The Florida Legislature reconvened in a short special session to consider a sweeping constitutional amendment proposed by Gov. Ron DeSantis that would dramatically expand the state’s homestead exemption and sharply reduce property taxes for many homeowners. Leadership in both chambers quickly revised the language to exclude taxes dedicated to public schools and certain local government functions, but the accelerated schedule and potential fiscal consequences have drawn criticism from lawmakers and local officials.
Supporters say the plan will offer tax relief to homeowners and align Florida’s tax code with a pro-growth agenda. Opponents argue the proposal was rushed and could strain county budgets, impact health care funding mechanisms, and require voters’ approval to become constitutional law.
What the amendment would change
Under the governor’s submission, the current homestead exemption would be increased substantially, phasing in higher thresholds over two steps. If enacted, the change would immediately eliminate property taxes for a sizable portion of homeowners and reduce liabilities for many more. The measure is framed as a constitutional amendment that must clear a three-fifths majority in each legislative chamber and then receive at least 60 percent approval from Florida voters in November.
Legislative leaders modified the proposal to protect education funding and other targeted levies. Specifically, the current draft carves out taxes that finance public schools and excludes certain local government revenue streams from being reduced or eliminated by the amendment.
Why leaders added carve-outs
House and Senate negotiators said the decision to exclude school levies was driven by the unique structure of school financing. Local governments contribute a significant share of funding to K-12 education through property taxes, and some lawmakers believe districts cannot rapidly adapt to revenue losses.
As House Speaker designate Sam Garrison put it, schools lack the flexibility to generate new user fees or reallocate revenue as some local governments might. To address those concerns, the Senate offered a targeted amendment to preserve the funding streams that support classroom operations and related obligations.
Protection for constitutional offices and health programs
Senators also added language intended to protect revenue used by constitutional county offices and to preserve certain intergovernmental financing mechanisms. Sponsor Sen. Bryan Avila emphasized that the change would shield funds tied to county collections that are used to draw down federal Medicaid matching dollars.
Those transfers, often referenced as intergovernmental transfers (IGTs), support supplemental hospital payments and programs sometimes labeled as the Low Income Pool or Hospital Directed Payment Program. Avila argued that those protections would maintain funding streams benefitting hundreds of hospitals across the state.
Pushback from local officials and some lawmakers
Despite revisions, the measure faces resistance from a mix of Republicans and Democrats. County and municipal groups—including the Florida Association of Counties and the Florida League of Cities—warned lawmakers that a broad reduction in property tax authority could trigger severe fiscal stress. County officials told committees that city budgets might be pushed to insolvency and that consolidation pressures could follow.
Jeff Scala, deputy director of the Florida Association of Counties, told legislators that the proposal represents an “historic shift” in local finance and urged a deeper analysis before any constitutional change. Multiple speakers urged the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission—a constitutionally established body that reviews the state’s fiscal structure every 20 years—to study the proposal, rather than rushing a vote.
Lawmakers question pace and process
Some legislators criticized the compressed timetable for consideration of the amendment. Sen. Tom Wright noted a large volume of constituent contact before committee votes and described the process as moving too quickly. Other critics called the truncated session and two-day legislative window inappropriate for a proposal of this magnitude.
Democrats framed the effort as risking essential services and community stability. Rep. Anna Eskamani asked how counties would cover costs if revenue fell but service demands stayed level. Proponents, including Rep. Toby Overdorf, countered that the state can absorb some revenue decline and urged counties to prioritize spending decisions like a private-sector business might.
Next steps and voter approval
If the Legislature secures the required supermajorities, the amendment would be placed on the November ballot for Floridians to decide. Passage would alter the state’s tax code in a permanent way and immediately affect many homeowners’ tax bills.
For now, committees in both chambers have approved versions of the amendment with the education and certain local funding exceptions. Whether those protections will satisfy skeptical lawmakers and local leaders—and whether voters will approve the constitutional change—remains unresolved as the special session moves forward.
