The Florida Senate has received a constitutional amendment proposal that echoes elements of the plan Gov. Ron DeSantis outlined during his recent press conference but does not replicate all of his public statements. Filed as SJR 2F by Sen. Bryan Avila, the proposal would raise the state’s homestead property tax reduction to specific levels in successive stages: to $150,000 beginning Jan. 1, 2027, and to $250,000 beginning Jan. 1, 2028. Those figures match parts of the governor’s submission to the Senate, but the legislative text stops short of enshrining the larger $500,000 ambition the governor described as an eventual target.
What SJR 2F would change
SJR 2F proposes a constitutional amendment allowing a greater exemption for owner-occupied residences by adjusting the statewide homestead reduction. The joint resolution would also place limits on year-to-year increases in assessed values for many types of property. Specifically, the measure caps assessment growth at no more than 10% over the prior year and no more than 5% over the previous year’s assessments beginning Jan. 1, 2027. This restriction would apply broadly to categories such as rental properties, second homes, vacant lots and commercial real estate.
Key differences from the governor’s public description
Although Gov. DeSantis publicly framed the plan as aiming ultimately for a $500,000 homestead exemption, SJR 2F does not include language that fixes the exemption at that amount. Instead, the joint resolution would empower the Legislature to enact a general law allowing local governments—counties, municipalities and school districts—to expand the homestead exemption up to all remaining assessed valuation. In short, the constitutional text delegates the timeline and precise upper bound to future legislative action rather than locking in a $500,000 cap itself.
Scope and terminology
Another notable divergence concerns the proposal’s stated coverage for non-homestead property. In his remarks the governor said limits would extend to small businesses, but SJR 2F categorizes affected assets more broadly as non-homestead properties. The resolution lists examples—rental properties, vacation homes, vacant land and commercial buildings—but it does not specifically refer to small businesses. That omission could influence how relief and caps are applied in practice and how lawmakers or courts interpret the measure.
Funding and public services considerations
DeSantis indicated he would create a mechanism to shield critical local services—public schools, health care and safety—from funding losses that could result from reduced property tax revenue. He described establishing a trust or similar fund to replace revenue formerly raised by property taxes on local rolls. The Florida Education Association and other stakeholders, however, have raised concerns about whether such protections would be sufficient. SJR 2F itself does not contain the detailed funding plan the governor discussed; it focuses on property-tax structure and leaves implementation strategies to later legislation and appropriations.
School district taxes and caps
Importantly, SJR 2F would not cap assessments that fund school districts. The resolution explicitly excludes school district levies from the new assessment caps, leaving local school funding subject to existing assessment rules unless the Legislature acts later. That carve-out distinguishes this amendment from an across-the-board cap and keeps school financing on a separate track for policymakers to address.
Political reactions and next steps
Senate leadership responded quickly. Senate President Ben Albritton thanked the governor for presenting the idea and framed the measure as delivering substantial relief to homeowners, noting that moving the exemption to $250,000 aligns with his goal to give voters a chance to lower property taxes. Supporters describe the change as offering meaningful tax relief while aiming to protect local budgets for public safety, education and infrastructure. Critics remain focused on unanswered implementation details—how replacement funding will operate, which properties truly gain or lose, and the absence of explicit language for small businesses.
With SJR 2F now on file, the constitutional amendment process would proceed through the Senate, with committee consideration and potential revisions before voters could see a ballot measure. Lawmakers will have to reconcile the governor’s public framing with the precise statutory and constitutional language in SJR 2F as they weigh the political and fiscal consequences of broader homestead relief and assessment caps.
