Panama City officials award Hometown Revitalization grant funds to local businesses
About three years ago, Panama City was awarded nearly $13.5 million from the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for the grant.
About 50 eligible businesses from low- or moderate-income areas applied for funding for cosmetic upgrades.
'It's not just for you know, to have a pretty building, although it makes a big difference. But it makes people feel safer. It promotes local business. And one of the, I think pride of the greatest things is civic pride and how people feel,' Panama City Commissioner Jenna Haligas said.
Alice's on Bayview, Hunt's Oyster Bar and Seafood, and Little Village and FINNS Island Style Grub are the first recipients of the grant, totaling nearly $500,000 for this group.
FINNS received the majority of the grant and will be undergoing the most significant makeover.
'It's going to just create so much more aesthetic. You know, just when people come in and something new, something fresh, everyone likes to see that. You know, everyone likes to see small growth,' Little Village and FINNS Island Style Grub owner Justin Buxton said. 'With the state coming in and funding this to kind of revamp to revitalize St. Andrew's, Panama City or all the surrounding areas, it's just I think it's I think it's fabulous.'
They'll be using the funding for a wraparound awning, storm windows and doors, re-painting the building, new decking, and more.
FINNS officials say they'll try to stay open during construction.
The city will continue awarding grants to the eligible businesses in the coming months. Some of the grant funds will also go towards parking in downtown St. Andrews and phase two of the streetscape project downtown.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
20 hours ago
- The Hill
How the ‘tech titans' can save Social Security
The Wall Street Journal reports that several of 'Silicon Valley's elite' believe the artificial intelligence boom will generate massive wealth even as it displaces millions of workers, leaving them unemployed. Their solution to this unemployment crisis is to use the newly generated wealth from AI to provide a universal basic income for everyone. It's a terrible idea for several reasons. But it could be tweaked to address a huge public policy problem: funding Social Security. The idea of a universal basic income has been around for decades. While proposals vary, the basic plan is a taxpayer-funded redistribution scheme: providing everyone with a designated amount of money — usually between $500 to $1,000 per month — with no strings or work attached. Wall Street Journal reporter Josh Reich notes that Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey and Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes have used their own money to set up limited universal basic income, or UBI, pilot programs to see if they work. And they aren't alone. Stanford University's Basic Income Lab tracks UBI programs around the world. While most are in the U.S. and created at the state or local level, there are several in other countries. Some are funded by donations; others are taxpayer funded. Reich says OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is a UBI proponent and funded an experiment in 2016 that gave $1,000 a month to low-income individuals for three years. Elon Musk has talked about 'universal high income,' and boasted that AI 'will automate most production and the public can share in the revenue.' And tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang proposed a $1,000 a month UBI program as part of his failed Democratic presidential campaign in 2020. What's different now is that some tech titans 'see a future flush with wealth generated by artificial intelligence.' And 'that revenue can be shared under a massive wealth-redistribution system.' It's not clear how AI-created wealth could be redistributed. Wealth is usually created by a company or an individual, who owns the wealth. To redistribute that wealth, the owner has to voluntarily donate it or the government must take it. Even if AI were to dramatically boost federal revenues, the federal government currently has a $37 trillion debt and a $1.9 trillion 2025 budget deficit that need to be reduced. And there are other problems. UBI programs have a dubious record, as a recent National Bureau of Economic Research paper demonstrates. The funds aren't enough to reduce income inequality, especially since participants tend to work fewer hours. Even many center-left organizations oppose them. Finland tried a pilot UBI project for two years. About 2,000 unemployed Finns received the equivalent of $634 per month. The hope was the money would encourage the unemployed to find a job. The BBC asks, 'Did it help unemployed people in Finland find jobs, as the centre-right Finnish government had hoped? No, not really.' However, if untold riches flow from AI advancements — and that's a very big 'if' — as some tech titans seem to think, there is a way that money could help both individuals and the country. Instead of handing people a monthly check, establish something like a special individual retirement account for everyone. The individual could not take out any funds until retirement age — say 60 or 65. Individuals would have limited, broad-based investment options to prevent speculation. Workers would continue to pay their current payroll taxes to Social Security. They wouldn't be funding this new type of IRA because the money would come instead from the tech titans' predicted AI revenue. At retirement, an individual could then choose between standard Social Security and their AI-funded retirement accounts. If enough money has been deposited and appreciated in these accounts over the years, retirees might choose it over standard Social Security. Plus, they would have ownership rights, meaning any money left over would be passed on in their estate. Retirees who choose their special private retirement account would forfeit their claim on traditional Social Security, leaving fewer retirees relying on Social Security's underfunded financial position. Those who choose traditional Social Security would forfeit their special account. Unlike a universal basic income, the special account would be more like a universal basic retirement program. Because people would not have access to their universal basic retirement funds until retirement, there would be no economic incentive to reduce work. And it wouldn't be a new entitlement, because retirees would choose between traditional Social Security or their private retirement option. Although AI will surely make a lot of money for some people, it is unlikely to produce the flood of revenue some tech billionaires anticipate. That said, if AI does produce massive wealth, using it to improve retirement and save Social Security is a much better and more workable option than a universal basic income.
