TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Opposition to Florida’s proposed property tax overhaul is growing, with a new statewide coalition joining the campaign against Amendment 3 while a major organized effort to persuade voters to support the measure has yet to emerge.
Floridians for Shared Prosperity has launched its “Save Our Services — No on 3” campaign, becoming the latest group to organize against the constitutional amendment headed to voters in November.
The coalition describes itself as a statewide alliance of grassroots organizations, community leaders and advocates. Its campaign argues Amendment 3 would shift tax burdens and threaten local government services.
The new effort adds to an increasingly organized opposition movement as the amendment faces separate political and legal challenges.
Amendment 3 would dramatically expand homestead exemption
The Florida Legislature approved CS/HJR 1-F during a June special session, placing the proposed constitutional amendment before voters.
If approved, the measure would increase the homestead exemption for non-school property taxes to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028.
The proposal would also reduce the annual assessment growth cap on certain non-homestead property from 10% to 5% and limit how counties and municipalities may use certain property tax revenue.
School district property taxes are excluded from the expanded homestead exemption.
The amendment would require approval from at least 60% of voters and, if adopted, would take effect Jan. 1, 2027.
Supporters argue Florida homeowners need substantial property tax relief after years of rising home values and increasing local government tax collections.
DeSantis has repeatedly criticized the growth of local property tax revenue and argued that local governments should reduce spending and focus on core responsibilities.
Third opposition effort joins Amendment 3 fight
Floridians for Shared Prosperity is the latest organized group campaigning against the measure.
The group is chaired by Holly Bullard of the Florida Policy Institute and is campaigning under the slogan “Save Our Services — No on 3.”
Its website calls Amendment 3 a “devastating tax shift onto working Floridians and seniors” and argues the proposal could reduce funding available for local services.
Vote No on 3 and 3 Degrees Florida have also mobilized against the amendment.
The emergence of multiple opposition campaigns gives opponents an increasingly visible political operation heading into the fall campaign.
No comparable statewide “Yes on 3” campaign has yet emerged as a dominant public advocate for the amendment.
DeSantis supports measure but won’t campaign for it
The lack of an organized pro-amendment campaign is particularly notable because DeSantis spent more than a year pushing for major property tax relief.
But the governor has said he does not intend to formally campaign for the Legislature’s final proposal.
DeSantis has said he supports the amendment and plans to vote for it, but argued lawmakers did not go as far as he wanted in reducing property taxes.
The governor’s decision leaves the amendment without the aggressive campaign support he has brought to other major political battles during his time in office.
That could give opposition groups more room to shape the debate over the measure’s potential impact on local government budgets.
Lawsuits challenge Amendment 3 ballot language
Opponents are also challenging the amendment in court.
Former Republican state Sen. Jeff Brandes and former Democratic U.S. Rep. Al Lawson filed a lawsuit arguing the ballot language is misleading and politically slanted.
Their lawsuit contends the Amendment 3 ballot language is misleading and uses political messaging rather than providing voters with a neutral explanation of the proposed constitutional changes.
The Brandes-Lawson case is another legal challenge targeting the ballot language as courts face growing pressure to determine whether voters are receiving an accurate description of the measure.
The lawsuits could become a major factor in the amendment’s future before ballots are cast in November.
Local governments warn of billions in lost revenue
The financial impact of Amendment 3 has become the central argument against the proposal.
State economic estimates cited in recent analyses project local government property tax revenue losses approaching $5 billion in fiscal year 2027-28, rising to about $8.8 billion in 2028-29 and $10.8 billion by 2030-31.
The Florida Association of Counties has warned that the effects would vary significantly across the state depending on each county’s tax base and reliance on homestead property revenue. Its county impact map shows substantial projected levy reductions across Florida.
Critics argue governments could be forced to reduce services, increase fees or assessments, or seek additional financial support from Tallahassee.
Supporters reject those warnings as alarmist and argue local governments have allowed spending and property tax collections to grow too quickly.
Amendment 3 heads toward a high-stakes November vote
The increasingly organized opposition sets up a major test for a proposal built around an idea that has long held political appeal in Florida: lowering property taxes.
But constitutional amendments face a high threshold.
Amendment 3 must receive at least 60% support statewide to become part of the Florida Constitution.
With multiple opposition groups now campaigning against the measure, court challenges moving forward and DeSantis declining to serve as its chief campaign messenger, the political battle over Amendment 3 is becoming increasingly one-sided organizationally.
As voters follow Florida Elections 2026, whether they ultimately focus on the promise of lower property taxes or warnings about local government services could determine the fate of one of the state’s most consequential ballot measures. Amendment 3 needs at least 60% support to pass.
