Amendment 3: So I Pulled Out My Own Property Tax Bills

What Florida’s proposed property-tax cut would actually mean for one Sarasota homeowner, landlord and Realtor

At a dinner party recently, someone asked me what I thought about Amendment 3, the property-tax amendment Floridians will vote on in November. I gave what was probably a rather unimpressive answer for someone who has been selling real estate in Sarasota for more than two decades: I really hadn’t thought much about it.

Of course I like the idea of lower property taxes. Who doesn’t? But I had also heard that the actual savings for many homeowners might not be nearly as dramatic as the words “property-tax cut” make them sound. So when I got home, I did something very simple. I pulled out our property-tax bills.

We own our Sarasota home, which is homesteaded, and we also own a nearby rental property, which is not. That makes us a pretty useful little case study for Amendment 3. And once I started doing the math, the issue became considerably more interesting.

First, what exactly are we voting on?

Amendment 3 would increase Florida’s homestead exemption for non-school property taxes to $150,000 in 2027 and then $250,000 in 2028, with inflation adjustments thereafter. It would also lower the annual assessment-growth cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%.[1]

The important phrase here is “non-school property taxes.” The amendment does not simply take $250,000 off the value of your house and make all taxes on that amount disappear. School taxes remain. Certain assessments remain. And your savings depend upon your property’s assessed value, which may be very different from its market value.

That’s where my own bill became useful. Our 2025 Sarasota property-tax bill shows an assessed value of $164,283. Our total ad valorem property taxes were $1,466.26, and we had another $935.88 in non-ad valorem assessments. After our early-payment discount, our actual bill was $2,306.05.

Those non-ad valorem charges include things such as fire rescue, sewer, solid waste and stormwater. They don’t simply disappear because the homestead exemption increases. Neither do our school taxes. In fact, when I added up the school-related levies on our bill, they came to about $849 before the early-payment discount.

Using our current assessment and tax rates simply as an illustration, the fully phased-in Amendment 3 would save us roughly $600 a year, or about $50 a month.

Would I like another $500 or $600 in my pocket every year? Absolutely. But I also realized something: before I actually looked at the bill, I didn’t know whether we were talking about $500, $1,500 or several thousand dollars. I suspect I’m not alone.

Then I looked at our rental property

Our rental has a 2025 assessed and taxable value of $313,400. Its ad valorem taxes were $3,613.84, with another $800.17 in non-ad valorem assessments. After our early-payment discount, the bill was $4,237.45.

Because it isn’t our homestead, it doesn’t receive the new $150,000 or $250,000 exemption. Instead, Amendment 3 would reduce the maximum annual increase in its assessed value from 10% to 5%.[1]

That could become valuable to owners of rental properties, second homes and commercial properties during periods of rapidly rising values, but it doesn’t mean thousands of dollars suddenly disappear from our rental’s current tax bill. Again, the reality is more complicated than the headline.

Which led me to another question: Why are we doing this?

Once I understood what Amendment 3 would actually mean to us, I became interested in a question I hadn’t even thought to ask at dinner: Why did the Florida Legislature propose this, and have we done a good enough job explaining to homeowners what it really means?

The case for property-tax relief isn’t difficult to understand. Florida homeowners have watched housing costs, insurance premiums and other expenses rise substantially. Property values have risen too, increasing local property-tax revenues. Governor Ron DeSantis, in calling the special legislative session that produced the proposal, argued that local property-tax collections had nearly doubled over seven years and that Florida homeowners needed relief.[2]

There is a perfectly legitimate argument that homeowners should keep more of their money and that local governments should continually be required to examine whether they are operating efficiently.

But I think voters should understand what the tax reduction actually means on their own bill, rather than simply hearing “$250,000 homestead exemption” and assuming their entire property-tax bill is about to be dramatically reduced.

I don’t think people are stupid. I’m Exhibit A. I’ve been a Realtor since 2002, I own two properties in Sarasota, I look at property taxes regularly, and I hadn’t stopped to calculate it until somebody asked me about it over dinner.

Then there’s the other side of the ledger

Sarasota County has been doing its own math. County officials project that Amendment 3 could reduce county property-tax collections by approximately $46.9 million in fiscal year 2028 and approximately $87.1 million in fiscal year 2029, when the $250,000 exemption would be reflected in county revenues.[3]

At the fully phased-in level, county projections include approximately $68.1 million less for the General Fund, $11.4 million less for EMS, $4.1 million less for environmentally sensitive lands and $1.1 million less for mosquito control, along with other reductions.[3]

Those numbers caught my attention, but they do not mean Sarasota County has decided to cut those services by those amounts. County Administrator Jonathan Lewis specifically explained that his figures illustrated what the financial impact could look like, not a directive to make equivalent cuts to individual departments.[3]

And that’s where I find myself asking questions rather than pretending I know the answers.

