Ashley Chandler
& Nick Blank
News-Leader
Nassau County has released its budget analysis in response to Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia’s initial report that Nassau County’s Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget included more than $50 million dollars of wasteful spending.
The county’s Fiscal Acc-ountability and Transparency Report focuses primarily on the General Fund budget, actual spending and fiscal analysis, which it stated was the focus of Ingoglia’s Jan. 21 press conference held in Fernandina Beach.
The report says “an in-complete review of Nassau County’s General Fund budget resulted in Florida’s CFO missing an opportunity to recognize a county government that closely modeled the standard for an efficient local government based on the CFO’s ‘Indexed Budget.’”
Ingoglia said Nassau County spent about $196 million in fiscal year 2024-25, which included $53 million of “wasteful spending.”
“Both the statement that Nassau County spent $196M and had ‘excessive, wasteful spending’ of $53 million are factually inaccurate,” the county’s report states. It said the adopted budget for the year, “including reserves and project funding from prior years, totaled $196.3 million.”
The county’s analysis says that in 2024-25 Nassau County “had actual spending of approximately $150.6 million,” and New General Fund revenue for the year totaled $133.3 million.
“The $63 million difference between new revenue and total budget reflects the planned use of prior-year ‘carryforward’ funds from fiscal year 2023-24,” the report states.
County officials discussed the analysis at the Winter Strategic Planning Session on Thursday
“If we want to build, let’s say, Westside Regional Park, it took us multiple years to save money in order to have enough money to build that park,” County Manager Taco Pope said. “So each year we save money, that cash carries forward, rolls forward to the next fiscal year as part of your general budget.”
County officials countered Ingoglia’s claims by addressing his methods of findings, saying it does not account for a rural county transitioning to urban, as well as the need for increased services.
The county said in its analysis, “in contrast to the information provided at the CFO’s press conference, actual General Fund spending demonstrated the fiscally conservative and prudent expenditure of public funds necessary to facilitate critical operations expected by residents.”
Commissioner Jeff Gray said Nassau is behind in its rural to urban transition, but the board has to be responsible.
“It’s going to make it tough for us to try to provide essential services, much less the nonessential services. We’re not a county that has everything infrastructure fully developed. We’re in a transition,” Gray said. “We have been paying as we go with this, and being as prudent and responsible a commission as we can with taxpayer dollars.”
Commissioner John Martin noted potential property tax reform at the state level would negatively impact funding for necessary services. He said it was false to state that local school districts wouldn’t be affected.
Martin also said he was disappointed that major police and firefighter unions have endorsed Ingoglia. He compared it to “cutting off your nose to spite your face.” He said Ingoglia didn’t consider much of what the county’s analysis did.
“It did not take into consideration, ‘How do we live with that? What are the repercussions of that going forward?’ Because we’re only looking at the short term for their political careers,” Martin said.
He said Nassau County isn’t like Orange, Miami-Dade or Baker counties and asserted Ingoglia’s visit was part of a state-funded tour to push for property tax reform.
“I’ve seen a few videos of the CFO going around the state. He uses the same chart, it’s got the same graph, a different name of the county and different numbers,” Martin said. “It’s the same thing.”
Martin referred to the “worst case scenario” of homestead property taxes being eliminated altogether.
The county has the funding for capital projects, roads and public safety at an adequate level, Martin said, but property tax reform would result in a cut in services. He said the first thing he would ask somebody who has a complaint that costs money to fix is whether they voted for property tax reform.
“Then I’m going to say, ‘OK, now where do you want me to get this money?’” Martin said.
Referring to Ingoglia’s visit, Commissioner A.M. “Hupp” Huppmann said the presentation was disappointing and left him confused.
“It’s unfortunate for the public, because they were duped,” he said.
The county’s report stated that “the county requested the data and methods used by the state, but did not receive the information before or after the public statements by the Florida CFO. County staff attempted to reconstruct the analysis using public, verifiable data, but could not confirm the state’s analysis.”
Actual Expenditures
The county’s analysis said its “actual spending of $150.6 million in fiscal year 2024-25 was $45.6 million below the adopted budget of $196.3 million.”
The county said it used the $133,321,895 in new General Fund revenue to fund the Clerk of Courts; Property Appraiser, Sheriff’s Office; Supervisor of Elections; Tax Collector, Public Health/Health Department; Courts/Judiciary; and the Board of County Commissioners, Fire Rescue, Roads, Parks, etc.
