News Service of Florida — Two former local elected officials and a nonprofit group filed suit Thursday in Leon County Circuit Court against the property tax cut amendment placed on the November ballot by lawmakers, alleging it is misleading.
The group is called Save Our Voters From Misleading Ballot Language, and the two officials are Thomas Campenni, former Mayor of Stuart, and Michael Davey, former Mayor of Key Biscayne.
They claim the ballot measure which seeks to increase the existing $50,000 tax exemption for homestead properties to $150,000 in 2027 and to $250,000 in 2028 would deceive voters.
“The ballot summary does not merely describe the Proposed Constitutional Amendment – it endorses it,” the lawsuit states. “The ballot summary … sets forth three political taglines – ‘ensuring funding for core services,’ ‘protecting small businesses,’ and ‘ensuring fairness for Florida residents’ – giving reasons why voters should vote for the proposal. But the purpose of a ballot summary is to explain what an amendment does, not to advocate for its adoption.”
But even if the court finds the ballot summary is misleading, that wouldn’t erase the measure from the ballot.
Under state law, Attorney General James Uthmeier would be required to amend the ballot summary if it is found to be defective.
Lawmakers passed the measure after it was drafted by DeSantis’ office. GOP leaders amended it to exempt taxes levied to fund schools, but city and county officials across the state have warned if voters approve it their budgets – and the services they provide to residents – will suffer.
DeSantis and supporters of the measure, though, have largely waved those critiques away, claiming local governments have overtaxed homeowners as property values have risen in recent years and now they need to rein in spending.
According to a House staff analysis the measure could cost local governments $8.4 billion per year, if it gets the necessary 60 percent support from voters to pass into law.
A spokeswoman for DeSantis didn’t immediately respond to an email Thursday.
The lawsuit claims several pieces of the ballot summary are misleading.
The phrase “ensuring funding for core services” is a misnomer, the lawsuit claims, because it drastically cuts property tax revenues. The proposed amendment would require cities and counties to spend property tax revenues on a list of “core services,” including public safety, but it also lowers the amount of money available for those services.
The lawsuit also takes issue with the phrase “protecting small businesses,” as there’s no provision that marks such business out for special treatment. There is a provision lowering the current 10 percent cap on annual assessment increases for non-homestead properties to 5 percent, but that applies to more than just small businesses.
“The Proposed Constitutional Amendment broadly limits future assessment increases on all categories of non-homesteaded property, and provides no protection to small businesses, or other non-homesteaded property, from the expected higher taxes resulting from increases in millages rates necessary to offset (at least partially) the loss of tax base caused by the amendment,” the lawsuit states.
Another misleading piece, according to the lawsuit, is it’s expressed intent to eventually eliminate all non-school homestead property taxes, something DeSantis has said is his goal. But although the measure directs the Legislature to set up a structure to allow local governments to phase out homestead property taxes, that’s short of a mandatory full elimination.
“The actual proposed constitutional language does not require the ‘full elimination,’” the lawsuit states. “Rather, it requires the Legislature to establish procedures through which local governments may choose to grant additional exemptions in the future ‘up to’ the full assessed valuation.”
