Florida Amendment 5, Extend "Save Our Homes" Portability Period Amendment (2020)

Florida Amendment 5
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Taxes
Status a Approved
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature
List of Florida measuresAmendment 1Amendment 2Amendment 3Amendment 4Amendment 5Amendment 6Submit

Florida Amendment 5, the Florida Extend "Save Our Homes" Portability Period Amendment, was on the ballot in Florida as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported extending the period during which a person may transfer Save Our Homes benefits to a new homestead property from two years to three years.

A "no" vote opposed extending the period during which a person may transfer Save Our Homes benefits to a new homestead property from two years to three years.

Supermajority requirement: A 60 percent supermajority vote was required for the approval of Amendment 5.

Election results

Florida Amendment 5
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		7,484,104	74.49%
No		2,562,387	25.51%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What did Amendment 5 change?

See also: Constitutional changes

This amendment was designed to extend the period during which a person may transfer "Save Our Homes" benefits to a new homestead property from two years to three years.

Going into the election, if a person moved to a new home, they had two years to transfer their "Save Our Homes" benefit to have the new home assessed "at less than just value." The amendment was designed to increase that time period to three years rather than two.

The Florida Revenue Estimating Conference (REC) determined that approval of the amendment would reduce local property taxes by $1.8 million beginning in fiscal year 2021-22 and would eventually grow to a $10.2 million reduction annually.

What is the "Save Our Homes" benefit?

See also: Background

Homesteads, or primary residences, are subject to property taxes in Florida, which must be assessed at just value, except that every primary residence is eligible for a $25,000 homestead exemption. Another $25,000 homestead exemption is applied to homesteads that have an assessed value of more than $50,000 up to $75,000. The homestead exemption reduces the taxable value of a property.

Amendment 10 of 1992, a citizen initiative known as the "Save Our Homes Amendment", limited homestead property valuation increases for homes receiving a homestead exemption to a maximum of 3% annually. Voters approved the measure in a vote of 54% to 46%. The difference between the just value and the assessed value is referred to as the Save Our Homes (SOH) benefit.

How did Amendment 5 get on the ballot?

See also: Path to the ballot

Amendment 5 was introduced as House Joint Resolution 369 by Florida Sen. Rick Roth (R) on January 14, 2020. The state House approved the amendment unanimously with two Democratic representatives not voting on March 9, 2020. The state Senate approved the amendment unanimously on March 11, 2020.

Text of the measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Amendment 5 is below:

“

Limitations on Homestead Property Tax Assessments; increased portability period to transfer accrued benefit

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for Amendment 5 is below:

“

Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution, effective January 1, 2021, to increase, from 2 years to 3 years, the period of time during which accrued Save-Our-Homes benefits may be transferred from a prior homestead to a new homestead.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article VII, Florida Constitution

The measure amended section 4 of Article VII and create a new section in Article XII of the state constitution. The following underlined text was added, and struck-through text was deleted: Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.

Insert the text of the quote here, without quotation marks.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2020

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The Florida state legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 18, and the FRE is -21. The word count for the ballot title is 13, and the estimated reading time is 3 seconds. The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 19, and the FRE is 28. The word count for the ballot summary is 37, and the estimated reading time is 9 seconds.

Support

The amendment was sponsored by Florida Rep. Rick Roth (R). The measure was passed unanimously in both chambers of the Florida State Legislature.

Supporters

Officials

• Florida State Representative Rick Roth (R)

Organizations

• Americans for Tax Reform

Opposition

Opponents

Organizations

• League of Women Voters of Florida

Arguments

• League of Women Voters of Florida: "[Amendment 5 would] reduce property tax revenue available for funding local schools and other services like police, fire and infrastructure; add tax law to the Florida Constitution making it difficult to alter in response to changing or emergency economic conditions; and limit the ability of local governments to control their budgets based on their county needs."