Axios
21 hours ago
- Axios
How North Korea's IT army is hacking the global job market
Nearly every Fortune 500 company is hiding the same uncomfortable secret: they have hired a North Korean IT worker. Why it matters: Despite how widespread the issue is, few companies are willing to talk publicly about it. Experts say reputational risk, legal uncertainty, and embarrassment all contribute to the silence — which in turn makes the problem harder to solve. Dozens of resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and fraudulent identity documents shared with Axios lay bare the scale and sophisticated of the scams. The big picture: For North Korea, this is a precious revenue stream that evades American sanctions — capitalizing on the wealth of high-paying remote worker roles in the U.S. to route cash back to Pyongyang. In the past two years, companies and their security partners have begun to grasp the scale of the problem — and now, they're sounding the alarm about where it's headed next. "They've been stealing intellectual property and then working on the projects themselves," Michael "Barni" Barnhart, principal investigator at DTEX Systems, told Axios. "They're going to use AI to magnify exponentially what they're already doing — and what they're doing now is bad." Between the lines: It sounds easy to simply weed out North Korean job applicants. But some of the world's biggest firms have found it devilishly difficult. That's because the North Korean operation has become as complex as a multi-national corporation. It involves several North Korean government offices, dozens of China-based front companies and Americans willing to facilitate the fraud. And the undercover North Korean IT workers are often exceptional at their jobs — at least until they start stealing sensitive data or extorting companies that try to fire them. Google Threat Intelligence VP Sandra Joyce recalled the response of one employer when told they likely had a North Korean fraudster on staff: "You guys better be right, because that is my best guy." The groups running the show North Korea has invested years into building up its remote IT labor force, providing training not just for remote job fraud but also corporate espionage and IP theft. Workers are selected and trained at elite institutions such as Kim Chaek University of Technology and the University of Sciences in Pyongsong — some with specializations in software development, AI or cryptography. Research from DTEX shows that the most advanced worker scams are often coordinated with units like APT 45, a notorious government hacking group known for infiltrating companies, running scams and laundering money. Other participants in the scheme include the Lazarus Group, which typically leads the regime's cryptocurrency hacks and has positioned insiders within crypto companies, and Research Center 227, a new AI research unit inside North Korea's intelligence agency. The intrigue: Cybersecurity companies have been discovering and naming new groups running these hacks, with names like Jasper Sleet, Moonstone Sleet and Famous Chollima. The scale Driving the news: Nine security officials who spoke with Axios all said they've yet to meet a Fortune 500 company that hasn't inadvertently hired a North Korean IT worker. Google told reporters at the RSA Conference in May that it had seen North Koreans applying to its jobs. SentinelOne and others have said the same. KnowBe4, a cybersecurity training company, admitted last year that it hired a North Korean IT worker. A smaller cryptocurrency startup told the WSJ that they accidentally had North Korean workers on their payroll for almost two years. In one case, Sam Rubin, senior vice president of Palo Alto Networks' Unit 42 consulting and threat intelligence team, told Axios that within 12 hours of a large client posting a new job, more than 90% of the applicants were suspected to be North Korean workers. "If you hire contract IT workers, this has probably happened to you," Rubin said. The intrigue: Even small-to-mid-sized companies that rely on remote IT talent or outsource their IT needs to a consulting firm have encountered this problem, Adam Meyers, senior vice president of counter adversary operations at CrowdStrike, said. CrowdStrike has investigated more than 320 incidents where North Korean operatives landed jobs as remote software developers, according to the company's annual threat hunting report published earlier this month. How it works Getting a job at a U.S. company — and going undetected — is a team effort that involves several North Korean IT workers, China-based companies and even a handful of Americans. Some of the North Korean workers are even stationed in China and other nearby countries to keep suspicions low. First, the workers identify potential identities they can assume. Those are often stolen from a real person, or even from a dead U.S. citizen. To pull off this deception, they create fake passwords, Social Security cards and utility bills. Many of them use the same recognizable tablecloth in the background of fake ID photos, Meyers said. For instance, in a December indictment of 14 North Koreans, the workers were found using stolen identities to apply to dozens of jobs. Second, the workers find open jobs in software development, technical support and DevOps posted on Upwork, Fiverr, LinkedIn, and third-party staffing platforms. Much of this is streamlined through AI tools that help track and manage their job applications. Many of them will