Amendment 3 Campaigns Launch as Florida Nears Property Tax Vote

The fight over Florida's property tax amendment has moved out of the Legislature and into a full statewide campaign. Florida Realtors, the trade group representing more than 238,000 real estate professionals, launched a Vote Yes on 3 effort this month, while a coalition of county mayors, city commissioners and public safety unions has begun organizing against the measure. With the general election set for November 3, both sides now have less than two months to reach voters who will decide whether to sharply expand the state's homestead exemption.

Amendment 3 reached the ballot through House Joint Resolution 1-F, passed during a special legislative session that Governor Ron DeSantis called for the first days of June. The measure needs at least 60 percent approval to become part of the Florida Constitution, a threshold that has sunk otherwise popular amendments in past cycles.

What makes this campaign unusual is that the traditional political alignments do not hold. Local elected officials from both parties have raised objections, and the most visible opposition has come from county and municipal governments that depend on property tax revenue rather than from a statewide partisan organization.

What Amendment 3 would do

The amendment would create a new homestead exemption applied to property that owners use as their primary residence. Under the language headed to voters, the exemption would be set at $150,000 in 2027 and rise to $250,000 in 2028. The exemption would apply to non-school levies, meaning county, municipal and special district taxes, but not to the school district portion of a tax bill.

That school carve-out was one of the most consequential changes made during the special session. The governor's original proposal, unveiled as the Save Our Homes from Excessive Property Taxes plan, contemplated broader relief. The House amended the resolution so that school levies remain untouched, which preserves roughly 40 percent of a typical homeowner's bill.

A second provision would lower the annual assessment growth cap on non-homestead property from 10 percent to 5 percent. That change would affect landlords, second-home owners, commercial property owners and short-term rental operators, a category that covers a substantial share of the property base in coastal counties.

If voters approve the measure, most provisions would take effect January 1, 2027. The Legislature would then need to pass implementing legislation to handle the mechanics, and lawmakers reserved for themselves a pathway to eliminate non-school homestead property taxes entirely through general law at some future point.

The fiscal math local governments are citing

Florida's Revenue Estimating Conference, the state's official forecasting body, has determined that Amendment 3 would reduce local government revenue by roughly $12 billion on a recurring basis once fully phased in. That figure has become the central number in the opposition campaign.

Because Florida has no personal income tax, property taxes carry an unusually heavy share of the burden for funding local services. County budgets rely on ad valorem revenue for sheriff's offices, fire rescue, emergency medical services, libraries, parks and road maintenance. Municipal budgets lean on the same source for police departments and utilities.

Public hospitals and health care districts, which in many Florida counties are funded by a dedicated property tax levy, have produced their own estimates. Analysis circulated among health systems suggests Florida public hospitals and health care districts could lose more than $320 million over three years if the amendment passes, a figure that has drawn attention in counties where the public hospital is the primary safety net provider.

Supporters counter that the estimates assume local governments make no spending adjustments and that years of rapid property value appreciation have delivered windfall revenue increases to counties and cities without corresponding votes to raise millage rates.

What polling shows so far

Survey work released by the James Madison Institute, a Tallahassee-based free market policy organization, found the homestead exemption increase begins with majority support among likely voters. The same polling found that support drops by more than 20 percentage points when respondents are told about the potential consequences for local service funding.

That pattern matters enormously in a state where constitutional amendments require 60 percent. A measure polling in the low-to-mid 60s before voters hear counterarguments has very little margin for erosion once an opposition campaign starts buying advertising.

It also explains the strategic posture of both campaigns. Supporters are working to keep the conversation focused on the dollar figure a typical homeowner would save. Opponents are working to attach a specific local consequence to the vote, which is why so much of the early opposition messaging has come from sheriffs, fire chiefs and hospital administrators rather than from party officials.

Who is campaigning on each side

Florida Realtors, which was among the most active proponents during the special session, formally launched its Vote Yes on 3 campaign in September. The group has framed the amendment around affordability, arguing that property tax relief and the lower non-homestead assessment cap together address two of the cost pressures making Florida housing difficult to enter and difficult to hold.

On the other side, Miami-Dade Mayor Daniella Levine Cava has emerged as one of the more prominent opponents, joined by mayors, commissioners and representatives of police and firefighter organizations from around the state. Their argument is that a tax cut delivered at the state level is paid for at the county level, and that the shortfall will surface as reduced services, higher fees, or both.

