Transcript Highlights:

• Article 6, Section 18A, counties may frame, adopt, and amend a..." "...charter for their own government
• Louis does not give constitutional veto to other counties that want to fix their form of governance.
• Also, the governance exclusion, most notably, you've excluded the Jackson County Executive and any county
• And I think the people of Jackson County should decide how they want to be governed.
• government than the gentleman from Benton County.

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Article 6, Section 18A, counties may frame, adopt, and amend a charter for their own government by vote
• Louis does not give constitutional veto to other counties that want to fix their form of governance.
• Also, the governance exclusion, most notably, you've excluded the Jackson County Executive and any county
• And I think the people of Jackson County should decide how they want to be governed.
• government than the gentleman from Benton County.

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and unanimously voted Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 914 and House Committee Substitute for House Bill 3467 due pass. HB 3467 was amended before passage; the sponsor said the changes clarified that any tax authority would apply only if a tax change is actually approved, corrected county/city references, and fixed ballot-language issues involving sheltered workshops. Members generally praised the sponsor’s work, though one member noted concern about shifting more burden to sales taxes. The main public hearing was on H.J.R. 107, which would place before voters a constitutional question allowing Jackson County to consider separating Kansas City from the county or otherwise altering its charter government. Sponsor Rep. Steinmeyer argued the measure was about voter sovereignty and local control, citing prior Jackson County ballot measures and saying entrenched local power had blocked reform. Supporters echoed that Jackson County residents were frustrated with representation, taxes, and county governance. Opponents, including Kansas City and chamber representatives, argued the proposal was unnecessary, costly, procedurally unclear, and potentially destabilizing; several members also questioned the 10-year resubmission clause, the exclusion of local officials from the transition process, and the statewide fiscal impact. No action was taken on the resolution during the hearing. The committee then heard Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 975, dealing with ambulance district mergers and community paramedic/mobile integrated health services. Senator Black and supporters said the bill would help struggling rural ambulance districts merge without disrupting billing, contracts, or service, and would expand community paramedic care for low-acuity patients and hospital-at-home models. Several witnesses from ambulance and fire districts described successful programs and said the bill would improve patient care and help rural areas. Opponents, including ambulance and fire district representatives, supported the merger provisions but objected to Senate-added language they said would let districts provide community paramedic services across jurisdictional lines without memorandums of understanding, undermining local control and negotiating power. The hearing ended with testimony still ongoing after a recess for floor session; no vote on SB 975 was reported in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• My understanding is it's through the property appraiser or the local government. County? Right.
• So, you know, going into this, is that something that you looked into with the county governments?
• The bill also provides that a member of a county or municipal governing body who violates the prohibition
• And so when we look at DEI as it relates to county governments, this bill would... ...tie their hands
• over 70% of Orange County voters who voted for those protections to get government out of there.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 1134, which would extend and clarify the use of qualified private providers and computer-based tools in the building permit and inspection process for residential solar energy systems. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long delays in solar permitting and make the process faster and cheaper; Senator Pizzo questioned whether the problem was limited to specific local governments, and a late-filed amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted. After brief testimony from an industry representative supporting the measure, the committee reported the bill favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no. Next, the committee considered SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats and new development. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would bar fee collection if the local government fails to act within five business days. County representatives said they wanted to keep working on the bill and raised concerns about the private-provider language and the short deadlines, while several senators discussed whether the process should be handled earlier on the front end. The committee then reported the bill favorably. The committee also passed SB 1738 on transportation concurrency, which would let counties that previously opted out of concurrency opt back in by maintaining current levels of service. SB 1080, a local government land regulation bill, was described as a measure to speed development approvals by setting stricter timelines, limiting repeated information requests, and imposing penalties for noncompliance; local-government testimony opposed it as a loss of local control, while builders supported it. After debate, SB 1080 was reported favorably. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members discussed possible adjustments to avoid burdening county budget negotiations. Finally, the committee took up SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, policies, programs, offices, or contracts, and would expose officials to misfeasance/malfeasance claims and local governments to lawsuits. The sponsor said the amendment removed retroactive language, delayed the effective date, and added definitions and contract-certification requirements, but many senators and public speakers argued the bill was overbroad, vague, and would chill local efforts such as Black History Month, women-owned business programs, minority contracting, and community outreach. Supporters said it would ensure merit-based government action and consistency with state standards. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition testimony and debate over its scope and potential conflict with federal and state law.

Transcript Highlights:

• of a county government; that also includes your property appraiser, tax collector, your supervisor of
• It provides support in most counties, and it will vary, but for all functions of government.
• We actually started my public government career back in 2005 in Gadsden County with Mr. Suggs.
• The local option sales tax is totally controlled by the county in 52 counties.
• And it's going to differ county to county about how those gas taxes are allocated. By the county.

