Provided below is a brief description of the three statewide amendments that are up for consideration in 2022.
The passage of Amendment 1 – Limitation on Assessment of Real Property used for Residential Purposes – will provide “property tax savings on flood protection improvements,” so you won’t have to pay more for the increased value of your home.
When homes are modified or renovated to resist storm damage, property values go up. The amendment, if approved, would simply adjust how post-renovation values change property taxes for homeowners.
A yes vote on Amendment 2 will “abolish the Constitution Revision Commission,” which meets every 20 years to put amendments on the ballot.
The members are appointed by the governor, Senate president and House speaker. It was criticized in 2018 for bundling initiatives, getting you to approve things like an oil drilling and a vaping ban with just one vote.
The approval of Amendment 3 would be a financial windfall for people who work in certain professions.
It provides an “additional homestead property tax exemption for specified critical public services workforce,” such as teachers, first responders, corrections officers, child welfare workers and military personnel.
It takes 60% of the vote to pass any amendment to the state constitution.
What a Yes Vote Means for the Three Florida Ballot Amendments added by Staff on
View all posts by Staff →
Want more affordable housing? Get the repub legislature to do something real about insurance rates.
How about lowering the property taxes? But wait, can’t do that if we are going to give so many Florida workers a nice new 100% property tax break.
I support paying the workers their true high worth and let them pay taxes like the rest of us.
@GOW – Ad Valorem taxes on property seem almost criminal to me. While I do believe that taxes should be mostly borne by people (not businesses) taking a portion of one’s home every year is nearly as foolish as how Social Security is set up. The system takes excessively from the worker (making it harder for people to meet their own expense), then takes from the business (resulting in higher prices). The average worker is squeezed out of providing for his own retirement and later faces the confiscation of his home as a consequence.
That’s a special kind of insanity!
#3 is an admission that property taxes are too high. I believe a person’s home should not be taxed as taxing it means you never own it you are just renting it from the state.
What Amendment 3 should have been is a requirement for counties to cut the tax rate for everyone and reduce their spending by 50%. It is not the governments responsibility to feed your children, these programs and any other program that takes money from one and gives it to another needs to stop. The government needs to go back to doing only their Constitutional duties like providing infrastructure and security for the people.
No, Yes, No for me.
#1. Making improvements to a property that increase it’s value shouldn’t be exempt from property taxes. That it makes it less prone to flood damage is something that should improve its rating and lower the property insurance bill. Getting somebody else to pay the property tax bill as an incentive is wrong when the owner gets it all back when the property is sold and the new owner gets the full tax bill.
#2. I’m all for reducing government when we can. A commission that meets once a generation might have a worthwhile agenda on those years, making it something that is useful once in a generation. Either dispose of it, or use it.
#3. Decrease the property taxes on government workers and pass the tax burden onto the private sector? That’s a very socialistic thing to do. This might be the “real” Russian collusion that we’ve heard so much about!!!!
I still don’t understand why dental hygienists, roofers, nurses and everyone else should have to pay more taxes so that teachers can pay less taxes.
It was a Yes, Yes, No vote for me… and for S&Gs, here are my reasons…
1. Simply put, you shouldn’t be punished (aka: taxed) for improvements to your property to help shield against damage caused by natural disasters. Chances are, you already paid taxes for the products and labor to do so.
2. Having a body that only meets every 20 years to do anything is foolish and vapid in nature. For the record… I am in full support of convening a Convention of States ASAP.
3. Had they stopped at active and retired military, LEOs, and firefighters… I would have supported it.
Teresa,
You are correct and keep reminding us of the good work teachers do. Thank you for your selfless service!
Vote NO on Amendment 2.
The CRC was created to give a direct voice to the voters on constitutional amendments instead of leaving it up to only the legislature. It may need some tweaking but the concept is sound. Many bills that pass the legislature need tweaking too. Hell, the entire legislative process could stand a few changes too.
Don’t mute the People, vote NO on 2.
@ Barb, when was the last time you taught school? I challenge you to spend 1 month with a school teacher. Just one month! Do you think the school board pays for even half the materials the teachers use in the classroom? Bard, ask a teacher how much of their own personal money they spend on/for their students/class, then ask again “why teachers are included”. And anyone that is going to reply to my comment, I don’t want to hear it, unless YOU have been or are a school teacher!!
Amendment 3 applies to active duty US Armed Forces and National Guard only.
It appears my long string of “no” votes on amendments to the Florida Constitution is at an end as I must vote YES to abolish the Constitutional Revision Commission. If there ever was an unneeded governmental activity it is the pack of political hacks that comprise the CRC. Florida is the only state that has this dumb idea and it is time to vote it into the oblivion it deserves. Don’t let Common Cause and other do-good organizations mislead you. The Constitution can be amended without the CRC telling Floridians what’s good for them. This amendment to abolish the CRC is long over do. VOTE YES.
Generally, I think there are too many amendments; most of them should go through the legislative process instead of the amendment process.
On amendment 3, I don’t understand why the teachers are included in this group. The other members of the group are risking life and limb. As far as performing a “critical public service”, many people are providing a “critical public service” such as medical and dental workers, plumbers, mechanics, the list goes on.
I will be Voting NO on #3. What I would like to see is, Once you turn 65 Years of age, you no longer have to pay Property Taxes on your Home if it is Homesteaded. At 65, you no longer have Kids in Public School or even Grand Kids most likely. I don’t care what Race or Financial Status you have, every little bit helps for Senior Citizens.
Will retired military personnel get any benefit from Amendment 3?