but never disclosed her financial interests. She also said the city attorney learned about the grants after they were awarded and warned Espinosa in December 2025 that receiving the money raised concerns under state ethics law.
Downs told commissioners that voting money into a program and later benefiting from it represented a clear violation of the city’s ethics code. She urged them to follow the process the city had already begun and allow the evidence to be considered during a trial.
Espinosa’s attorney, Migdalia Perez, argued the city does not have a clearly established impeachment process and was effectively creating one while attempting to use it against the mayor.
Perez also argued Downs had not identified a grant decision Espinosa improperly influenced or any employee she pressured. The businesses had not received the grants when Espinosa participated in the earlier commission votes, Perez said, and the applications were later evaluated by city staff.
Even if Espinosa should have disclosed her interests, Perez argued, that did not by itself establish corruption or justify removing an elected mayor from office.
Commissioners Janette Martinez supported moving forward with a trial.
Martinez argued a trial would allow the evidence to be heard publicly and could either hold Espinosa accountable or clear her. She pointed to more than $25,000 the city has already spent on the investigation and said completing the process would provide transparency.
The other two eligible commissioners voted against moving forward, producing the 2-2 tie that defeated the motion. Espinosa did not vote on the matter involving her own impeachment.
Perez told commissioners that a separate review remains pending before the Florida Commission on Ethics. She said Espinosa is prepared to return the grant money if that commission determines repayment is required.
The failed vote leaves Espinosa in office and ends the immediate effort to hold a city impeachment trial. The special prosecutor’s findings do not constitute a criminal charge or a final determination that Espinosa violated the law.