Commissioners approve juvenile community corrections MOU amid questions about FireFly funding

5930679 · August 11, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Johnson County approved a memorandum of understanding for juvenile community corrections administered by FireFly; one commissioner raised questions about FireFly’s national revenue and a state funding cut that reduced local payments.

Johnson County commissioners approved a memorandum of understanding for juvenile community corrections services on Monday after a public discussion that focused on the local share of a statewide prevention services contract managed by FireFly.

Damien Kostas, assistant director for juvenile community corrections, spoke to the board and said the funding the county receives for prevention services is managed by FireFly but originates with the state. Kostas said the state reduced the allocation managed through FireFly to $140,000, which produced a corresponding reduction in what the county would receive.

One commissioner questioned FireFly’s overall finances after noting material from the organization’s annual report, saying the nonprofit reported more than $47 million in total revenue in 2024 and that FireFly’s 2024 operations reported servicing about 89,000 children. The commissioner said those figures prompted concerns about administrative overhead and whether the county was receiving an appropriate share.

Kostas answered that the prevention funding is state-allocated and that FireFly serves as the fiscal and administrative manager for those prevention services. He said the county’s reduction in funding reflected the state’s cut to the managed allocation.

Despite the concerns, a motion to approve the memorandum of understanding carried. One commissioner said they were approving “under protest” and had asked for a FireFly representative to appear at a future meeting to explain their budgeting and the basis for the county’s reduced payment.

The board did not record a roll-call vote on the record during the meeting audio. Kostas offered to have FireFly representatives answer questions and the board accepted his offer to get additional information.

The MOU was approved with direction to seek clarification from FireFly and to request a representative at a future meeting to address the questions raised by the board.