3 questions Florida leaders didn’t answer before punting property-tax cuts to voters | Opinion

Florida legislators really stuck it to voters this time. Lawmakers rushed to approve a November property-tax amendment that Gov. Ron DeSantis wanted, and now voters are left with the hard work of figuring out what this complicated measure actually will do.

That’s wildly unfair. Lawmakers should have stayed in Tallahassee this year to debate the measure and air out its pluses and minuses — but they didn’t. DeSantis shouldn’t have vetoed money to study the issue last year when there was still time to weigh its far-reaching consequences — but he did. That leaves voters doing the job their representatives failed to do: sorting this out.

Floridians are clamoring for relief from the state’s high cost of living, and slashing taxes — by raising the homestead exemption to $150,000 next year and $250,000 the year after — could save many homeowners thousands of dollars a year. But voters must figure out the full consequences of their vote and answer many questions that are beginning to surface. Here are three:

Is the five-year residency requirement unconstitutional? This is the waiting period that DeSantis wanted so voters wouldn’t be turned off by the idea of residents from other states flocking to Florida to take advantage of tax cuts.

Floridians, especially South Floridians, are wary of another population boom like the one during the pandemic that resulted in wealthy newcomers pushing up property values — and taxes and insurance. As DeSantis said last month, “I don’t want Floridians to go and see this on the ballot and say, ‘Oh man, I really would like the property tax relief, but I don’t want the entire state of Illinois to empty out into Florida or wherever because of this.’”

But there are legal considerations, as DeSantis — a Harvard-trained lawyer — no doubt knew. The Miami Herald reported this week the Florida Supreme Court, more than 40 years ago, struck down a similar five-year waiting period for new residents to benefit from a property tax break. The grounds? Previous U.S. Supreme Court decisions ruling that states can’t discriminate against their residents by limiting which ones can receive state benefits.

This issue needs to be sorted out before November, before Floridians cast a single vote.

Would the reduction in property taxes hurt bond ratings for cities and counties? Local officials have been making ominous noises about what a sudden drop in property tax revenue could do to bond ratings. Now there’s word from three national credit rating agencies, according to the Sun Sentinel, that the measure could impact local governments’ ability to borrow money.

Bonds are often used to pay for big improvements such as sewers or roads.

Fitch Ratings said the tax exemptions could increase fiscal uncertainty unless municipalities “take offsetting action.” In other words, cities and counties could increase fees or shift the tax burden to non-homesteaded properties. That means more fees and taxes on rental apartments, businesses and other properties.

What does that mean for Floridians? Municipalities could be looking at a double whammy: a drop in property tax revenue and a reduction in their ability to borrow money for long-term improvements.

Then there’s the big question, one that should have been analyzed by the state before now: How much would this reduce municipal services?

Some figures are finally coming out, two weeks after lawmakers voted. State economists projected on Friday that cities, counties and special taxing districts statewide would lose nearly $5 billion the first year and nearly $12 billion by the fifth year. In Miami-Dade County, estimates for 2027 are roughly $386 million.

The amendment requires property taxes to be spent only on “core services” such as public safety and schools, but there would be less money to go around. How would that affect Jackson Health, Miami-Dade’s safety net hospital system? Or the Children’s Trust, created to help the lives of children and families?

It’s a grave responsibility to impose such a drastic change to our tax structure. DeSantis shouldn’t have pushed this unvetted idea on the Legislature. And legislators shouldn’t have foisted it off on taxpayers.