Florida
Judge rules Florida property tax ballot language misleading
Florida tax exemption plan heads to voters
If voters approve, the plan would increase the state’s homestead exemption, lowering property tax bills for primary homeowners.
A Tallahassee judge said the title and summary for the November ballot initiative to reduce homeowners’ property tax, originally proposed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, is “clearly and conclusively defective” and ordered it rewritten.
The proposed state constitutional amendment, however, will still be on the ballot; Circuit Judge David Frank made clear he wasn’t asked to do so and had no legal authority to remove it.
As Frank wrote in an Aug. 3 order on three consolidated lawsuits challenging the measure: “Specifically, (the) Constitution and (state law) require this Court to … determine whether the language fairly informs the voter of the chief purpose of the amendment and does not mislead. They fail both prerequisites and must be rewritten.”
Attorney General James Uthmeier now must redraft Amendment 3’s title and summary language. It will need no less than 60% approval from voters statewide to be added to the Florida Constitution.
In his order, which was docketed shortly before 11 p.m., Frank said the title – “Save Our Homes From Excessive Property Taxes” – “is more akin to a political slogan. It is not fair or neutral. It advocates a policy position: to stop excessive property taxes.”
He goes on to cite a laundry list of problems with the summary, in part saying it “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 would do, not to advocate for its adoption,” he added.
Uthmeier has “10 days (to) prepare and submit to the Department of State a revised ballot title or ballot summary that corrects the deficiencies identified by the Court ….” A request for comment is pending with his office.
What does the amendment do?
Among other things, Amendment 3 would increase the state’s homestead exemption from the current $50,000 to $150,000 in 2027 and then to $250,000 in 2028.
In a special legislative session in June, state lawmakers modified the measure from DeSantis before placing it on the ballot, however. Among other things, they:
- Carved out school taxes from the higher homestead exemption.
- Protected funding for constitutional county officers, such as property appraisers, tax collectors, supervisors of elections, clerks of court.
- Lowered the annual assessment cap on non-homesteaded property (including commercial) from 10% to 5%, meaning taxable values on those properties could rise more slowly from year to year.
- Got rid of a state trust fund meant to cushion local revenue losses.
Cities and counties have been sounding alarms over the proposal, intended to deliver relief to homeowners even as it likely will force difficult local budget choices. Cities and counties would lose $5 billion in tax revenue next year and almost $12 billion by 2031, according to state economists.
It has sparked three lawsuits, including one spearheaded by two former state lawmakers: Republican Jeff Brandes of St. Petersburg and Democrat Al Lawson of Tallahassee. They all were consolidated for review by Frank.
“This case was never about stopping tax relief. It was about stopping misleading ballot language,” Brandes said in a statement to the USA TODAY Network – Florida. “The ballot box is not a place for political advertising.”
He added: “Voters deserve facts, not slogans. They deserve truth, not marketing … Today wasn’t a victory for plaintiffs. It was a victory for every Floridian who believes the truth still matters.”
Portions of this story were previously reported. Jim Rosica is a member of the USA TODAY Network – Florida Capital Bureau. Reach him at jrosica@tallahassee.com and follow him on X.com: @JimRosicaFL.
Faced with spending tens of thousands of dollars to ditch their septic tanks by 2030 under Florida law, Indian River County homeowners lash out.
When I came home the other night and told my wife what I learned at an Indian River County “sewer conversion” meeting, I got a stiff whiff of her “keep Florida free” bent.
It began when I told her if we were unable to connect to county sewer by July 1, 2030, we’d have to spend $25,000 or more to install an enhanced septic tank system, then pay $1,200 to $2,000 a year to permit and maintain it, county officials said.
“What kind of green new deal is this?” she asked.
I concluded most people at the meeting thought it sounded more like a brown raw deal.
Apparently, Indian River County commissioners who missed the meeting I attended got the same whiff at the second meeting. The county announced late Sept. 11 it would cancel five other meetings it planned throughout September.
“Citizens attending the meeting … were clear,” Deryl Loar, county commission chair, said in a press release. “This mandate is creating stress and has the potential to create a significant hardship for many of Indian River County’s fixed-income households and young families struggling to provide a secure home for their children.”
In all, 28,374 property owners will be impacted, county officials said.
Why?
Florida Legislature gets ball rolling
Florida mandate hits Indian River County septic-sewer program move
Indian River County released this video on its septic-sewer conversion program and played it at a community forum Sept. 2, 2026.
DIVISION OF UTILITY SERVICES
Because in 2023, Florida legislators unanimously passed a comprehensive package (HB 1379/SB 1632), introduced by Rep. Toby Overdorf, R-Palm City, designed to protect Florida springs and waterways, such as the Indian River Lagoon and Tampa Bay, from harmful nitrogen.
“(Human waste leaking from) septic tanks is the single-biggest bogeyman that we can do something about to really save the lagoon,” Brian Lapointe, a Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute scientist told TCPalm’s Max Chesnes in a 2021 interview.
But as much as Gov. Ron DeSantis professes to love the environment, for him to sign a bill that would require so many Floridians to spend this kind of money without consideration of the details seems like the antithesis of his “Free Florida” shtick.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the state’s efforts to preserve our waterways; they’re essential to Florida’s health, environment, economy and quality of life.
But, for the central government in Tallahassee — whose overwhelmingly Republican representatives claim to be anti-regulation on the campaign trail ― to pass along vastly underfunded mandates, forcing local governments to expand their sewer systems and requiring local residents to pay for it within just a few years is wrong.
The estimated unfunded cost statewide? $6.7 billion, according to a study cited by Florida TaxWatch in 2023. It suggested the state consider imposing user fees on utilities that can be bonded against to help fund septic conversions, including subsidies for lower-income homeowners.
