Increasing the Homestead Exemption

[Aristocles]

According to the Jacksonville Daily Record, the governor's plan to increase the homestead exemption will have a negative impact on downtown revitalization. Here's the article URL: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2026/jun/03/deegan-property-tax-vote-would-squelch-city-funding-for-downtown-revitalization/
Any thoughts on how accurate this is?

[thelakelander]

It will be a negative on just about anything being funded at the local level. The big projects relying on local public incentives will fizzle out when that financial faucet is turned off but the impact will be felt far outside of downtown.

Every neighborhood will take a hit as well. Its all simple math, once you remove the politics from the discussion. You can't squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Eliminating a major revenue source, also eliminates or severely reduces what it currently funds.

Ultimately, we get what we pay for. The best way to be a slum and be raggedy is to not invest in your well being. My prediction is most people refuse to read or count, so we'll FAFO and then get nickel and dimed in other ways to make up for the budgeting gaps and frustration that follows.

[Aristocles]

Councilman Carlucci said there were other ways to make up the funding (fees), but held off on proposing anything definite because he wants to see how the voters treat the idea. Also, I'm assuming the UF Jacksonville campus in La Villa, being publicly funded, isn't going to be impacted by this -?

I have an idea where they can cut spending to protect downtown revitalization credits: nix the U2C.

[Charles Hunter]

Councilman Carlucci said there were other ways to make up the funding (fees), but held off on proposing anything definite because he wants to see how the voters treat the idea. Also, I'm assuming the UF Jacksonville campus in La Villa, being publicly funded, isn't going to be impacted by this -?

I have an idea where they can cut spending to protect downtown revitalization credits: nix the U2C.

Incentives to UF might be affected. But, if you mean the UF doesn't pay property tax, so it won't be affected by the 'savings'.

Defunding the U2C won't counteract any losses from the property tax, as the U2C is funded from the Sales Tax.

[jaxlongtimer]

Eliminating the property tax will result in massive fees everywhere.  Government services are not going to be tolerated to shrink, especially public safety, parks and recreation, environment, garbage and cleanups, road and sidewalk maintenance, etc.

Expect sales tax, permit fees, park fees, parking fees, occupational license and other business fees, gas taxes, etc to mushroom.  Also, real estate taxes on businesses and rental properties that would continue on.  New fees and taxes will arise to replace the lost revenue too.  Unfortunately, most of this will be regressive, hitting the poor the most heavily.

We already have a cap on residential property tax increases of 3% or inflation, whichever is lower, plus numerous exemptions.  The best would be to exempt the first $100,000 or other amount of ALL residential living units including rental properties so renters don't take a hit either.  Heck, go to exempting $250,000 or more, but don't eliminate the tax entirely.  After all, residents are the main beneficiaries of City services so they should be willing to pay for what they get within reason.

DeSantis proposal is on par with Curry trying to sell JEA.  One hit wonders leaving a trail of problems for others to clean up.  So selfish.

[thelakelander]

Yeah, the U2C is a different pot of money and even if it is cut, that pot can't be used on random downtown revitalization projects and gimmicks.

As jaxlongtimer just stated and CM Carlucci hinted, expect getting hit with massive fees elsewhere.

At the end of the day, the person who actually needs help with affordability issues is going to get hit the hardest.

[jcjohnpaint]

So much I'd like to say, but... too much to say. These politicians! It will be everyone else's problem when that asshole is running for president, again!

[Aristocles]

Yeah, the U2C is a different pot of money and even if it is cut, that pot can't be used on random downtown revitalization projects and gimmicks.

As jaxlongtimer just stated and CM Carlucci hinted, expect getting hit with massive fees elsewhere.

At the end of the day, the person who actually needs help with affordability issues is going to get hit the hardest.

How about using the sales tax for whatever it can be legally used for to fund essential services (and raising it to make up for the loss in property tax revenue if needed, along with fee increases if we hit a cap on the sales tax - I think we can go up to 8 - 8.5%), and giving the property tax incentives for development just like we do now? In other words, just replace the lost property tax revenue with new sales tax or fee revenue to cover budget items?