Media editorials

See also: 2020 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

• Tampa Bay Times Editorial Board: "People who sell their houses covered by a homestead exemption have two years to move into a new house and carry that tax break along with them. Except they really don’t. ... To transfer the Save Our Homes exemption, Florida law says a homeowner must have “received a homestead exemption as of Jan. 1 of either of the two immediately preceding years." So someone could easily miss out by selling a home late in the year and then building a new home that isn’t finished by New Year’s of the year after next -- in other words, after only a year and a few days had passed. ... This simple change means that the Constitution would reflect what voters intended, that homeowners could take their exemption with them for two full years or more -- and not lose it in the space of a year and a few days. Lawmakers should put this sensible change on the ballot, and voters should approve the amendment in November."
• Herald-Tribune Editorial Board: "These two legislative tweaks to Florida's homestead exemption on property tax both extend the favorable treatment to homeowners who put down roots in our state. The homestead exemption cushions the blow for longtime residents whose property values increase while their incomes may not. [...] We recommend voting yes."
• Miami Herald Editorial Board: "Amendment 5’s opponents fret that approval would reduce local property taxes by as much as $10.2 million. That’s shouldn’t be a crippling amount when spread statewide. But for average homeowners who likely need every dollar they can get their hands on, this amendment provides a small but welcome bit of relief. Vote YES on Amendment 5."
• Sun Sentinel Editorial Board: "In 2008, the Legislature and voters allowed homeowners to take to a new home as much as $500,000 of their accumulated assessment benefits. The catch is that they have to establish the new residence and claim homestead exemption within two years of the January 1 date of their last previous exemption. Sometimes the deadline is hard to meet, even with good intentions — as when the construction of a new home takes longer than expected. Pinellas County Property Appraiser Mike Twitty, who’s behind the push for Amendment 5, says that in practice, portability can expire in little more than one year. [...] the two-year window does seem to be too narrow."
• Tampa Bay Times Editorial Board: "If it passes, homeowners will be able to carry up to the same $500,000 in accumulated reduction in their assessment from one home to another, but for up to three years. On Amendment 5, the Times Editorial Board recommends voting yes."
• Palm Beach Post Editorial Board: "Amendments 5 and 6 are two tax-break initiatives. One would give homeowners more time to transfer 'Save Our Home' benefits. The other would aid single surviving spouses of combat-disabled veterans facing higher property taxes when buying new homes. While we typically take a dim view of tax breaks imposed on local governments by self-serving state legislators, these amendments will help a small group of homeowners. And they won’t break the bank doing it."

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not identify any media editorials opposing the amendment. If you are aware of one, please send an email with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Florida ballot measures

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$0.00
Opposition:	$0.00

If you are aware of a committee registered to support or oppose this measure, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls and 2020 ballot measure polls

Poll results regarding the measure are detailed below.

Florida Amendment 5
Poll	Support	Oppose	Unsure/refuse	Margin of error	Sample size
University of North Florida poll 10/1/20 - 10/4/20	67.0%	26.0%	8.0%	+/-1.8	2,928
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Background

Amendment 10 of 1992

See also: Florida Homestead Valuation Limit, Amendment 10 (1992)

Homesteads, or primary residences, are subject to property taxes in Florida, which must be assessed at just value, except that every primary residence is eligible for a $25,000 homestead exemption. Another $25,000 homestead exemption is applied to homesteads that have an assessed value of more than $50,000 up to $75,000. The homestead exemption reduces the taxable value of a property.

Amendment 10 of 1992, a citizen initiative known as the "Save Our Homes Amendment", limited homestead property valuation increases for homes receiving a homestead exemption to a maximum of 3% annually. Voters approved the measure in a vote of 54% to 46%. The difference between the just value and the assessed value is referred to as the Save Our Homes (SOH) benefit.

The Orange County Property Appraiser provided the following explanation of "Save Our Homes" along with the chart below:

“

Prior to SOH, taxable value, upon which taxes were calculated, was equal to market value less Homestead exemption. When the market value increased, so would taxable value and therefore, taxes. The SOH law prohibits this from happening – allowing for the maximum 3% “cap” to protect assessed value, regardless of how high market values may increase. This prevents owners from being taxed out of their homes when the market is escalating. A SOH benefit stays on a Homestead property, providing there are no ownership changes or property improvements. This can provide significant tax savings over time, especially when the market is increasing, as was seen during the real estate boom of 2004-2007. The table below illustrates how significant the tax savings can be with SOH. Let’s assume a home was purchased for $125,000, it qualified for Homestead exemption and the Property Appraiser valued the property at $110,000 for the first year. If property sales in the neighborhood indicate an increase of 15% per year in the market value, the tax benefits due directly to SOH can be seen in the last column. Assuming a tax rate of $20/$1000 of taxable value, the tax savings over 5 years would be $3,153.12.

”

Property tax limits types by state

The following chart shows different property tax limit types in each state. Assessment limits, like the Florida "Save Our Homes" assessment limit, impose a cap on annual property tax increases. Rate limits impose caps on millage rates and levy limits impose caps on property tax revenue.

Property tax initiatives on the 2020 ballot

See also: California Proposition 15, Tax on Commercial and Industrial Properties for Education and Local Government Funding Initiative (2020)

The California Tax on Commercial and Industrial Properties for Education and Local Government Funding Initiative qualified to appear on the 2020 ballot. The initiative was designed to require commercial and industrial properties, except those zoned as commercial agriculture, to be taxed based on their market value, rather than their purchase price. In California, the proposal to assess taxes on commercial and industrial properties at market value, while continuing to assess taxes on residential properties based on purchase price, is known as split roll.