In Indian River County, Howard Richards, the county’s utility department’s manager of capital projects, told residents it had funds from the state to help subsidize sewer hookups for a limited number of about 463 parcels where service is available now, and 443 where it would be over the next few years.
Pick a date, any date …
Even then, though, it could cost homeowners $11,000 to $23,000 to hook up, then $50 to $60 a month in sewer charges, Richards said.
It’s a massive challenge, compounded by the county continuing to install sewer service for new developments in the unincorporated county and in Sebastian, which continues to annex rural land for development.
It’s one reason I continue to argue the county (and cities) should not expand urban services into rural areas until it catches up with shortages in its existing urban core.
Personally, I’d be happy connecting to sewer service when my septic tank fails, even before. But for the state to set a date of July 1, 2030 ― whether the county can get to any of us with sewer lines or not — is arbitrary.
I just wish our state legislators, Rep. Robbie Brackett and Sen. Erin Grall, Vero Beach Republicans, had been at the meeting I attended. The county, instead of canceling their meetings, should have asked them to be at all of them. The public deserves to learn:
- What will happen if they do not comply with the septic laws? Richards said he did not know, suggesting the state Department of Health will be tasked with enforcing the law.
- Why no one from the state of Florida was at the meeting? After all, it’s the Legislature’s mandate. The county, as Richards noted, is just trying to follow the law and get state grants to cover a portion of the cost to connect homes to the county sewer system.
27,500 Indian River County homeowners in limbo
Richards kept his cool answering often-heated questions from some of 100 people gathered at the county fairgrounds exposition center meeting I attended.
Richards said about 27,500 homeowners like me remain in limbo.
The good news is the county at least has a preliminary plan for about 11,000 of them, in Sebastian. County commissioners were expected to discuss it Sep. 15. The bad news: It could cost $329 million to $599 million to execute the plan.
Sebastian has made solid efforts to improve the quality of the lagoon, but does not have its own water-sewer utility. So, for now, it’s at the mercy of the county, which is at the mercy of the state.
As for the rest of us, Richards offered a couple of options to having to put in potentially more expensive newfangled septic tanks, which might be too big to fit in some yards:
- Join with neighbors to petition the county to provide sewer service, with the county determining the cost.
- A less costly, but more complicated option: Unite with neighbors to hire professionals to design, build and fund a system to connect to county service.
More legislation leads to more unintended consequences
There’s no easy option, which is why Realtor Mary Lou Ciambriello has encouraged some of her clients looking for more affordable homes to build a new one — incorporating a modern septic tank into construction and a mortgage ― where she lives: in Vero Lake Estates.
The community has more than 1,300 vacant lots and 3,280 homes with septic tanks, she said, noting she asked Grall to get legislators to push the mandatory hookup to 2035.
Otherwise, can you imagine what kind of supply chain and labor force it will take to get all this work done in three years? And how will all these people pay for it?
Talk about unintended consequences of legislation.
On one hand, lawmakers pass bills to encourage affordable housing — developers are using the law to argue they can build a largely high-end high-rise complex along the lagoon in Fort Pierce ― but they’re making home ownership potentially unaffordable for many people with septic tanks.
Is our Legislature really represented by the party of less regulation, freedom, affordability and fiscal responsibility?
As always, the devil of legislation is in the details. No one likes unfunded mandates, especially when they’re passed down by central governments — in Washington or Tallahassee.
I see no solution to resolving this mandate by 2030.
Florida, local lawmakers must consider mitigation
How can issues be mitigated?
- Legislators should work with local officials to determine how long it will take to hook folks up in the urban services area to the wastewater system. Push back the deadline so all of this can be funded and completed.
- Allow homeowners inside the urban services area to keep their old septic tanks or replace failed ones with old-style ones until sewage service is available. Require modern septic tanks outside the urban services area.
- Local governments should consider moratoriums on, at least, annexations or expansion of existing urban services areas as of Oct. 1, 2026. That would give utilities time to meet the backlog of sewage hookups.
In its press release, Indian River County said commissioners “will include this issue as a priority for the 2027 legislative session and will advocate for financial assistance and a reasonable path toward compliance for affected residents.”
That’s fine, but it kicks the proverbial can down the road, perpetuating residents’ uncertainty. The county should hold more meetings — with Brackett, Grall, Overdorf and other state officials present ― to hear directly from their bosses: you, me and our neighbors.
This column reflects the opinion of Laurence Reisman. Contact him via email at larry.reisman@tcpalm.com, phone at 772-978-2223, Facebook.com/larryreisman or Twitter @LaurenceReisman.
If you are a subscriber, thank you. If not, become a subscriber to get the latest local news on the latest local news on the Treasure Coast.
-
News1 week ago
Trump administration makes another appeal to the Supreme Court to allow mail ballot restrictions
-
Crypto1 week agoBitcoin Price Faces $82K Wall as Weekend Momentum Fizzles
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago‘You Can See Everything’ Review: Elizabeth Holmes Doc From Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim Is Fascinatingly Slippery, Dizzyingly Clever
-
Videos1 week agoCanada retaliatory tariffs loom as Ottawa moves to rename Trump Ave
-
Fitness1 week agoSokoto Police Inspector Dies After Weekly Fitness Exercise – Platform Times
-
News1 week agoTrump again asks Supreme Court to allow USPS plan to restrict mail-in voting
-
Technology1 week agoBoox’s tiny Picco e-reader should land in November
-
Finance1 week agoPlaying the oil endgame: Oil producers and the geopolitics of declining demand
You must be logged in to post a comment Login