Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Florida Amendment 1, Property Taxation and Assessment Amendment (January 2008)
| Florida Amendment 1 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Property and Taxes |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Legislatively referred constitutional amendment |
Origin |
Florida Amendment 1 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in Florida on January 29, 2008. It was approved.
A “yes” vote supported amending exemptions and benefits based on homestead property, providing an exemption on tangible personal property, and limiting assessment increase on certain non-homestead real property. |
A “no” vote opposed amending exemptions and benefits based on homestead property, providing an exemption on tangible personal property, and limiting assessment increase on certain non-homestead real property. |
Election results
|
Florida Amendment 1 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
2,667,543 | 64.08% | ||
| No | 1,495,270 | 35.92% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Amendment 1 was as follows:
| “ | This revision proposes changes to the State Constitution relating to property taxation. With respect to homestead property, this revision: (1) increases the homestead exemption except for school district taxes and (2) allows homestead property owners to transfer up to $500,000 of their Save-Our-Homes benefits to their next homestead. With respect to nonhomestead property, this revision (3) provides a $25,000 exemption for tangible personal property and (4) limits assessment increases for specified nonhomestead real property except for school district taxes. In more detail, this revision: (1) Increases the homestead exemption by exempting the assessed value between $50,000 and $75,000. This exemption does not apply to school district taxes. (2) Provides for the transfer of accumulated Save-Our-Homes benefits. Homestead property owners will be able to transfer their Save-Our-Homes benefit to a new homestead within 1 year and not more than 2 years after relinquishing their previous homestead; except, if this revision is approved by the electors in January of 2008 and if the new homestead is established on January 1, 2008, the previous homestead must have been relinquished in 2007. If the new homestead has a higher just value than the previous one, the accumulated benefit can be transferred; if the new homestead has a lower just value, the amount of benefit transferred will be reduced. The transferred benefit may not exceed $500,000. This provision applies to all taxes. (3) Authorizes an exemption from property taxes of $25,000 of assessed value of tangible personal property. This provision applies to all taxes. (4) Limits the assessment increases for specified nonhomestead real property to 10 percent each year. Property will be assessed at just value following an improvement, as defined by general law, and may be assessed at just value following a change of ownership or control if provided by general law. This limitation does not apply to school district taxes. This limitation is repealed effective January 1, 2019, unless renewed by a vote of the electors in the general election held in 2018. Further, this revision: a. Repeals obsolete language on the homestead exemption when it was less than $25,000 and did not apply uniformly to property taxes levied by all local governments. b. Provides for homestead exemptions to be repealed if a future constitutional amendment provides for assessment of homesteads "at less than just value" rather than as currently provided "at a specified percentage" of just value. c. Schedules the changes to take effect upon approval by the electors and operate retroactively to January 1, 2008, if approved in a special election held on January 29, 2008, or to take effect January 1, 2009, if approved in the general election held in November of 2008. The limitation on annual assessment increases for specified real property shall first apply to the 2009 tax roll if this revision is approved in a special election held on January 29, 2008, or shall first apply to the 2010 tax roll if this revision is approved in the general election held in November of 2008. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Support
Save Our Homes Portability, Inc. was the group sponsoring Florida Amendment One.
Florida Governor Charlie Crist believed that this amendment would stop residents from the "locked-in" effect which prevents homeowners or empty-nesters from moving into smaller homes as their needs or lifestyles change.[1]
Florida State House Speaker Marco Rubio also backed the measure, saying that the state legislature had not done enough to cut down on property taxes after Gov. Crist promised during the most recent election campaign that property taxes would "drop like a rock."[2][3] He promoted the Florida Cut Property Taxes Now (2008) initiative, saying it will bring real relief to Florida.