And yes, absolutely the increased homestead exemption will hurt those who can afford it least. I'm thinking in particular of renters. Only homestead property gets the exemption, so owners of rental properties don't qualify. To make up for the losses from the increased exemption, local governments could put rental property owners in the bullseye for increased property taxes - and these owners will pass those costs along to tenants with higher rents.

I'm thinking, as a strategy to defeat this thing, get all renters to vote against it. They're about a third of Florida's population, and as a constitutional amendment it needs 60% to pass. That puts it pretty close. Also it needs to be stressed that this, though it looks like a tax cut, really isn't - it's just a change in the style of taxation. Six or one half dozen. We need governments to protect our rights, but governments cost money - and that money has to come from somewhere.

Also listening to the governor talking about wealthy foreigners and tourists paying the taxes instead of Florida homeowners, isn't particularly good for Jax. For Miami, Palm Beach, Orlando, Sarasota and Naples maybe, but not Jax. Jax isn't a hotspot for wealthy foreigners and tourists unlike those other places, so while their local governments can get rich from foreigners and tourists, it'll be hard for Jax to tap into that. We'll have to get the money some other way.

I'm a homeowner and pay property taxes, have a homestead exemption too, and want tax cuts. I'd be all for raising the homestead exemption modestly, to 60-70 thousand for relief from increasing property valuations, and other perks like further reductions for seniors, etc. But $250K??? Crazy 

[Charles Hunter]

According to the Jax Daily Record article (linked above), if passed, the exemption increase "could eliminate more than $300 million in revenue for the city by fiscal year 2029, according to City Council auditor projections."

From the Florida Office of Economic and Demographic Research 2025 report, I found estimated revenue from one percent sales tax in Duval, and the sales tax ("surtax") authority still available.

1% sales surtax produced an estimted $258.8 million in FY2025.

There are four surtaxes available to be levied in Duval County:
Charter County or Regional Transit Surtax - up to 1.0% - Duval levies 0.5%
Local Government Infrastructure Surtax - up to 1.0% - Duval levies 0.5%
Two specialized taxes not levied in Duval:
Indigent Care and Trauma Center Surtax - up to 0.5%
Pension Liability Surtax - up to 0.5%
For a total of 1% levied, and 2% still available.

Now, I don't know what the budget, or costs, or needs, for Indigent Care and Pension Liability are, but there is $129.4 Million available for each.
And, going to the max on the Infrastructure Surtax would also add $129.4 Million.

We might be able to cover the first-year loss, but what about in subsequent years?

Observation I saw somewhere:
It is part of the MAGA goal, going back to Pres. Reagan and Grover Norquist, who said in a  2001 interview on NPR, "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."
The amendment referendum is probably "red meat" to draw MAGAts to the polls in November.

[jaxlongtimer]

I'm a homeowner and pay property taxes, have a homestead exemption too, and want tax cuts. I'd be all for raising the homestead exemption modestly, to 60-70 thousand for relief from increasing property valuations, and other perks like further reductions for seniors, etc. But $250K??? Crazy

I agree on not wanting to go to a $250K exemption.  I threw that out there to mitigate any surge in voters leaning toward approving the DeSantis plan.

In reality, with the escalation in housing prices over the last few years, even with a $250K exemption, mathematically, it might not be as financially damaging given an average house today starts at $400K or more in most parts of Florida.  At $400K with a $250K exemption, it leaves $150k in taxable value.  If that house sold for $200K 10 years ago with a $50K exemption, the taxable value would also have been $150K.  Of course, adjusting for inflation, if the millage rate remains fixed, the taxable value does need to increase over time. The question then, is how much to tweak things to cover that.

I would only add that I believe higher priced homes have increased faster in value than lower priced ones so the above example might be even more favorable to a $250K exemption on the low end. Another possibility is tiered tax rates like the Federal income tax system. Higher values pay at increasingly higher rates to offset lowered rates for cheaper homes. Property taxes tend to be progressive vs. regressive (which fees, sales taxes, gas taxes, etc. are) which should be the aim of most taxes other than those designed for social engineering (e.g. alcohol and cigarette taxes).