use AI tools to help generate passable resumes and LinkedIn profiles, according to Trevor Hilligoss, senior vice president at SpyCloud Labs. "There's a hierarchy: There's a group of people who are the interviewers, and they're the ones with the really good English specialties," Hilligoss told Axios. "When they get hired, that gets turned over to somebody that's a developer." Those developers will often juggle several jobs and multiple different personas. Zoom in: Job interviews would seem like the obvious time to catch a fraudulent application. But the "applicants" — whether they're using their real faces and voices or AI-enabled personas — are practiced interviewers with the skills necessary to complete technical coding assignments. In multiple cases, hiring managers only realized something was wrong weeks later when employees looked or behaved differently than during the interview, Barnhart said. After landing the job, the developers step in and request that their company laptop be shipped to a U.S. address — often citing a last-minute move or family emergency. That address often belongs to an American accomplice, who typically operates what's known as a "laptop farm." These facilitators are told to install specific remote desktop software onto the laptops so the North Korean worker can operate the laptop from abroad. In July, the FBI said it executed searchers of 21 premises across 14 states that were known or suspected laptop farms, seizing 137 laptops. Then there's the challenge of ensuring the salaries actually reach the North Korean regime. That often requires the facilitators forward the paychecks to front companies across China or funnel it through cryptocurrency exchanges. In a report published in May, researchers at Strider Technologies identified 35 China-based companies linked to helping North Korean operations. Challenges Hiring processes are so siloed that it's difficult for managers to see all the signs of fraud until the North Korean workers start their roles, Kern said. Even if a company suspects something is wrong, the forensic signals can be subtle and scattered. Security teams may detect unusual remote access tools or strange browser behavior. HR might notice recycled references or resumes that reuse the same phone number. But unless those insights are pooled together, it rarely raises alarms. "There's not one giant red flag to point to," said Sarah Kern, a leading North Korea analyst at Sophos' Counter Threat Unit. "It is multiple technical forensic aspects and then such a human aspect of small things to pick up on that aren't necessarily going to be in telemetry data from an endpoint detection standpoint." Yes, but: Even when these workers are detected, they're not easy to fire. Many of them are so talented that managers are reluctant to even believe they could actually be in North Korea, Alexandra Rose, director at Sophos' Counter Threat Unit, told Axios. If these workers are caught, employers then face a litany of problems: Some workers will download sensitive internal data and extort the companies for a hefty sum in a last-ditch effort to bleed the company of whatever money they can. Some workers have filed legal complaints, including workers' compensation claims, Barnhart said. In one case, Barnhart said he had a worker try to claim domestic violence protections as they were being fired just to buy time. "There is a lot of focus on companies that cybersecurity shouldn't just be for the CISO," Rose said. "You want a bit of that security feel throughout the company, and this is the kind of case that really demonstrates why that is." The bottom line: Some companies also hesitate to report these incidents, fearing they could be penalized for unknowingly violating U.S. sanctions — even though law enforcement officials have said they're more interested in cooperation than prosecution. What's next Right now, the operations are predominantly focused on making money for North Korea's regime. Threat level: But the hacking groups involved are evolving into something more sophisticated and dangerous — including by potentially building their own AI models and feeding in sensitive U.S. company data. That's a particular concern in the defense sector. Barnhart says his teams have seen North Korean IT workers increasingly studying information about AI technologies, drone manufacturing and other defense contract work. What to watch: As U.S. companies become more alert, North Korean IT workers are shifting their focus abroad as they seek employment at other companies and set up laptop farms throughout Europe — suggesting the operation is only just now ramping up, instead of slowing down.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
The truth about the commission airline staff earn on booze, bag charges and scratch-cards
