SerpApi.Org
Floridians’ support for a constitutional amendment that would eventually phase out property taxes in the state may hinge on the exact wording used in the November ballot, a new poll by the University of North Florida (UNF) suggests.
In a few months, voters in the Sunshine State will be asked whether they support a property tax overhaul backed by lawmakers in Tallahassee and Republican Governor Ron DeSantis. According to UNF’s polling, when the question included estimates of the municipal budget shortfall that could result from phasing out property taxes, support for the amendment fell below the necessary threshold.
The proposal—known as Amendment 3 or Save Our Homes from Excessive Property Taxes—requires the approval of at least 60 percent of voters to pass. Under the amendment, 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.
The proposal has sparked criticism from experts and local authorities fearful of the impact that a drastic loss in revenues for cities and towns across Florida could have on key public services. But a majority of Floridians facing the burden of higher property taxes, borrowing costs, homeowners associations fees and home insurance premiums may be in favor of cutting their bills—as long as they are not reminded of what this could cost them, UNF researchers found.
How Ballot Language Influences Voters
The Public Opinion Research Lab (PORL) at UNF ran a poll of 848 likely midterm election voters in Florida between July 8 and 17, asking what they thought of the proposed amendment to the Florida State Constitution that would phase out taxes on homestead property, with the exception of those directed to schools.
When Floridians were told that the property tax overhaul would require local governments to use property taxes only for core public services—a requirement under the proposed amendment—61 percent of respondents said they supported the proposal, either strongly or somewhat. Only 32 percent were opposed.
However, things changed when Floridians were told that estimates suggest the phasing out of property taxes would lead to a “municipal budget shortfall of about $11.8 billion over two years.” When this information was provided along with the question of whether they approved of the amendment, overall support for it plunged by 16 percentage points to 45 percent—falling far short of the 60 percent requirement.
A total of 47 percent of respondents—15 percent more than in the first case—opposed the amendment while knowing of its potential downfall.
“These numbers show how important the final ballot language will be in determining the outcome of this amendment,” Sean Freeder, PORL’s faculty director, said in a news release. “When told about the budget impact, likely voters decisively reject the amendment. Without that language, the subject of an ongoing lawsuit, it just barely exceeds the 60 percent threshold required for adoption.”
Multiple lawsuits are already challenging the language set to be used in the November ballot, including a bipartisan lawsuit by former U.S. Representative Al Lawson, a Democrat, and former state Senator Jeff Brandes, a Republican. The pair is seeking to prevent the proposal from appearing on the ballot unless its title and summary are rewritten.
According to the former lawmakers, the ballot language is written to persuade voters rather than inform them of what impact the amendment would have on the state.
How the Proposed Amendment Could Affect Floridians
The proposed amendment is set to appear on the November 3 ballot in the form of a “yes” or “no” question.
The property tax overhaul pushed by lawmakers promises to save homeowners in the Sunshine State thousands of dollars every year on taxes they pay to fund city and county services across Florida. However, experts, mayors and municipalities have warned of the holes this would open in their budgets.
The Florida Legislature’s nonpartisan Office of Economic and Demographic Research (EDR) estimated that the proposed amendment would reduce local-government property-tax revenues by an estimated $5 billion in its first year and $11.8 billion per year after five years if approved.
According to some estimates, commuter counties with less commercial development and more residential housing will be hit the hardest, proportionally, by the projected loss in revenues. St. Lucie could face the steepest loss at 35 percent. Clay, Baker, Citrus and Hernando counties all face likely losses of more than 30 percent.
A May 29 analysis by the Florida Policy Institute has calculated that, overall, Florida counties would lose an average of $4.8 billion per year under the $250,000 exemption.
Orange County, home to the city of Orlando, warned that if approved by voters, the amendment would increase homestead exemptions for homeowners who use their property as a primary residence in Florida.
Orlando authorities have already imposed a hiring freeze as they brace for a potential loss in tax collections, giving voters an idea of what they might lose should the amendment pass. The freeze will continue through 2028 if the amendment passes.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Ben Kelly and Shakeema Edwards.
Correction 7/21/26, 12:07 p.m. ET: This article was updated to clarify that EDR estimated the potential budget shortfall at $11.8 billion after five years of the amendment passing.
Related Articles
