Thank you for this detailed explanation and unlike the governors page….providing actual local tax revenue figures, broader tax revenue statistics and most importantly examples of the potential negative impacts. I say potential however the likelihood they occur are almost guaranteed so the word potential may be a poor choice of words.
This explanation unlike the governors hype provides the negative impacts born from the decision - not just the happy tax refund scenario that gets a headline and makes people start to mentally salivate about “keeping their money”
Thank you for, once again, pointing out that Tallahassee has forgotten the famous theme of conservative government - keep it small and keep it local. This current administration has done just the opposite over and over again (need we say SB180?) and is getting to be more like California than the Florida we once showed off as the best place to be. Sadly, most people won't read this, won't hear the facts that Tallahassee intentionally avoided showing the people. Facts that, I suggest, most of those who voted in favor of this proposal didn't know or understand, either. The next few months are going to be ugly, I fear!
Thank you for this article. I don't recall the people of Florida asking for no property taxes, we need property insurance reform. DeSantis is not helping us with this, when a policy or law is rushed through, it needs to be questioned.
I am writing to you today not just as a constituent, but as a senior citizen on a fixed income who has lived, worked, and paid real estate taxes in Manatee County for over 40 years. I have read your arguments regarding local budgets and the upcoming November ballot measure, and frankly, your perspective completely overlooks the crushing reality facing long-term residents like me.
Your article paints a picture of a local government under siege by tax cuts, but from where I sit, it is the fixed-income seniors who are under siege by out-of-control local spending. You argue that cutting revenues will force a choice between public safety and "quality of life" services. But let’s look at the actual reality of growth in Manatee County.
For years, we have been told that the massive, sprawling residential growth in our county would expand the tax base and pay for itself. Instead, our taxes have gone up considerably over the last few years. My modest home is valued under $150,000, and even with the existing homestead exemption, my tax bill has spiraled out of control. When local government revenues surge by hundreds of millions of dollars due to skyrocketing property valuations and thousands of new residents, yet our individual tax bills still increase, it is a failure of local budgeting, not a revenue problem. Growth was supposed to subsidize our community; instead, legacy residents are subsidizing the infrastructure strain caused by rapid development.
You note with alarm that the Sheriff’s budget alone has ballooned to over $200 million and debt service sits at $44 million. You use these figures to justify why you cannot give us a break. But these bloated numbers prove our point: the county has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. If public safety and legacy debt are consuming the entire budget, it is because local leaders have consistently prioritized funding massive expansion over protecting the vulnerable citizens who built this community. Why must seniors on fixed incomes choose between buying groceries, paying for prescription medications, or being taxed out of the homes they have owned for four decades just so the county can fund pickleball courts, boat ramps, and developers' infrastructure?
Furthermore, your defense of the status quo ignores the very nature of a fixed income. When inflation hits, my income does not adjust. When the county refuses to rein in its millage rates to offset ballooning property values, you are actively choosing to price seniors out of their homes. This is precisely why the proposed constitutional amendment to expand the homestead exemption is not a "manufactured campaign slogan"—it is a vital financial lifeline.
The argument that expanding exemptions will lead to a "state-mandated defunding" is a scare tactic. The state legislature's proposal explicitly protects school funding and requires local governments to focus remaining property tax revenues on core needs like public safety, infrastructure, and emergency services. It forces the county to do what every household on a fixed income must do every single day: prioritize essential needs and cut out the fluff.
Seniors who have invested 40 years of sweat equity and tax dollars into Manatee County deserve relief. We have paid our dues, built this community, and funded its past. We should not be used as an endless piggy bank to fund unchecked growth and unchecked county spending.
I urge you to reconsider your opposition to this critical relief. If local government refuses to provide a meaningful break to its most vulnerable homeowners, then we will gladly take the matter to the ballot box this November to force the fiscal discipline that local leadership refuses to exercise.
And by the way, I still get hammered for four separate tax bills from the School District alone and I don’t use any of those resources.
Valid points that resonate with rational and logical people. Sadly, I keep hearing the argument that raising the hotel tax an additional penny will make up the difference.
First, an extra penny of our hotel tax would be $6 million. This proposal removed $150 million in 2028. Second, the state restricts our use of hotel taxes so we can’t use any of it on general fund services.
The state controls any adjustment to tax, we have to transmit everything to the state for approval even if we would have control of the money. All they have to do is deny it. The majority of counties have nothing pre existing to fall back on and will default on their loans and become financially insolvent. This will trigger a financial emergency Section 218.503, Florida Statutes. At that point the state takes control legally with no questions asked. I don't know what would happen by 2030 if the majority of the state has eliminated local control but my guess would be it would lead to a vote to declare all counties irresponsible because the majority are. I'm extremely alarmed.
Spot on, this is a long term power play to consolidate power to Tallahassee.
You tell it like it is sir. We appreciate it!
