Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Seminole County staff say proposed homestead-exemption amendment could cut $119 million; board plans public education and department reviews
Summary
County staff told commissioners that the proposed constitutional Amendment 3 (increasing the homestead exemption) could reduce Seminole County ad valorem revenue by about $119 million (roughly 27%), exposing public safety and other services to large cuts; commissioners directed staff to run department-level impact analyses and expand public information.
County officials warned Seminole County commissioners that a proposed state constitutional amendment on the November ballot could meaningfully reduce county property-tax revenue and force difficult tradeoffs in public services.
Tim Jeks, the county's budget director, outlined the ballot measure's two main changes: a larger homestead exemption (rising to $150,000 next year and $250,000 in 2028 under the amendment text) and a reduced annual growth cap for non‑homestead property values. Using the county's numbers, staff estimated Seminole County would collect about $426 million in ad valorem revenue in FY27 and that the amendment would cut roughly $119 million (about 27%) from that total. Jeks said about $116 million of the reduction would come from the higher homestead exemption and $3 million from the non‑homestead cap change.
Staff presented a chart showing how the county's ad valorem revenue supports public safety, transportation, parks and other services and noted that 72% of ad valorem funds currently support public-safety activities (law enforcement, corrections, fire/EMS and dispatch). The presentation projected a $74 million cut to public safety under an across-the-board 20% reduction scenario and called out a roughly $31 million reduction to the county's fire fund (a 23% cut in the scenario) as particularly consequential.
The county manager said staff will convene leadership and department heads to evaluate department-level impacts and identify mitigation options; staff also pledged an informational campaign for residents that includes FAQs, website materials, brochures and videos. The property appraiser, who spoke during the session, told commissioners there is no single online calculator that can accurately project every resident's change because of differing assumptions, statutory limits and turnover in homestead status.
Commissioners pressed for dollar-level graphics that are easier for residents to use and asked county legal staff to specify which services are statutorily required and therefore harder to reduce. Several commissioners emphasized the need to show residents how the amendment's math translates into specific cuts or alternative revenue choices. The board asked staff to return in late August/September with department-level briefings (fire, sheriff, public works, parks, community services and elections) and to provide a follow-up analysis before the fall election.
During the public-comment period, Leslie Grubel of Longwood, appearing for the League of Women Voters, urged voters not to approve the amendment and described it as an overreach that would weaken local control and reduce county services.
The presentation did not include final policy decisions; rather, commissioners directed staff to prepare departmental impact reports, refine public communications and return with clearer dollar-level visualizations.
