Menu
Who is
Douglas Greene
First of all, thank you for finding your way to my election website. Given that many of you do not know me, let me tell you a bit about myself and where I stand on issues important to the residents of Nassau County.
For more than 44 years, I have built a career based on leadership, accountability, and service. After spending 18 years with Marriott, I proceeded to build and operate my own hospitality company, Haberhill LLC, in 2000, growing it into a successful business that at its peak owned five hotels, with 4,600 rooms, employing nearly 2,000 people, generating more than $300 million in sales and $84 million of operating profit.
Throughout my career, I learned that leadership is about more than managing budgets and businesses. It is about taking care of people and making responsible decisions, especially during difficult times. I embraced Bill Marriott’s credo, which was “take care of your people, and they will take care of your customers.;
When the COVID-19 pandemic forced the furlough of approximately 1,700 employees, I realized that I needed to help them with essential food and living expenses. As such, I personally funded more than $510,000 in emergency $300 gift cards to help workers and their families make ends meet while they waited for assistance. My belief was simple: leaders have a responsibility to take care of the people who depend on them for their livelihood.
I am running for Nassau County Commissioner because I believe county government should operate with the same accountability, transparency, and fiscal discipline expected of every family and business in Nassau County. I am committed to protecting taxpayer dollars, increasing transparency, and ensuring county government works for the people it serves. I believe the current County government has fallen significantly short of these ideals.
One final point. This position pays almost $70,000 annually. After two terms, Commissioners receive a pension. This is for, at best, a part-time job. Teachers in the County are paid, on average, about $55,000 in salary. How is that fair? If elected, I intend to donate my County Commissioner salary to local Nassau County charities and decline any pension benefits. Public service should be about serving the community, not personal financial gain.
Please click on the links below to learn more about my observations and other details related to how I would envision accomplishing these goals.
- 18 August 2026
- Nassau County
Rebuilding Opportunity in District 2.
The people of District 2 deserve leadership that invests in our children, strengthens working families, and rebuilds our communities. These are the priorities Douglas Greene will fight for.
Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds
A Clear Choice for District 2
Douglas Greene In:
I believe public officials should be accountable to the people they serve. County government should focus on delivering results, setting clear priorities, and ensuring taxpayer dollars are directed toward projects that provide meaningful value to residents. All with total transparency all the time. If elected, I will commit to having at least a monthly (more frequently if necessary) “town hall” rotating between the Western, Central and Eastern part of the County. I will update residents on everything going before the Commission and be open honest and forthright in clearly stating my positions. I will take questions from anyone who asks (no time limit) until everyone is satisfied that they are heard.
If elected, I will immediately ask each County department for a review of every regulation that impacts small businesses throughout the County. Examples that I see of over-regulation include small and large issues that affect small business through increased costs and unnecessary time spent are:
- Requiring drinking fountains in hair salons (when was the last time anyone actually drank out of a water fountain?)
- Health inspectors requiring restaurants to “prove” that their “fresh catch” fish sandwich is really “fresh or frozen” (frankly not a government function but rather a civil issue).
- Confusing permit requirements for parking spaces, sidewalks that serve no purposes (which require ongoing County maintenance ), business licenses, tree protection (I am a big advocate of responsibly taking care of our centuries-old live oak trees and other native plant species, but navigating the rules is a nightmare).
Each of these regulations takes County employees time and money to enforce with our tax dollars that could be spent in more constructive ways. I believe there are hundreds of these regulations that need to be reviewed.
The Conservation Land Acquisitions and Management (“CLAM”) bond initiative.
This is a perfect example of the County getting away from its core mission and costing the taxpayers millions of dollars. I would never have voted for this. I also don’t believe that the initiative would have passed if County voters knew the specifics which should have been incorporated into the description on the ballot.
In 2024 the County put a bond initiative on the ballot. The question on the ballot read as follows:
“BALLOT TITLE:
NASSAU COUNTY GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR LANDS TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY, WILDLIFE
HABITAT, AND RIVERS
BALLOT QUESTION:
To acquire lands that improve water quality in rivers, creeks, and drinking water sources; protect natural areas, beaches and the St. Mary’s, Nassau and Amelia Rivers; reduce flooding, conserve wildlife habitat, and provide outdoor recreation, shall Nassau County be authorized to issue general obligation bonds in an amount not exceeding $30,000,000, bearing interest at market rates, maturing within 30 years, payable from ad valorem taxes, with all expenditures reviewed by an independent citizen oversight committee? “
Who doesn’t want to conserve water quality, natural areas, beaches and outdoor recreation? This initiative was approved by over 60% of voters.
But would it have been approved if the following was known and fully disclosed prior to the vote?:
- Additional Property Tax Burden. Most people do not know the term “ad valorem taxes” means. They do know what “property taxes” means. Calling this an ad valorem tax rather than a property tax increase clearly confused many voters.
- New Bond Obligation. Specifically, this initiative allows the County to add a charge to your property tax bill for at least the next 30 years to pay back $30 million plus interest on the Bonds. This is just an estimate. This is a General Obligation Bond, which means the County must raise additional taxes to pay the shortfall if the additional taxes paid are insufficient to repay the principal and interest on the bonds
Cost of the New Bond Obligation. The County plans to issue the bonds on July 1, 2026. As of June 19th, 2026, the 30-year rate on AAA rated Tax free municipal bonds was approximately 4.3%. Over a 30-year period this would amount to over $38 million of interest payments plus repayment of the $30 million principal or a total of $68 million. That would equate to a loss of $650,000 annually of property tax revenue or $19.5 million in tax revenues over the 30-year period.