Thank you for this detailed explanation and unlike the governors page….providing actual local tax revenue figures, broader tax revenue statistics and most importantly examples of the potential negative impacts. I say potential however the likelihood they occur are almost guaranteed so the word potential may be a poor choice of words.
This explanation unlike the governors hype provides the negative impacts born from the decision - not just the happy tax refund scenario that gets a headline and makes people start to mentally salivate about “keeping their money”
Well said, Mr. Commissioner. I wrote about something similar in a recent substack essay,
Thank you for, once again, pointing out that Tallahassee has forgotten the famous theme of conservative government - keep it small and keep it local. This current administration has done just the opposite over and over again (need we say SB180?) and is getting to be more like California than the Florida we once showed off as the best place to be. Sadly, most people won't read this, won't hear the facts that Tallahassee intentionally avoided showing the people. Facts that, I suggest, most of those who voted in favor of this proposal didn't know or understand, either. The next few months are going to be ugly, I fear!
Thank you for this article. I don't recall the people of Florida asking for no property taxes, we need property insurance reform. DeSantis is not helping us with this, when a policy or law is rushed through, it needs to be questioned.
Thank you!!! Great information.
This article echoes a lot of the concerns I've been having.
I am writing to you today not just as a constituent, but as a senior citizen on a fixed income who has lived, worked, and paid real estate taxes in Manatee County for over 40 years. I have read your arguments regarding local budgets and the upcoming November ballot measure, and frankly, your perspective completely overlooks the crushing reality facing long-term residents like me.
Your article paints a picture of a local government under siege by tax cuts, but from where I sit, it is the fixed-income seniors who are under siege by out-of-control local spending. You argue that cutting revenues will force a choice between public safety and "quality of life" services. But let’s look at the actual reality of growth in Manatee County.
For years, we have been told that the massive, sprawling residential growth in our county would expand the tax base and pay for itself. Instead, our taxes have gone up considerably over the last few years. My modest home is valued under $150,000, and even with the existing homestead exemption, my tax bill has spiraled out of control. When local government revenues surge by hundreds of millions of dollars due to skyrocketing property valuations and thousands of new residents, yet our individual tax bills still increase, it is a failure of local budgeting, not a revenue problem. Growth was supposed to subsidize our community; instead, legacy residents are subsidizing the infrastructure strain caused by rapid development.
You note with alarm that the Sheriff’s budget alone has ballooned to over $200 million and debt service sits at $44 million. You use these figures to justify why you cannot give us a break. But these bloated numbers prove our point: the county has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. If public safety and legacy debt are consuming the entire budget, it is because local leaders have consistently prioritized funding massive expansion over protecting the vulnerable citizens who built this community. Why must seniors on fixed incomes choose between buying groceries, paying for prescription medications, or being taxed out of the homes they have owned for four decades just so the county can fund pickleball courts, boat ramps, and developers' infrastructure?
Furthermore, your defense of the status quo ignores the very nature of a fixed income. When inflation hits, my income does not adjust. When the county refuses to rein in its millage rates to offset ballooning property values, you are actively choosing to price seniors out of their homes. This is precisely why the proposed constitutional amendment to expand the homestead exemption is not a "manufactured campaign slogan"—it is a vital financial lifeline.
The argument that expanding exemptions will lead to a "state-mandated defunding" is a scare tactic. The state legislature's proposal explicitly protects school funding and requires local governments to focus remaining property tax revenues on core needs like public safety, infrastructure, and emergency services. It forces the county to do what every household on a fixed income must do every single day: prioritize essential needs and cut out the fluff.
Seniors who have invested 40 years of sweat equity and tax dollars into Manatee County deserve relief. We have paid our dues, built this community, and funded its past. We should not be used as an endless piggy bank to fund unchecked growth and unchecked county spending.
I urge you to reconsider your opposition to this critical relief. If local government refuses to provide a meaningful break to its most vulnerable homeowners, then we will gladly take the matter to the ballot box this November to force the fiscal discipline that local leadership refuses to exercise.
And by the way, I still get hammered for four separate tax bills from the School District alone and I don’t use any of those resources.
For the record
Valid points that resonate with rational and logical people. Sadly, I keep hearing the argument that raising the hotel tax an additional penny will make up the difference.
First, an extra penny of our hotel tax would be $6 million. This proposal removed $150 million in 2028. Second, the state restricts our use of hotel taxes so we can’t use any of it on general fund services.
The state controls any adjustment to tax, we have to transmit everything to the state for approval even if we would have control of the money. All they have to do is deny it. The majority of counties have nothing pre existing to fall back on and will default on their loans and become financially insolvent. This will trigger a financial emergency Section 218.503, Florida Statutes. At that point the state takes control legally with no questions asked. I don't know what would happen by 2030 if the majority of the state has eliminated local control but my guess would be it would lead to a vote to declare all counties irresponsible because the majority are. I'm extremely alarmed.