The county spent $17.3 million from prior years that was ‘carried forward’ to the 2024-25 General Fund to execute planned projects such as the Pages Dairy Road improvements; County Road 121 reconstruction; Blackrock Cove Park; Piney Island Conservation Acquisition; Westside Regional Park; drainage projects, the 500-year Storm Event; the Goffinsville Boat Ramp improvements; and more.
State law requires counties to include prior-year funds and reserves in the annual budget, whether those dollars are to be spent in the year or not. “As a result, the total budget is often higher than the county’s actual annual spending,” the report says.
The report said in fiscal year 2024-25, the General Fund budget included about $63 million in reserves and previously-approved project funds carried forward. “Those dollars are included for legal and accounting purposes,” the report explains.
Reserves are funds set aside for “emergencies, minimum operating fund balance requirements, future capital and infrastructure needs and unexpected expenses,” established in accordance with state law “to ensure long-term stability.”
The report said “without adequate (emergency) reserves, a county must borrow money to respond to disasters such as hurricanes – adding interest costs for taxpayers and slowing recovery.”
In 2025, the BOCC increased the Emergency Reserve from $1.5 million to $10 million to ensure “first responders and Public Works employees can immediately clear roads, repair infrastructure and restore the community to normal operations after a storm.”
Reserves not used are carried forward to the next year. The report says in 2024-25, no Emergency Reserve funds were spent, so the same $10 million appears in 2025-26.
“It is not new revenue – it is the same savings from prior years maintained to protect the community.”
The report also explains that Nassau County allocates funds for certain projects that are expected to take years, hence the reason for the ample project funding carried over from previous years.
“Nassau County uses a pay-as-you-go (Pay-Go) approach to fund capital projects,” the analysis states. “Rather than borrowing money, the county intentionally saves money over multiple years to pay cash for major infrastructure projects such as roads and parks. Because large projects take years to plan, design and construct, funds are ‘carried forward’ annually until the project is completed.”
The county used the William Burgess Boulevard extension project as an example. “It took more than five years to save enough money to extend William Burgess Boulevard from U.S. 17 to Miner Road. … The funds were set aside and carried forward each year until construction could begin.”
Aside from funding the constitutional offices, which the BOCC does not establish operating costs of, the county also uses the General Fund to cover state mandated services and costs. The county’s analysis states that “the collective state mandates and required services represent more than $75 million in impact on the Nassau County annual budget.”
The county’s analysis further addresses the county’s adopted budget and expenditures, impact fees and millage rates, as well as the county’s plans and investments.
It also referenced its second consecutive Triple Crown Award, awarded in June 2025, from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for the 2024 budget year.
“This is the highest honor a local government can achieve in financial reporting and further demonstrates the county’s commitment and dedication to achieving the gold standard in transparency, financial responsibility and public outreach. This award can only be achieved by earning all 3 notable GFOA Awards in a budget year: The Distinguished Budget Presentation Award; the Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting; and the Popular Annual Financial Reporting Award.”
County's View
The county’s analysis addressed several factors that affect the data Ingoglia discussed at the January press conference such as population and inflation.
The county said it reviewed Ingoglia’s claim that Nassau County’s population increased by 16,597 residents over the five-year period.
“Based on verifiable state data, this analysis utilizes the lower five-year population growth estimate published by BEBR, which reflects an increase of 17,795 residents, or 19.9% population growth, over the period examined.”
The county’s analysis also addressed the “limitations” the population and Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) Based Model the Florida CFO used.
The “referenced model evaluates budget growth using only CPI-U and population change. While this approach captures increases associated with population growth and inflation, it does not account for changes in the level of services provided by the county.”
The county said it does not account for changes in level of service, so the model “may indicate excess spending where service expectations, operational complexity, or mandated standards have materially changed.”
The county used the Parks Department as an example.
“Nassau did not have a Parks Department in 2019 nor did they provide basic park and recreation services. Between 2019 and 2025, Nassau County created a Parks Department and established a new base level of service which included cleaning park restrooms on a routine schedule, maintaining playing fields instead of relying on volunteers, and hosting basic community events such as a Christmas tree lighting, opening of the beaches celebration, and a Halloween festival. The state model does not account for rural transitioning counties who are establishing, for the first time, base levels of service for routine services that have been long established in more mature suburban, small urban and urban counties,” the county report says.
The analysis also addresses public safety, staffing and service expectations and the county compensation pressures and statewide mandates in regard to Ingoglia’s model.
View the entire analysis at
https://www.nassaucountyfl.
com/DocumentCenter/View/
31397/Audit_Spending
Review_February2026_Final_v621926.