Florida Property Tax Vote to Change After Legal Ruling

0 Share Newsweek is a Trust Project member See more of our trusted coverage when you search. Prefer Newsweek on Google to see more of our trusted coverage when you search. The title and summary of a much-awaited property tax cut proposal set to be placed on the November ballot in Florida are misleading and contain political rhetoric, a Tallahassee judge ruled on Monday, ordering them to be redrafted.

The decision breaks a weekslong impasse around the proposal’s wording in the state, after multiple lawsuits were filed by opponents challenging the amendment’s language, including former lawmakers.

In their bipartisan lawsuit filed last month, former U.S. Representative Al Lawson, a Democrat, and former state Senator Jeff Brandes, a Republican, argued that the ballot language was written to persuade voters rather than inform them of the amendment's impact on the state.

Judge David Frank of the Leon Circuit Court sided with the two former lawmakers on Monday night. In his 18-page ruling, he said that “voters are entitled to a fair, clear, accurate and non-misleading ballot statement to assist them in making their critical determination.”

The present ballot language, on the other hand, “would deprive the voters of the opportunity to make a meaningful decision,” he wrote.

Newsweek reached out to Brandes and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' office via email for comment.

The proposal, known as Amendment 3 or “Save Our Homes from Excessive Property Taxes," was passed by the Florida GOP-led legislature earlier this year after much back and forth between the House, the Senate, and DeSantis.

It was the Republican governor, now in his last months in office, who pushed strongly for lawmakers to introduce meaningful property tax reforms, throwing his support behind efforts to eliminate property taxes entirely. But after the Florida legislature passed a version of the proposal that did not exactly reflect the one presented by the governor, DeSantis said he would take a step back and not campaign to support the amendment .

Under the proposal that will be put in front of voters in November, the current $50,000 homestead exemption limit would be raised to $150,000 in January 2027 and to $250,000 in January 2028, excluding school district levies. The amendment would also limit local spending to “core services,” such as public safety, public education, infrastructure and natural resource management.

There is no mention in the proposal of raising the exemption to $500,000, as DeSantis wanted to, though the bill would authorize lawmakers to pass a general law laying out the procedure for counties, municipalities and school districts to increase the homestead exemption “up to all remaining assessed valuation.”

As it involves amending the Florida constitution, the proposal would require the approval of at least 60 percent of voters to pass.

According to estimates by state economists, the amendment would result in the loss of $5 billion in tax revenues next year and almost $11 billion by 2031.

Critics have argued that the proposal would cause a critical loss of revenues for local governments, which is likely to compromise the continuous operation of key public services such as public safety, emergency services, parks and road maintenance, unless fees are raised elsewhere—adding another financial burden on residents while the burden of property taxes is being lifted.

These are the services that property taxes normally pay for:

Several law enforcement groups in the state, including the Florida Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), firefighters’ union and fire chiefs, and Sheriffs Association, have publicly spoken out against the proposal.

In a Facebook post from July 24, FOP—the second-largest police union in the state—said they were going to oppose the amendment “because it creates far too much uncertainty about how local governments would continue to fund law enforcement, fire rescue, emergency medical services, and other critical public safety functions.”

They added: “Public safety should never become collateral damage with uncertain fiscal consequences.”

Just before FOP, Florida Professional Firefighters, a union representing about 31,000 firefighters and EMS personnel in the state, had expressed a similar opinion, as had the Florida Fire Chiefs Association.

“Our position is not about opposing tax reform, it is about protecting the people we serve every day. Public safety is the foundation that allows Florida’s families, businesses and economy to thrive, and any lasting reform must ensure reliable funding that keeps those services strong,” Wayne ‘Bernie’ Bernoska, president of the Florida Professional Firefighters, said in a letter to its members mentioned by local news media.

The Florida Sheriffs Association joined this group of opponents on August 3, issuing a statement of “concern” on social media, saying the ballot initiative “potentially allows Tallahassee to control your local budgets, creates longer law enforcement response times, limits communities’ abilities to provide road repairs and stormwater removal—these are a few of the things voters deserve to be aware of.”

Amendment 3: “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 exe...

Indexed and credited by AIPROPX. Originating outlet: Newsweek. Open at source →