In my opinion bond issues should be used for capital projects related to school buildings, road improvements, fire station construction, hospital construction, etc. Core County government functions. Not purchasing private property from wealthy sellers at a premium to actual value
Conflicts of Interest. Entities that pushed this initiative are the direct beneficiaries of CLAM. The North Florida Land Trust (NFLT) lobbied extensively for this initiative. They are significantly involved with the selection of properties and are compensated for their efforts. Owners of both the Piney Island and St Mary’s Farm properties were also very involved in this bond initiative. Prices paid to for these parcels (Piney Island was wholly purchased and St Mary’s was a conservation easement) from the sale of these properties to the County were well in excess of what the sellers originally paid for the property.
- Maintenance Obligations. The ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the Piney Island Property will be the responsibility of the County, as will many of the other properties acquired, putting an ever larger burden on the County budget
- Reduction in Future Property Tax Revenue. Using the $30 million along with other grants and donations will likely result in a multiple of this $30 million being spent to acquire properties. The County sells this as a positive. I look at this as buying properties with Taxpayer money and eliminating property tax revenue at the same time. For every $1,000,000 of taxable value, the County will lose approximately $13,000 of property tax revenues. Assuming $50 million of property purchased, that would equate to a loss of $650,000 annually of property tax revenue or $19.5 million in tax revenues over the 30-year period.
In my opinion bond issues should be used for capital projects related to school buildings, road improvements, fire station construction, hospital construction, etc. Core County government functions. Not purchasing private property from wealthy sellers at a premium to actual value.
Residents should be able to easily understand how decisions are made and how taxpayer dollars are spent. A perfect example of how the County has failed to be transparent and accountable has been the Riverstone fiasco. In Summary:
- About 20 years ago, Riverstone Properties purchase 50 Beachfront acres on the South Side of Amelia Island abutting the State park
- In 2021, the County Commission reduced Beachfront height limitations to 45 feet from 85 feet
- Riverstone sued the County at that point claiming that the rezoning negatively effected the value of its property
- Without consulting the adjacent landowners, the County Commission settled with Riverstone, allowing them to build 11 condominium Towers – each at 85 feet high;
- The adjacent residents sued the County
This is a prime example of the County not properly communicating with effected residents to try to get buy-in for an extremely divisive issue. If I were on the County Commission, I would have treated adjacent property owners as adults. I would have insisted lawyers for the County meet with representatives of the adjacent landowners to explain the rationale for settling the lawsuit and at least attempt to get their “buy-in”.
Neither my opponent or the County attorney ever did that.
Background. On June 16th, 2026, the Florida State Legislature approved a constitutional amendment called the “Save our Homes from Excessive Property Taxes” amendment.
It requires a ballot measure, which will read as follows:
“CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE VII, SECTIONS 4, 6, AND 9
ARTICLE XII
SAVE OUR HOMES FROM EXCESSIVE PROPERTY TAXES.
This amendment benefits Florida taxpayers by:
Exempting homestead properties from taxation. Exempts the first $250,000 of a homestead’s value from taxation for all levies other than school district levies and requires, through general law, a schedule for full elimination.
Ensuring funding for core services. Requires local governments to use remaining property taxes solely for core public needs including public safety, education and schools, infrastructure, and natural resources.
Protecting small businesses. Limits future property tax assessments on businesses.
Ensuring fairness for Florida residents. Requires any person who establishes Florida residency after January 1, 2027, to maintain Florida residency for five years prior to receiving the increased homestead exemption.”
Put simply, the homestead exemption for non-school taxes will increase from $50,000 currently to $250,000. In other words, anyone with over a $250,000 assessed value will save over $1,500 annually in property taxes (depends on Millage rates) on their property tax bill. This will not impact property taxes related to school funding since the exemption will remain where it is. Florida has set up a website www.saveourhomesfl.com to give residents an estimate of their savings. Simply enter your address and the site will give approximate savings.
Scare Tactics Already Begun. Clearly, the County does not want to lose precious tax revenues, so they are aggressively fighting this exemption increase. Their arguments are as follows:
- Tax Cut for the Rich. While it is true that persons in the County that have assessed values over $250,000 will see a reduction of their property taxes, the largest beneficiaries of this increase are average everyday County citizens to whom $1,500/year or $125/month is very impactful. With affordability a major issue these days, these savings provide additional money for core everyday needs such as gas, food and electricity, etc.
- There will be cuts in core services. I do not believe the core services listed in the ballot above will need to be cut. What I believe the County will threaten is funding for what I believe are non-core services that are better provided by the private sector or individual donations/support. A prime example is the threat to cut money for Parks and rec as well as libraries. This is a red herring. The total annual maintenance and upkeep budget and support provided here is at best a few million dollars or about $100 in taxes per resident. Why should people who live paycheck to paycheck be required to pay an additional $1,500 to fund these activities? People who want to continue to fund these parks and libraries can give half of that money to those entities and still be ahead of the game.
If you want a better future, Vote for Douglas
Experienced & Professional
Strong Vision
Honesty & Transparency
Paid for by Douglas Greene, Republican for District 2 Commissioner | Website created by DesignsByDonW