Campaigning with a Calculator: Florida’s CFO and the Mirage of “Overspending”
Florida’s Chief Financial Officer has been campaigning under the banner of fiscal transparency, touting a formula that supposedly exposes “overspending” by county governments.
It looks tidy on a slide deck:
GF(FY25) > GF(FY20) × [(1 + ΔPopulation) × (1 + ΔCPI)]
If a county’s General Fund grew faster than population plus inflation, the difference is labeled waste.
That’s not forensic accounting; it’s arithmetic on totals. It doesn’t ask why a budget changed. It doesn’t factor in new deputies, case backlogs, storm repairs, or the expiration of one-time federal relief. It just measures growth and calls the rest “fat.”
In poker terms, this isn’t a showdown, it’s a range read. Two cards sit face up: population and inflation. The rest: service mandates, debt costs, and one-time transfers never hit the table.
Where the Math Breaks
1. Definition Drift
“What counts” as the General Fund varies by county. Some include subfunds or transfers; others don’t. Swap definitions between baseline and current years, and your “overspending” number shifts by hundreds of millions. That’s not transparency; it’s sleight of hand.
2. CPI Cherry-Picking
Florida runs on fiscal years (October to September). The CPI runs on calendar years. Pick the wrong slice—or the pandemic spike—and you shift the “allowed” line dramatically. Even using the wrong regional index can swing the story by millions.
3. Population Games
Which population count? Which boundary? Use Census estimates for a county one year and city limits the next, and your math inflates the supposed “waste.” Jacksonville’s consolidated city-county is the classic example: count only city residents, and the ratio breaks instantly.
The Seminole County Example
Seminole’s FY25 adopted budget shows what this ratio test can’t: most of its growth comes from legitimate expansions—more deputies, new infrastructure, and the phasing out of pandemic funds. In other words, the spending matches the work.
The Bottom Line
The CFO’s “exposure” campaign isn’t analysis—it’s campaigning with a calculator. It takes a complex fiscal picture and flattens it into a bumper sticker. When the press echoes that without asking what’s underneath, we lose sight of what budgets actually are: reflections of service, safety, and shared responsibility.
Arithmetic can’t tell you if a county’s priorities are sound. Only context can.