You don't need to watch one of those fly-on-the-wall documentaries to appreciate that working for an airline can be a stressful job – and one that isn't always handsomely compensated. In theory, then, most of us wouldn't begrudge the opportunity for staff to earn themselves a bonus for good performance. In reality, some bonuses can prove more contentious than you might expect, particularly when customers are kept in the dark about them. For a prime example, look at the comments earlier this summer from Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary – never one to avoid controversy – when he said he wanted to see ground staff given extra money in return for enforcing the airline's notoriously strict baggage rules. Naturally, the comments ruffled some feathers from those who fear the low cost carrier is tough enough with its allowances. Ryanair has since confirmed that its ground staff are already paid a small commission, reportedly around €1.50 per bag intercepted. 'That is likely to rise to €2.50 per bag in October,' says a Ryanair spokesman. 'We are determined to eliminate the scourge of oversized bags which delays our boarding process and annoys the 99.9 per cent of passengers who comply with the rules.' It certainly isn't the first time that Ryanair's 'incentives' have come under the spotlight. It's been known since the mid-2010s that cabin crew were being paid a commission on any on-board sales – including alcohol and scratch-cards – to help the airline make more money. There were also suggestions at the time that staff with lower sales figures were being given less choice over their roster – something that the airline denies. An American invention Like many things in the budget airline world, the practice was pioneered by American carriers, who have become notorious for badgering their passengers to sign up to airline credit cards. According to one Spirit staffer, cabin crew can receive as much as $70 when a customer successfully takes out one of their cards. Either way, these incentives have now become an essential part of the deal when working for low-cost carriers and charter airlines in particular. 'When I worked as cabin crew for a major charter airline, around 40 per cent of my earnings was made up of on-board sales commissions,' says Charlotte Crocker, a former flight attendant who now provides training to cabin crew. 'We would sell duty-free products, headsets, food, drinks and anything else that was available. We weren't put under a huge amount of pressure from the airline, but they would offer extra bonuses – like a pair of designer sunglasses or something similar – to the best sellers.' As for the current incentives, Ryanair pays 10 per cent on all in-flight sales, as does its competitor Wizz Air. There are also extra incentives for high performers: when travel writer Rob Crossan attended a Wizz training day for The Telegraph a few years ago, he found that top sellers were given more choice over which routes they worked, meaning they could pick the higher-spending flights. While commission is still a big deal, the pressure from above has eased up over the years, say insiders, partly due to the number of airlines scrambling to recruit cabin crew. Though the ongoing cost of living crunch means that staff have an extra incentive to earn their bonuses, particularly when the standard salary for low-cost airlines can be around £20,000 per year. As for the legacy carriers, the emphasis on bonuses is much smaller. 'On the short-haul flights you can get commission on food and drink sales, but it's generally a much smaller part of your pay,' says a British Airways staffer. 'It's not like Ryanair where people make money from the non-stop alcohol [sales].' Mixed messages It's all rather intriguing given the general push towards responsible drinking, with Michael O'Leary in particular emerging as an unlikely voice of moderation in recent years. Last year, he even called for airports to enforce a two-drink minimum to help prevent on-board misbehaviour. Though when you weigh up the economics of in-flight hospitality, it's not hard to see why Ryanair might take a slightly different approach towards its own alcohol sales. According to IATA, the global aviation trade body, European airlines generate an average profit of just £6.80 per passenger (indeed if you divide Ryanair's profits by its passenger numbers, you get a very similar number). Those kinds of margins mean that hospitality sales can make a sizeable difference, particularly with alcoholic drinks. According to US industry figures, airlines typically make around 50 per cent profit on every alcoholic drink they sell, not least as they aren't subject to the same taxation rules as restaurants and bars. Even if they pay a 10 per cent bonus to the staff member who sold the drinks, they're still making a healthy profit. As for the baggage fees, Ryanair currently charges up to £75 for each item of over-sized baggage that gets stopped at the gate. If ground staff get €1.50 (or £1.30) for each bag they intercept, they're still getting a much less generous deal than their cabin crew peers. Arguably, they're also doing the far tougher job of having to tell disgruntled customers they need to pay more. Interestingly, the idea of paying bonuses to ground staff gets a thumbs up from cabin crew too. 'Sometimes I think that ground staff don't bother about stopping people with larger bags as they don't want the trouble,' says a flight attendant with one full-service airline. 'But that creates problems for us on board when there isn't enough locker space to go around.' On the other hand, if ground staff had an extra incentive to enforce the rules then passengers would be less inclined to try their luck in the first place. It also means that those who have shelled out the extra cash in order to bring on board more luggage won't feel aggrieved for having wasted their money, they suggest. That's the thing about airline bonuses: we might not always like them, but they do tend to make sense – at least from the perspective of those responsible for keeping the industry moving in the first place. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more. Solve the daily Crossword