Just thinking that maybe property taxes for elders could be tied to Social Security increases as they are the ones most squeezed if on fixed incomes.  Could further limit to only those living in a house for decades that is rapidly appreciating. Maybe only those owning a house for at least 20 consecutive years or more which would block out the wealthy retirees from other states that just showed up yesterday at the Villages and are the cause for all that expensive new infrastructure needed to support population growth  .

[Tacachale]

This will be disastrous for core services and life in Jacksonville, but positively deadly for smaller rural counties. There simply isn't enough room in local budgets to make cuts this serious without it really hurting the citizens. It's a terrible sign Tallahassee doesn't get that.

[Aristocles]

Actually, I'm feeling a lot better now - because what you folks are saying is making me think Deegan and friends can find ways of making up the funding. Of course I'd like to hear what the real estate wonks like Sifakis and Moll have to say about all this but they use mosquito philosophy for challenges: if God doesn't give you an opening, you make one. So I'm confident they'll figure something out also. It's true, Tallahassee is showing there's a lot they don't get. Nevertheless, this obstacle can be gotten around.
Even if Jax had to drop the incentives I still think downtown revitalization would happen for the most part anyway, although maybe more slowly than it is now. In Raleigh-Durham, where my dad lives, the boom occurred first in outlying areas while bypassing the downtowns. Now, however, the downtowns have caught up. I remember downtown Durham was a pimple on the butt of a black hole at the end of the universe somewhere, but now there are 30 story condos going up there. It really depends on the economic health of the area overall. And Jax, although it has always been a growing metro area, was always short of booming - until now. That may be the reason, ultimately, that the downtown revitalization is now finally for real.

[Aristocles]

I'm wondering: is the proposed downtown Publix eligible for any funding from the state or federal governments because it's the only full service supermarket in a large area that a lot of people consider a "food desert"?

[Tacachale]

Actually, I'm feeling a lot better now - because what you folks are saying is making me think Deegan and friends can find ways of making up the funding. Of course I'd like to hear what the real estate wonks like Sifakis and Moll have to say about all this but they use mosquito philosophy for challenges: if God doesn't give you an opening, you make one. So I'm confident they'll figure something out also. It's true, Tallahassee is showing there's a lot they don't get. Nevertheless, this obstacle can be gotten around.
Even if Jax had to drop the incentives I still think downtown revitalization would happen for the most part anyway, although maybe more slowly than it is now. In Raleigh-Durham, where my dad lives, the boom occurred first in outlying areas while bypassing the downtowns. Now, however, the downtowns have caught up. I remember downtown Durham was a pimple on the butt of a black hole at the end of the universe somewhere, but now there are 30 story condos going up there. It really depends on the economic health of the area overall. And Jax, although it has always been a growing metro area, was always short of booming - until now. That may be the reason, ultimately, that the downtown revitalization is now finally for real.

Not to scare you, but there's no making up a $300 million hole without cutting services substantially. And it has to be recurring funding - you can't plug the gap by scaling back on one-time dollars like an economic incentive. The only way to avoid it is to vote the tax down.

[Ken_FSU]

If this passes, I would seriously consider leaving the city, and the state. There comes a point where you start to feel complicit sticking around. Smarter people than me have already pointed out the obvious in this thread - this "tax savings" would be deeply regressive, and the fees and cuts that would have to be enacted to make up for the shortfall would decimate the city's lower classes who we've already been failing for decades. Downtown revitalization is a first-world problem that should be 50th on our list of concerns with a cut this deep. Parks, libraries, public health, public transit, social services, police & fire, and countless other recurring services would be neutered. And at the same time, hikes in sales taxes, garbage fees, vehicle registrations, and all the other things would disproportionately hit the city's disadvantaged. Everyone wants to complain about public welfare, but it's never going to go away if we keep stacking the cards against those at the bottom.