California Proposition 13, the Tax Limitations Initiative, was on the ballot for the election on June 6, 1978. Voters approved Proposition 13, with 65 percent voting for passage. Proposition 13 required that properties be taxed at no more than 1 percent of their full cash value shown on the 1975-1976 assessment rolls and limited annual increases of assessed (taxable) value to the inflation rate or 2 percent, whichever was less. When a property is sold to new owners, however, the property is reassessed at 1 percent of its full cash value at the time of purchase and the limit on increases to assessed value resets.

Tax policies on the ballot in 2020

See also: Taxes on the ballot

In 2020, voters in 14 states voted on 21 ballot measures addressing tax-related policies. Ten of the measures addressed taxes on properties, three were related to income tax rates, two addressed tobacco taxes, one addressed business-related taxes, one addressed sales tax rates, one addressed fees and surcharges, and one was related to tax-increment financing (TIF).

Click Show to read details about the tax-related measures on statewide ballots in 2020.

Tax-related policy ballot measures in 2020

Income Tax a/ot Arizona Proposition 208: The campaign Invest in Education proposed the ballot initiative to enact a 3.50% income tax, in addition to the existing income tax (4.50% in 2020), on income above $250,000 (single filing) or $500,000 (joint filing). Proposition 208 was designed to distribute the revenue from the 3.50% income tax to teacher and classroom support staff salaries, retention programs, and career and technical education programs. a Colorado Proposition 116: In 1987, the state's income tax was changed from graduated rates to a flat rate. Going into 2020, that flat rate was 4.63%. The ballot initiative reduced the rate from 4.63% to 4.55%. d Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment: The Illinois State Legislature proposed this constitutional amendment to allow the state to enact legislation for a graduated income tax. Going into 2020, the state constitution required that the state personal income tax be a flat rate. Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), who advocated for a graduated income tax during his gubernatorial campaign, was providing funds to the campaign backing the amendment. Business-Related Taxes d Alaska Ballot Measure 1: The campaign Vote Yes for Alaska's Fair Share proposed the ballot initiative to increase taxes on oil production fields located in Alaska's North Slope that exceeded certain output minimums. According to Robin Brena, chairperson of Vote Yes for Alaska's Fair Share, three oil production fields—Alpine, Kuparuk, and Prudhoe Bay—met those criteria. BP, Conoco Phillips, ExxonMobil, and Hilcorp Energy funded the campaign to defeat Measure 1. a Nebraska Initiative 431: The initiative was designed to impose an annual tax of 20% on gross gambling revenue of licensed gaming operators; distributing 2.5% of tax revenue to the Compulsive Gamblers Assistance Fund, 2.5% to the General Fund, 70% to the Property Tax Credit Cash Fund, and 25% to the counties where gambling is authorized at licensed racetracks. The initiative was one of three initiatives that together were designed to authorize, regulate, and tax gambling at racetracks in Nebraska. Property-Related Taxes d California Proposition 15: The ballot initiative would have amended Proposition 13 (1978), which required that residential, commercial, and industrial properties are taxed based on their purchase price, with an annual adjustment based on inflation or 2%, whichever was lower. Proposition 15 would have required commercial and industrial properties, except those zoned as commercial agriculture, to be taxed based on their market value. In California, the proposal to assess taxes on commercial and industrial properties at market value, while continuing to assess taxes on residential properties based on the purchase price, is known as split roll. The state fiscal analyst estimated that Proposition 15 would generate between $6.5 billion and $11.5 billion. Proposition 15 would have required that the revenue be allocated to local governments and schools. a California Proposition 19: The state Legislature proposed the constitutional amendment as a compromise with the California Association of Realtors, which had qualified a different ballot initiative. Proposition 19 was designed to allow tax assessments to be transferred from someone's old home to their new home anywhere in the state and increased the number of times that tax assessments can be transferred from one to three for persons over 55 years old or with severe disabilities. Proposition 19 was also designed to require that inherited homes that are not used as principal residences, such as second homes or rentals, be reassessed at market value when transferred. a Colorado Amendment B: The constitutional amendment repealed the Gallagher Amendment (1982), which required a 45%-55% ratio between residential assessment rates and non-residential assessment rates regarding tax revenue. Therefore, Amendment B permitted the Colorado Legislature to define tax assessment limits without reference to the 45%-55% ratio requirement. In Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, New Jersey, and Virginia, voters also decided eight ballot measures related to exemptions, adjustments, and payments: Florida Amendment 5, Florida Amendment 6, Referendum A, Louisiana Amendment 2, Louisiana Amendment 5, Louisiana Amendment 6, New Jersey Question 2, and Virginia Question 2. Sales Tax a Arkansas Issue 1: The ballot measure continued an existing a 0.5% sales tax, with revenue dedicated to roads, highways, and bridges. Going into 2020, the tax was set to expire in 2023. Issue 1 had the support of Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R), and the campaign behind Issue 1 received financial support from Alice and Jim Walton. Tobacco a Colorado Proposition EE: The ballot measure increased the tax rate on cigarettes from 84 cents per pack to $2.64 per pack and the tax rate on tobacco products from 40% of the manufacturer's list price to 62% of the manufacturer's list price. The ballot measure created a tax on nicotine products, such as e-cigarettes, with scheduled increases over seven years to 62% of the manufacturer's list price. Revenue from the tax increases was dedicated to preschool, education, housing, and the General Fund. a Oregon Measure 108: The ballot measure increased the cigarette tax from $1.33 to $3.33 per pack. The ballot measure also taxed e-cigarettes and other nicotine inhalants at a rate of 65% of the wholesale sales price and cigars at 65% of the wholesale sales price (but not to exceed $1.00 per cigar). Measure 108 dedicated revenue from the tax increases to the Oregon Health Authority. Fees a Colorado Proposition 117: In 1992, the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) Amendment defined government-owned firms that provide goods or services for a fee as enterprises. Examples of enterprises include state nursing homes, state lotteries, Colorado Correctional Industries, and College Assist. The ballot measure was designed to require voter approval of laws that create new enterprises should the enterprise's projected or actual revenue from fees and surcharges exceed $100 million within the first five years. TIF a Nebraska Amendment 2: The constitutional amendment increased the repayment period for tax increment financing from 15 to 20 years for areas where more than one-half of properties are designated as extremely blighted.

