Florida Amendment 1 2018
 

What does amendment 1 in Florida's 2018 election really mean?

Increased Homestead property Tax exemption.

Proposing an amendment to increase homestead exemption by exempting the assessed evaluation of homestead property greater than $100,000 and up to $125,000 for all levies other than school district levies.

This is basically the way it will read on the Ballot.

So, we all would like to see taxes reduced by exemption. This would suggest that everyone will say yes on the ballot.

But, towns and cities have a budget of dollars that translate to millage rates against taxable property. If taxable property value goes down, the millage rate goes up. So it would seem that your taxes would remain the same. Except, who gets the exemption? Only Florida residents? Only people with property assessed between $100,000 and $125,000?. What is the exemption Dollar Value?


Perhaps I am not in touch with reality, but my concern is that the amendment as described on the ballot is too vague to vote yes.

Not against or for but looking for clarification. My inclination is to vote nay because of lack of clarification.

Amendment 1 will essentially allow a total of $75,000 in deductions for homes valued at $125,000 or more. Amendment 2 takes away the 10% per year assessment cap on non homestead homes. As a resident what do I have to lose if voting yes on Amendment 1 and no on amendment 2 ? Is not the worst that can happen is the towns raise the millage rate to make up for the loss - which still puts me even. By voting no for amendment 2 perhaps that will be some of the offset required for amendment 1 if housing assessments keep rising rapidly. Yes I feel bad for non residents however they knew the rules going in (akin to covenants when you purchased you house). Just like no state income tax that we enjoy, it relies on tourism to fund the budget. Owning a house without residency is a form of tourism. Is it not?

///

I am reposting a link from another thread that does a good job describing the various amendments without bias

2018 Florida Constitutional Amendments | Be Ready to Vote

This was an ENORMOUS help. Thank you very much!!!

Good post - Illustrates revenue lost by a yes vote for amendment 1 is offset by a no vote for amendment 2.

Thanks to Taltarzac725 for the original post

Thank you for taking the time to do this. I have been studying these amendments since they came out in the paper and had absolutely no idea what most of them meant! Which, unfortunately, goes to show that people will just check off one or the other without knowing what they are voting for.

Does anyone remember an old phrase "double Dutch" - whoever wrote these amendments was proficient in that.

I have spend some time studying the amendments and I think that it is all very confusing. Even the explanations are not clear. And then the bundled amendments, through several of those may not be counted. I would like to see most taken off the ballot, be rewritten, and then vote.

Many of these amendments are already in state law and don't need to be in the constitution.

Yes that is the part that makes it confusing.

I would love to have a one-on-one conversation with the genius who decided that the issues of vaping and off-shore drilling could be bundled into one inclusive item.

Seriously that is just ridiculous.

Another informative site.
Florida 2018 ballot measures - Ballotpedia

The Florida Constitution Revision Commission (CRC) voted 33-3 to place Amendment 9, which is composed of two constitutional amendments, on the ballot for the election. The 37-member commission, which meets every 20 years to propose changes to the Florida Constitution, is unique amongst the states. Florida is the only state with a commission empowered to refer constitutional amendments to the ballot. Republicans, including legislative leaders and Gov. Rick Scott, appointed 33 of the commissioners. Attorney General Pam Bondi (R) also served on the commission. Jorge Labarga, chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court, appointed the three remaining members.
As Amendment 9 is a package of two constitutional amendments, voters cannot approve one and reject the other. Voting “yes” on the ballot measure is a vote to pass the two constitutional amendments. Voting “no” on the ballot measure is a vote to reject the two constitutional amendments.

This practice is common in politics.

Rider (legislation - Wikipedia)

Great you use Orwell quotes on your posts...nice.....two of my favorites...

"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

And....

"We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it."

Thank you. That also adds insite.

As the original poster for this topic, I appreciate the comments.

My summary of what I have read from posts is that amendment 1 incrementally increases the homestead exemption up to $75,000 from $50,000. The increase starts at a home valued at $100,000 and stops at $125,000.

Amendment 2 affects non homestead properties only. Currently, they are protected from annual increases exceeding 10% . A yes vote would keep protection at 10% while a no vote eliminates protection.


So assuming that our local government expenses are necessary, the additional exemption on homestead properties will reduce needed revenue at current tax millage rates and will require tax increases on some properties. Amendment 2 clears the path to unlimited tax increases on non homestead properties. (isn't the 10% limit bad enough).


Another way to get the added revenues to increase the millage rate on homestead eligible properties. That would cause taxes to increase on all homes assessed at less than $100,000. I am a conservative but it seems to me that would be wrong to increase the tax on those least able to afford it so I can get a decrease. This is caused by the stepping stone practice on the Homestead exemptions. Why wasn't the new exemption initiated at a lower evaluation? ie $75,000 to $100,000. I understand that would be even more revenue lost but it illustrates the possible lack of equity on this amendment.


Easy to say yes for a benefit that favors me. Easy to say yes to pass the higher taxes to someone else.


Just another perspective.

That was exactly my thought.

I am going with straight "NO" votes. There is too much hanky panky mumbo jumbo special interest smoke and mirror giberishness involved.

Thanks Bogie, the more explanation the better. I have to admit that I gave up on one or two of the amendments and followed the dictates of the LofWV.

[QUOTE=mtdjed;1593052]My summary of what I have read from posts is that amendment 1 incrementally increases the homestead exemption up to $75,000 from $50,000. The increase starts at a home valued at $100,000 and stops at $125,000.

I think the way this works is a resident will get the full $25000 exemption for all houses over $125000. The $100K to $125K range is how it phases in. Example if your house is assessed at $112500 (halfway in the range) the exemption would be half of the $25000 or $12500. Not meant to be only houses within the range.

You are making a good point. This is the state constitution. Why are there so many items that are essentially laws or regulations. One of the items on the ballot is to eliminate dog racing. Is there an amendment in the constitution now that allows dog racing ? If it is in the constitution I have to ask myself why ? Why is is so important as to be in the constitution Vs being a state law? FYI I believe the Florida constitution already has 129 amendments. For reference the US constitution has 27 amendments.

Ok...I am convinced that amendment 1 in good for most of Florida's people BUT have you ready Amendment 4.......giving Felonds their right to vote back??