A Leon County circuit judge heard arguments Wednesday over whether the ballot title and summary for Amendment 3, a November property-tax measure, fairly explains the proposal or amounts to political advocacy. The amendment would increase the non-school homestead exemption to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028 for people who establish permanent Florida residency by Dec. 31, reduce the annual assessment-growth cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and require local governments to spend remaining property-tax revenue on public needs such as public safety, schools, infrastructure and natural resources.
Leon County Circuit Judge David Frank heard arguments in three consolidated lawsuits challenging the title and summary scheduled to appear on November ballots. The challengers include the nonprofit Save Our Voters From Misleading Ballot Language, several former mayors, former Republican state Sen. Jeff Brandes and former Democratic U.S. Rep.
Al Lawson Jr. They argue the amendment's title, 'Save Our Homes From Excessive Property Taxes,' and phrases promising to benefit taxpayers, protect small businesses, preserve core services and ensure fairness are biased, inaccurate and designed to persuade voters. Plaintiffs' attorney Jamie Cole told the court the language crosses a line and called it the worst example of a biased ballot question he has seen.
Frank did not immediately rule, instead ordering attorneys to submit proposed decisions by 5 p.m. Monday.
Attorneys representing the attorney general, secretary of state and Department of State urged Frank to uphold the language. State attorney Ben Gibson argued the title and summary must be read together and that Florida law requires them to explain only the amendment's chief purpose, not every possible consequence or implementation detail. The challengers must prove the title and summary are clearly and conclusively defective, not merely that different wording could have been better, Gibson said.
The Legislature approved the proposal during a June special session, passing it 75-26 in the House and 30-9 in the Senate. Because it is a proposed constitutional amendment, it was not subject to the governor's signature or veto. It needs support from at least 60% of voters in November.
A July analysis by Florida's Revenue Estimating Conference projected the quantifiable portions of the amendment would reduce local property-tax collections by nearly $4.93 billion in the 2027-28 fiscal year. The modeled recurring impact is approximately $11.83 billion annually. Election officials told the court that county supervisors may begin printing ballots Aug. 27, adding urgency to the case and any appeal. If Frank finds all of the ballot statements defective and appeals are declined or exhausted, Florida law gives Attorney General James Uthmeier 10 days to submit corrected wording.