Opposition
Teachers and unions generally opposed the measure. The League of Women Voters and Florida Tax Watch opposed the first amendment for Save Our Homes on the grounds that it created inequities in how properties were taxed.[4] Florida Tax Watch also believed that the measure was "probably unconstitutional" and would certainly meet litigation on those grounds if the voters approve it.[5]
Ballot title called confusing
While the proposed amendment itself came to 15 pages of text, a 498-word summary is what voters saw when they went to the polls on January 28. Both proponents and opponents are concerned that voters will be unsure about what they are voting on. Dominic Calabro of Florida Tax Watch said:
Since we only vote on the ballot title and summary, it's absolutely essential that it is clear, in layman's language, so you have a comfort level and really understand it because you're changing your basic rights and freedoms under the constitution. We don't think it's very clear.[6]
Media editorial positions
Support
The Fernando Beach News Leader says that while the current property tax system has flaws, the amendment is better than nothing and urges a "yes" vote.[7]
Opposition
The Miami Herald urges a "no" vote, saying that while property tax relief matters, this amendment leaves Florida's "creaky, inefficient and archaic tax system" in place.[8]
Other
The local NBC news took a different take on the recommendation to point out that if it was a simple majority the legislators wouldn't be sweating about their initiative, but instead because of their own recommendation to increase it to a super majority their initiative is likely not to pass.[9]
Lawsuits
Preemptive lawsuit
Three new Florida residents filed a class action lawsuit in Leon County on November 21, 2007 asking a judge to invalidate both the original Florida Save Our Homes property tax cap, and also to invalidate 2008's Florida Amendment One—if it passes—on the grounds that the newer amendment worsens the inequities built into the original property tax cap.[10][11]
Walter Hellerstein, a professor from the University of Georgia, argued that the portability provision of the proposed amendment discriminates against those who do not own homes in Florida—whether because they have yet to own a home or because they live outside the state. The tax advantages only belonged to those who sell a house in Florida.
Hellerstein believed that the fact that Amendment One provides benefits to current Florida homeowners, and no one else, could be interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to be an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce and the right of people to travel between states.[12]
Florida Governor Charlie Crist disagreed with the claims in the class action lawsuit and also with Hellerstein's legal analysis. Crist remarked, "We're changing the constitution. How can it be more constitutional?"[13]
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the Florida Constitution
A 60% vote is required during one legislative session for the Florida State Legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. That amounts to a minimum of 51 votes in the Florida House of Representatives and 18 votes in the Florida State Senate, assuming no vacancies. Amendments do not require the governor's signature to be referred to the ballot. Amendments on the ballot must be approved by 60% of voters to pass.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Amendment will bring needed relief to taxpayers Guest Opinion: Burt Saunders, Florida Rep of Lee and Collier counties
- ↑ Rubio gets behind tax reform drive, Tallahassee.com, Dec. 3, 2007
- ↑ Super-sized savings? Property tax cut may not mean big bucks for everyone, Sun Sentinel, June 17, 2007
- ↑ Tax amendment proposal would only exacerbate inequities South Florida Sun Sentinel, January 3, 2008
- ↑ Florida TaxWatch: Amendment One will do more harm than good Jacksonville Business Journal, January 11, 2008
- ↑ South Florida Sun-Sentinel: "Confused about property tax amendment? You're not alone," Jan. 23, 2008
- ↑ Vote Yes on Amendment 1 (dead link)
- ↑ Florida voters should say No to Amendment One, demand better tax relief Miami Herald, January 20, 2008
- ↑ Amendment One May Be Lesson For Supporters, NBC news, Jan. 26, 2008
- ↑ Miami Herald: "Florida newcomers' lawsuit targets Save Our Homes," Jan. 27, 2008 (dead link)
- ↑ United Press International: "Lawsuit: Fla. tax cap discriminatory," Jan. 27, 2008
- ↑ Orlando Sentinel: "Save Our Homes portability in Florida poses risks," Jan. 13, 2008
- ↑ Miami Herald, Jan. 27, 2008
 |
State of Florida Tallahassee (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