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Florida Constitution

To put a legislatively referred constitutional amendment before voters, a three-fifths (60%) vote is required in both the Florida State Senate and the Florida House of Representatives.

This amendment was introduced as House Joint Resolution 369 on January 14, 2020. The state House approved the amendment unanimously with two Democratic representatives not voting on March 9, 2020. The state Senate approved the amendment unanimously on March 11, 2020.

Vote in the Florida House of Representatives March 9, 2020
Requirement: Three-fifths (60 percent) vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 72  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	118	0	2
Total percent	98.33%	0.0%	1.67%
Democrat	45	0	2
Republican	73	0	0

Vote in the Florida State Senate March 11, 2020
Requirement: Three-fifths (60 percent) vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 24  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	40	0	0
Total percent	100%	0%	0%
Democrat	17	0	0
Republican	23	0	0

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Florida

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Florida.

How to cast a vote in Florida

The information below covers regular voting policies in the state. Information may have not applied to the election on November 3, 2020, because of temporary changes in response to coronavirus. Click here to read about changes made for the 2020 elections. Poll times In Florida, all polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time. Florida is divided between the Eastern and Central time zones. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote. Registration requirements Check your voter registration status here. To vote in Florida, one must be at least 18 years of age, a citizen of the United States, and a legal resident of Florida and the county in which he or she intends to vote. Pre-registration is available beginning at 16 years of age. Voters may retrieve registration applications at the following locations: Local elections offices Public assistance agencies Disability services agencies Independent living centers Military recruitment offices Public libraries Drivers license office Tax collector's office The office of any entity authorized by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission to issue fishing, hunting, or trapping permits A registration form is also available online. The form can be printed and submitted via mail. Click here to find your county Supervisor of Elections. Automatic registration Florida does not practice automatic voter registration. Online registration See also: Online voter registration Florida has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Voters may also apply for or modify their voter registration status while renewing their driver's license through the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ online renewal system here. Same-day registration Florida does not allow same-day voter registration. Residency requirements To register to vote in Florida, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible. Verification of citizenship See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States Florida does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. According to the state's voter registration application, "it is a 3rd degree felony to submit false information." All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registration The page Voter Information Lookup, run by the Florida Department of State, allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirements Florida requires voters to present photo identification with a signature while voting. The following list of accepted ID was current as of July 2024. Click here for the Florida Secretary of State's page on accepted ID to ensure you have the most current information. Florida driver’s license Florida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles United States passport Debit or credit card Military identification Student identification Retirement center identification Neighborhood association identification Public assistance identification Veteran health identification card issued by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs License to carry a concealed weapon or firearm issued pursuant to s. 790.06 Employee identification card issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the federal government, the state, a county, or a municipality A voter who presents an ID without a signature must show a second form of identification that includes the voter’s signature.

See also

2020 measures

• 2020 ballot measures
• Taxes on the ballot

Florida

• Florida ballot measures
• Florida ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Florida Division of Elections Booklet: Proposed Constitutional Amendments 2020 General Election
• House Joint Resolution 369