Update: A Leon County circuit judge has ordered Florida to rewrite the ballot language for a statewide property tax amendment, ruling that the wording was biased in favor of the measure, according to Florida Realtors. RealtyWire previously reported that a judge was weighing the ballot-language challenge in late July; Monday’s ruling resolves that hearing in favor of the plaintiffs.
Circuit Judge David Frank found that multiple phrases in the ballot language for Amendment 3, formally titled “Save Our Homes From Excessive Property Taxes,” were designed to sway voters rather than inform them. “The use of the term ‘save’ is rhetoric designed to elicit an emotional response and is improper,” Frank wrote in his ruling.
The judge also ordered the removal of several other phrases from the ballot summary, including “benefits Florida taxpayers,” “protecting small businesses,” “ensuring fairness for Florida residents” and “ensuring funding for core services.” Frank additionally found that the summary failed to adequately explain that the amendment could shift control over local property tax spending decisions away from cities and counties and toward the state Legislature. “Voters are entitled to a fair, clear, accurate and non-misleading ballot statement to assist them in making their critical determination,” he wrote.
What the amendment would do
Amendment 3, approved by the Florida Legislature in a June special session, would raise the state’s non-school homestead property tax exemption to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, with the exemption indexed to inflation starting in 2029. School district levies would be unaffected. The measure needs 60% voter approval to pass and is set to appear on the November 2026 ballot.
The legal challenge was brought by a group called Save Our Voters From Misleading Ballot Language, whose members include former state Sen. Jeff Brandes and former state Rep. Al Lawson, along with separate suits from former mayors Michael Davey and Philip Stoddard. Under Florida law, a successful ballot-language challenge triggers a court-ordered rewrite rather than removal of the measure from the ballot.
Public safety groups warn of budget strain
Opposition to the substance of the amendment, separate from the ballot-language fight, has come from public safety organizations. The Florida Sheriffs Association, the State Fraternal Order of Police, the Florida Professional Firefighters and the Florida Fire Chiefs Association have all warned that a significantly larger homestead exemption could strain local budgets for law enforcement, fire protection, emergency medical services and disaster response β services funded substantially through the property tax base the amendment would shrink.
What happens next
If the ruling survives any appeal, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has 10 days to prepare revised ballot language that satisfies the court’s findings. Uthmeier’s office said it was reviewing the decision to determine next steps, including whether to appeal.
The dispute unfolds against a backdrop of broader property-cost relief efforts in Florida real estate: the state has separately seen its share of U.S. property insurance lawsuits nearly halve following 2022 and 2023 legal reforms, part of a wider push by state lawmakers to ease the cost burden on homeowners. Amendment 3 represents the property tax side of that same affordability conversation, and its fate now hinges on ballot language the state has ten days to fix before the fight likely returns to court.
What it means
For Florida homeowners and the real estate industry, the practical stakes of Amendment 3 itself β a larger homestead exemption phased in over two years β are unchanged by this ruling. What has changed is how the measure will be described to the roughly 60% of voters needed to pass it, and the ruling gives opponents a procedural win in a fight over framing that could influence the amendment’s chances in November, even though the substance of the exemption increase was not before the court.
