House property tax proposals fizzle without Senate interest

After more than a year of discussion, months of special committee meetings and no shortage of calls for action from Gov. Ron DeSantis, House lawmakers came up with seven proposed constitutional amendments — and multiple proposed statutory changes — to reduce or eliminate property taxes in Florida.

None passed. And in the meantime, two South Florida municipalities have taken steps to provide relief to some of their most financially vulnerable residents.

In mid-October, following brainstorming sessions by an ad hoc committee in the lower chamber, House Speaker Daniel Perez announced a suite of property tax measures of varying impact.

The most extreme (HJR 201), by Rep. Kevin Steele, aimed to eliminate non-school, non-police property taxes outright, beginning on New Year’s Day, 2027.

Another, more narrowly targeted proposal (HJR 205) by Rep. Juan Porras would have provided narrowly targeted relief, exempting only homesteaded residents over 65. It was similar to 2023 legislation the House passed, but the Senate ignored, and local programs initiated recently by the cities of Hialeah and Miami Lakes.

There was a measure (HJR 209) by Rep. Demi Busatta that would have tied property taxes to homeowners’ insurance, granting an additional $100,000 in non-school exemptions to those who maintain coverage.

Rep. Toby Overdorf, who delivered a farewell speech on the House floor Wednesday, proffered a bill to nix the cap on portability of Save Our Homes (SOH) benefits, allowing homeowners to transfer them to a new primary residence, even when the replacement home is of lesser value.

Sen. Ana Maria Rodriguez and Rep. Tom Fabricio filed similar bills in January that barely advanced.

Other, non-amendment measures were filed too, including a bill (HB 215) by Rep. Jon Albert to slow the assessed value growth of non-school homestead levies and a trio of proposals by Rep. Ryan Chamberlin, who helped to spur the current conversation in 2024, when he filed legislation to study replacing property taxes with a “consumption tax.”

In response to the House’s flurry of legislative action, DeSantis expressed sour disapproval and Senate President Ben Albritton articulated trepidation. The Governor described the House’s fleet of options as confusing and insufficient.

“They’re all milquetoast,” DeSantis said. “People want to be bold.”

Albritton, meanwhile, insisted the upper chamber was “still measuring,” but was cooler on the idea of making sweeping, likely irreversible changes to how localities can generate revenue.

“We’ve got to be thoughtful,” he said.

The House was ultimately alone in advancing something: HJR 203, a proposed constitutional amendment by Rep. Monique Miller to phase out all non-school, non-emergency homestead taxes over 10 years. It was sold by its GOP supporters who pushed the measure to passage in February as a more measured alternative to HJR 201, as it would allow counties and cities to adjust to a massive change over time while also delivering homeowners immediate relief.

But the bill encountered significant opposition. Studies by the Florida League of Cities found that the change would slash municipal property tax revenues to such an extreme degree that the budget gaps would cripple core services.

Without state replacement revenue, researchers found, cities would likely face millage hikes of up to 70%, weakened bond ratings, and widening disparities in local service levels across Florida.

Another study found that 116 municipalities — including relatively big cities like Tampa, St. Petersburg, Fort Lauderdale, Pembroke Pines and Hollywood — would not generate enough general revenue to cover their 2024 public safety expenditures.

Rep. Robin Bartleman, a Democrat, was particularly outspoken against HJR 203, warning its carve-outs for public safety, while well-intended, would essentially create a “ceiling and a floor” for police and fire rescue funding, since counties and cities would likely not spend any more than a minimum on them because of how little they’d have for other vital services and maintenance.

She said the many unfunded mandates the Legislature has passed in recent years has fiscally overburdened localities, which are already dealing with inflation-driven cost increases, and the HJR 203 would squeeze them from the other side.

“You cannot continue to increase expenditures for these counties and cities and decrease their revenue,” she said. “That’s what we continuously do.”

The consternation, at least for now, proved all for naught as HJR 203 languished unheard in the Senate through Sine Die.

But it could come back alongside other proposals in a Special Session, one of potentially several, that has been floated for months.

Stay tuned.