Commissioners settle on balanced millage approach to preserve a tax reduction while boosting capital reserves

Nassau County commissioners on April 9 directed staff, by consensus, to advance a millage framework that aims to preserve a modest millage reduction for taxpayers in 2025–26 while setting aside a small, dedicated amount for long‑term capital and debt needs.

Staff presented three scenarios for the FY 2025–26 budget: a base scenario that produced a net 2.1% millage reduction with no new capital set‑aside; a revenue‑neutral scenario that largely preserved reductions but allocated significant funds to capital (producing about 0.1% reduction); and a middle path (called scenario 3) that moved debt service for an existing courthouse bond into a dedicated debt capital millage, shifted 0.0531 mills (about $830,000) into capital, and still produced an estimated 1.5% millage reduction for taxpayers.

Commissioners debated the tradeoffs. Commissioner Gray argued for the larger immediate reduction in scenario 1, citing concern about economic uncertainty and a desire to prioritize current taxpayers. Multiple other commissioners — including McCullough, Farmer and Martin — voiced support for scenario 3, which staff described as a ‘‘balanced’’ option that retains a small tax reduction while beginning to create a steady, predictable capital funding stream.

Staff presented two specific technical moves the board asked to implement: converting an annual debt service payment of about $2.3 million (for courthouse bonds maturing in 2031) into a 0.1483 mill dedicated millage for debt capital, and committing the approximately $945,000 annual payment previously used for a now‑paid fuel tax bond back into transportation capital budgets. The board indicated consensus to move those conversions into the FY 2025–26 budget structure.

Why this matters: commissioners said the changes are intended to reduce reliance on volatile one‑time carryforward and grant funding by creating a modest, stable capital revenue stream. Staff emphasized the county historically used carryforward and impact fees heavily but that both sources are volatile; the new approach moves part of the county’s revenue stream into more descriptive, purpose‑driven millage buckets for transportation, conservation, debt capital and a small capital allocation.

What happens next: staff will implement the changes in the FY 2025–26 budget documents and return with the technical millage language and budget ordinances necessary for formal adoption. Commissioners retained the option to reallocate funds later if revenues or circumstances change.

Quotes: ‘‘If we do not proactively have that in place, we're not doing right by the future residents,’’ Commissioner McCullough said in support of setting aside funds for capital. Commissioner Gray said he favored the larger reduction in scenario 1 due to present economic uncertainty and the need to put current taxpayers first.

Ending note: The workshop generated policy direction but no formal millage ordinance at the session; staff will draft the formal millage schedule for budget hearings.