Several county property appraisers have taken a different approach, publishing neutral explainers rather than advocacy. Offices including the Pinellas County Property Appraiser have posted question-and-answer material walking through how the exemption would apply to different property types, reflecting the volume of inquiries from homeowners trying to calculate their own situation.

What it means for Floridians

For a homeowner with a homesteaded primary residence, the practical effect would be a reduction in the taxable value used to calculate the non-school portion of the annual bill. The size of the benefit depends on local millage rates, which vary considerably across Florida's 67 counties, and on the assessed value of the home.

Homeowners in counties with high millage rates would see larger dollar savings. Homeowners whose assessed value is already below the combined exemption thresholds would see the non-school portion of their bill reduced to zero or near zero. Owners of second homes, rental property and commercial buildings would not receive the homestead exemption but would benefit from the tighter assessment cap over time.

Renters occupy an ambiguous position. Landlords holding non-homestead residential property would gain from the 5 percent assessment cap, but there is no mechanism in the amendment requiring that savings be passed through to tenants. Housing advocates have raised this point in counties where rent pressure has been most acute.

Local impact across the state

The effects would not fall evenly. Counties with large shares of homesteaded property and relatively narrow commercial tax bases would absorb the largest proportional revenue loss. Rural counties in North Florida and the interior, where a single employer or a modest commercial corridor supplies much of the non-residential tax base, have flagged this as a particular concern.

In South Florida, where property values are high and a substantial share of residential property is held as second homes or investment property, the non-homestead assessment cap carries unusual weight. Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties all have significant inventories of condominium units held by non-residents.

In Central Florida, tourism-driven counties face a different calculation. Orange and Osceola counties carry large commercial and hospitality tax bases that would not receive the homestead exemption, which partially cushions the revenue effect but shifts more of the remaining burden onto those sectors.

How Florida got here

Florida's property tax debate did not begin this year. It grew out of a sustained run of property value appreciation that followed the state's population surge, during which assessed values climbed rapidly across most counties while millage rates in many jurisdictions held steady or declined only modestly.

The result was that tax bills rose substantially without local governments taking recorded votes to raise rates. Homeowners protected by the existing Save Our Homes assessment cap, which limits annual increases on homesteaded property, were partially insulated. Buyers who purchased recently, along with owners of non-homesteaded property, absorbed the full effect.

That divergence produced a political problem with an unusual structure. Longtime residents and recent arrivals in identical houses on the same street can carry very different tax bills, an outcome the existing system produces by design but which becomes harder to defend as the gap widens.

State leaders responded first with targeted relief, including sales tax exemptions on disaster supplies and other measures, before turning to the constitutional route that produced Amendment 3.

What the school carve-out changed

The decision to exempt school district levies from the new homestead exemption was the single most consequential amendment made during the special session, and it reshaped the measure's fiscal profile substantially.

School levies typically account for roughly 40 percent of a Florida homeowner's property tax bill. By leaving that portion untouched, the House reduced both the savings homeowners would see and the revenue loss local governments would absorb. It also removed public schools from the list of institutions facing direct revenue reduction, which narrowed the opposition coalition considerably.

Florida's school funding formula adds another layer. The state sets a required local effort millage that districts must levy to receive state funding, which means school property tax rates are not fully within local control. Exempting school levies avoided a conflict between the amendment and that formula.

The tradeoff is that a homeowner expecting property taxes to fall dramatically may find the actual reduction more modest than the headline exemption figures suggest, because a substantial share of the bill remains unaffected.

What's next

Early voting periods and vote-by-mail deadlines will govern much of the practical timeline between now and November 3. County supervisors of elections will mail ballots to voters who have requested them, and the amendment will appear alongside the governor's race and legislative contests, which means turnout patterns driven by those races will shape the outcome.

Both campaigns are expected to expand advertising through October. The opposition coalition faces a resource disadvantage against organized industry support, and its strategy has leaned on local officials making the case in their own communities rather than on statewide media buys.

If Amendment 3 clears 60 percent, attention shifts immediately to the 2027 legislative session, where lawmakers would write implementing language and confront the question of how, or whether, to backfill local revenue. If it falls short, the property tax debate is unlikely to disappear. State leaders have signaled for two years that they consider the issue unresolved, and a failed amendment would likely return in some form in a future cycle.