Amendment 3 can agree on one thing – it would cause fundamental changes in Florida.
The proposed state constitutional amendment would massively expand the state’s homestead exemption for homeowners. The portion of value exempt from property taxes would increase to $150,000 in 2027, $250,000 in 2028 and annually based on inflation from 2029. School taxes would not be affected, and anyone moving to Florida would have to wait five years to qualify for the expanded exemption. Local government spending would also be limited to a handful of state-defined core areas.
Because it is an amendment to the state constitution, at least 60 percent of voters must support it.
Groups that have come out against it include the Florida Sheriffs Association and Florida Professional Firefighters. Trade association Florida Realtors has come out in favor.
According to an estimate by the Florida City and County Management Association, the Town of Miami Lakes would see a loss of $1,555,251 ad valorem revenue for the 2027-28 fiscal year, rising to $3,017,583 for 2028-29 and $4,020,992 by 20 31-32.
Experts have also weighed in on possible unintended consequences. A study for the Florida Housing Coalition by property tax expert Jared Walczak suggests that costs could be passed onto renters if municipalities raised taxes on rental housing to make up for shortfalls, and landlords passed those increases on to tenants.
In Miami Lakes, town councilmember Steven Herzberg is emphatically in the “no” camp. He believes that many city and county governments could benefit from belt-tightening. But Miami Lakes, he said, is not one of them. He believes frugal municipalities like Miami Lakes would be hit hardest by Amendment 3 precisely because they have less fat to trim.
‘If everybody was like Miami Lakes, Amendment 3 wouldn’t be on the ballot,” he said. “Communities that are responsible with their budgets are the communities that are going to be affected the most.”
In addition to a lack of town hall fat, Herzberg points to other details of Miami Lakes that he says would make it more susceptible, such as a large number of longtime, homesteaded residents and little industrial or other major commercial bases to fall back on.
“Everybody will be affected differently,” he said. “It does affect municipalities in a very different way depending on what their tax base is. That’s why I believe local governments should have the ability to do what local government does.”
Juan Carlos Fernandez wears two hats when looking at the amendment – he’s a Miami Lakes councilmember and a realtor. He supports Amendment 3 but says it would involve some creativity in town hall.
“Our town is pretty lean,” he said. “I don’t think that we have a lot of fat to cut. We’re going to end up paying for it. It would be naïve to say we’re not.
‘We’ll have to figure out how to come up with that shortfall,”
But he believes benefits to residents would outweigh that.
“It’s going to move the (housing) market,” he said. “It will make the market better; we’ll have more buyers and sellers that were possibly on the fence.” He gave the example of retired homeowners who want to downsize but who have been holding off because of how that move might affect their taxes.
The councilmembers agree that they would need contingency plans if the amendment passed, and some of those contingencies have been discussed and planned. For now though, they’re waiting to see what voters do.
“We’re going to have to find money somewhere else, which is increasing fees and taxes that disproportionally affect business owners and renters,” Herzberg said. “And we’ll still have to think about where to cut.”