Maybe Sarasota County can absorb a significant reduction in property-tax revenue without materially affecting the services residents care about. Maybe there are departments that are overstaffed. Maybe there are programs that have outlived their usefulness. Maybe procurement could be better. Maybe millions of dollars could be eliminated through efficiencies that taxpayers would never notice.

If that’s the case, taxpayers deserve to know that.

But I also don’t want my roughly $50-a-month tax savings to come at the expense of emergency medical services, law enforcement, roads, stormwater infrastructure, environmental protection or other services that contribute to the quality of life we enjoy here.

Those aren’t contradictory positions. I can want government to spend money efficiently and want essential services properly funded. What I don’t yet know is where that balance lies.

And then I found myself staring at the school taxes

A substantial portion of our property-tax bill goes toward public education. We never had children in Sarasota County schools, so it would be very easy for me to look at those taxes and ask: What am I getting for that money?

But I don’t think that’s quite the right question.

I benefit from living in a community with good schools even if I never personally send a child through their doors. Schools educate the future workforce. They influence neighborhoods and property values. They matter enormously to families considering moving to Sarasota. As a Realtor, I’ve seen that firsthand for more than two decades.

That doesn’t mean every education dollar is necessarily spent wisely. Public schools, like every government institution, should be accountable for how they spend taxpayers’ money. But “I don’t personally use it” isn’t the same thing as “it has no value to me.”

The same is true of many public services. I hope I never need an ambulance, the fire department or a sheriff’s deputy responding to my house. But I certainly want them to show up if I do.

So what does my $50 actually buy?

That’s ultimately the question Amendment 3 has left me asking.

Sarasota County estimates that it could eventually collect approximately $87 million less annually in property taxes under the amendment.[3] But there’s an equally important question on the other side: How efficiently is that $87 million currently being spent?

I don’t know yet, and I think both questions deserve answers.

It isn’t enough for opponents of Amendment 3 simply to say government services could suffer. Show us which services. Show us the budgets. Show us what cannot reasonably be cut.

And it isn’t enough for supporters simply to say homeowners are getting a tax cut. Show homeowners what that means on an actual tax bill. Explain what doesn’t change. Explain what happens to school taxes and assessments. Explain what happens to the revenue local governments currently receive.

Then let voters decide whether the trade makes sense.

I’m still not going to tell anyone how to vote. But I’m very glad somebody asked me the question. Before that dinner conversation, Amendment 3 was just another proposed constitutional amendment I would eventually have to read before Election Day. Now I can put my own numbers on it.

Using our current assessment and tax rates as an illustration, our household might eventually save approximately $600 a year on our homesteaded property. Our rental property doesn’t receive that expanded exemption, although it would receive greater protection against rapidly increasing assessments. Meanwhile, Sarasota County projects that the amendment could eventually reduce its annual property-tax collections by approximately $87 million.

Those are two sides of the same transaction.

So I’ve stopped asking the easiest question: Would I like another $500 or $600 a year in my pocket?

Of course I would.

Now I’m asking two harder ones: What does my $50 a month currently buy, and is government spending that $50 wisely?

I don’t think either question should be answered with a slogan. And at least the next time somebody asks me about Amendment 3 over dinner, I’ll have a much better answer.

Sources & Notes

1. Florida Department of State, Amendment 3: “Increased Homestead Exemption; Lower Cap on Increases in Non-Homestead Property Assessments.” Official ballot information and amendment summary.
https://constitutionalinitiatives.dos.fl.gov/Home/InitDetail?account=10&seqnum=110

2. Executive Office of Governor Ron DeSantis, “Governor Ron DeSantis Announces Special Session on Property Tax Relief & Unveils ‘Save Our Homes’ Property Tax Elimination Proposal,” May 27, 2026. This provides the administration’s stated rationale for seeking property-tax reductions, including its figures on the growth of local property-tax collections.
https://flgov.com/eog/news/press/2026/governor-ron-desantis-announces-special-session-property-tax-relief-unveils-save

3. Your Observer, “Sarasota County’s potential Amendment 3 impact exceeds $87 million,” August 25, 2026. Reporting on Sarasota County Administrator Jonathan Lewis’s budget presentation, including projected FY2028 and FY2029 revenue reductions and estimates by county fund.
https://www.yourobserver.com/news/2026/aug/25/sarasota-county-budget-amendment-three/

4. Sarasota County Government, Budget Document Library. Current adopted budgets, preliminary budgets, property-tax allocations and financial-plan documents.
https://www.scgov.net/government/office-of-financial-management/current-budget-documents

5. Florida Department of Revenue, Property Tax Exemptions. Background information on Florida homestead exemptions, Save Our Homes and property-tax assessment rules.
https://floridarevenue.com/property/Pages/Taxpayers_Exemptions.aspx

Author’s note: The approximately $600 annual savings discussed above is an illustration based on our actual 2025 Sarasota County property-tax bill, using the property’s current assessed value and tax rates. It should not be interpreted as a prediction of our 2028 tax bill. Assessed values, millage rates and other charges may change.