Pensacola Mayor and Congressman Both Raise Concerns as Florida Property Tax Amendment Heads to Voters

Pensacola, FL (NewsRadio 92.3) -- Florida's property tax constitutional amendment is heading to November's ballot after clearing the legislature Tuesday — and two of Northwest Florida's most prominent voices are raising serious concerns about how it was done and what it will mean locally.

What the Amendment Does

The measure raises the homestead exemption from the current 50,000 dollars to 150,000 in 2027 and 250,000 in 2028 — for non-school property taxes only. School district levies are carved out. Statewide local governments are projected to lose 4.6 billion dollars annually initially rising to 8.4 billion. The amendment also lowers the cap on annual assessment increases for non-homestead properties and limits property tax spending to core services. Florida voters will decide in November — 60 percent approval required.

Reeves: Half-Baked, No Analysis, Will Impact Services

Pensacola Mayor D.C. Reeves puts the city's loss at 6.2 million dollars annually on a recurring basis — with no legal mechanism to replace it. He says 72 percent of Pensacola homes would pay zero property tax under a 250,000 dollar exemption because Save Our Homes has held assessed values well below market value for decades. Sixty percent of the city's general fund goes directly to police and fire.

Reeves is particularly frustrated by the process — noting the governor vetoed a million dollar study of the proposal's financial impacts last year and then rushed it through a three-day special session. The city completed both a forensic audit and a DOJ audit in the last six months and neither found anything close to the cuts needed to absorb the loss. Reeves says the belt-tightening argument ignores the real inflation-driven costs of running a city — firefighter pay, police salaries, construction materials, and infrastructure all cost dramatically more than they did even five years ago.

He also raised a legal concern that has not been publicly addressed — the city's CRA has bonded against future property tax revenue and nobody has explained how that works if the revenue disappears.

Patronis: Concerned About First Responders, Sunset Would Have Been Smarter

Congressman Jimmy Patronis — who lived through a property tax special session in 2009 — says he supports the concept of homeowner relief but is concerned about unintended consequences for first responders and law enforcement. Patronis says a sunset provision giving governments time to adjust and giving voters a chance to revisit the decision after seeing real results would have been a more responsible approach. He noted that Democratic Senator Carlos Guillermo Smith proposed exactly that during the special session and it was voted down without discussion. Patronis says the amendment will generate significant debate between now and November as more details emerge about its real-world consequences.

What Happens Next

The amendment appears on the November 2026 general election ballot. It requires 60 percent voter approval to take effect. Even if passed the earliest any changes take effect is the 2027 tax year.