Committee: Senate Community Affairs

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs convened with a quorum and took up SB 308, a bill related to the Florida Museum of Black History. The bill would establish a Florida Museum of Black History Board of Directors and direct it to work with a supporting nonprofit foundation, while also requiring the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners to provide administrative assistance and staffing until planning, design, and engineering are complete. With no appearance forms or debate, the committee voted the bill favorably. The remainder of the meeting was an informational briefing from the Florida Association of Counties and the Florida League of Cities on local government budgeting practices. Presenters explained how counties and cities develop budgets, the legal framework governing property taxes and other revenues, the distinction between restricted and unrestricted funds, and the role of constitutional officers, public safety, debt, pensions, and capital planning. They emphasized that most local revenues are restricted by law, that general funds are the main discretionary source, and that local governments must balance annual budgets while meeting mandated service levels. The presenters also discussed how property taxes, fees, local option taxes, and state-shared revenues support local services, and they highlighted the fiscal pressures created by public safety, emergency management, infrastructure, and retirement costs. Members asked questions about the share of local revenue that is unrestricted and the implications for any proposal to eliminate property taxes. The presenters responded that only a portion of county and municipal revenue is flexible, with much of it dedicated to specific purposes by law.

Transcript Highlights:

• Government representatives, one at the city level and one at the county level, to provide insight on
• And so I think because cities and counties are the most transparent forms of government in the state,
• When you look at a county government and the things that we do, and we talked a little bit about personnel
• When you look at a county government and the things that we do, and we talked a little bit about personnel
• part of the county budget, which I'm a local government guy.

Summary: The Select Committee on Property Taxes heard first from city representatives through the Florida League of Cities, who argued that property taxes are a stable local revenue source that funds core services such as police, fire, parks, public works, and stormwater work. Casey Cook emphasized that cities are optional governments with widely different tax bases and service levels, that exemptions shift the burden to fewer taxpayers, and that transparency already exists through TRIM notices, public budgets, and local hearings. Sarah Campbell of Fernandina Beach, T. Michael Stavris of Winter Haven, and Stephen O’Kee of Port St. Lucie described their budget processes, the share of general-fund revenue coming from property taxes, reserve policies, debt and capital planning, and the impact of inflation, minimum wage increases, and personnel costs. They all said local governments need predictable revenue and that any property tax changes would require careful consideration of replacement funding or service reductions. Members questioned the city panel about whether homebuyers are clearly informed about city versus county taxes and services, the role of HOAs, how many lobbyists cities employ, reserve levels, average salaries, and whether utility revenues are used only for utility purposes. The panel said TRIM notices, realtor listings, and city websites provide tax information; HOAs generally do not provide emergency services; lobbyists help local governments track Tallahassee legislation; reserves vary by city and fund; and utility revenues are generally restricted, though some cities use limited transfers. Members also asked about revenue replacement if ad valorem taxes were reduced or eliminated, and the panel said options would likely include user fees, service cuts, or other local revenue shifts. The chair also asked about public safety consolidation, and the response was that such decisions are local and may shift costs rather than create true savings. The committee then heard from county representatives after an overview by the Florida Association of Counties’ Davin Suggs, who framed counties as shared partners with the state and emphasized the gap between rising market values and the shrinking share of taxable value after exemptions and assessment limits. He said counties face a mismatch between revenue based on taxable value and expenses driven by real-world costs, and noted that most counties either held millage steady or lowered it without reaching rollback rates. He also highlighted that property taxes are only one part of county revenue, with charges for services and intergovernmental revenue often larger in some counties, and that public safety at the county level includes more than law enforcement, such as EMS, emergency management, inspections, and corrections. Deborah Manzo of Okeechobee County described a fiscally constrained rural county with limited staff, a county-supported airport, heavy reliance on property taxes for the general fund, and major cost pressures from inflation, insurance, retirement, and state and federal mandates. She said the county lowered millage slightly over recent years but still depends on multiple revenue sources and special assessments, and she flagged Medicaid, medical examiner costs, and possible firefighter workweek changes as significant concerns. Bay County Administrator Mark McQueen said his county’s budget is shaped by Hurricane Michael recovery, non-discretionary obligations, and rapid growth; he described ongoing FEMA reimbursement delays, substantial borrowing to cover disaster costs, and continuing interest expenses while the county waits for reimbursement. The county panel was still in progress when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cities and counties, including Santa Cruz County, Santa Barbara County, the cities of Santa Maria, Santa
• SB 1400 modernizes the Health and Safety Code to provide Alameda County with additional governance options
• As noted, SB 1400 will modernize AHS governance and give the Alameda County Board of Supervisors more
• to put this on the onus on the government, the cities or the counties, who had already told this person
• The county government has conducted perfunctory internal reviews, and the sheriff-coroner has failed

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• governments at a very high level, the role of counties and property taxes, some important property tax
• </c> introducing kind of just County introducing kind of just County governments<00:02:14.280><c> at<
• of county government.
• :50.400><c> of</c> secret that County government is one of secret that County government is one of the
• government we're also layers of County government we're also we're<00:02:54.920><c> very</c><00:02:55.120

Committee: House Taxes

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So County A in red is a metro county, and the red box is the contributor located in that county.
• so County A in red is is a counties so County A in red is is a Metro<00:50:54.920><c> County</c><00:
• in County B.
• </c> Beyond County borders in Sterns County Beyond County borders in Sterns County for<01:10:09.640><
• of government, the more these things are going to crop up, and the more cities and counties are going

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• governments to adopt by resolution or county board of commissioners to adopt by resolution how the tourism
• governments to adopt by resolution or county board of commissioners to adopt adopt by resolution or
• And really think the government, the local government, the local government, tourism and whatever our
• the counties to designate these funds by city, or is this county-wide?
• This would devastate small counties like Nassau County.

Summary: The State Affairs Committee met with a quorum present and took up several measures. It first considered HJR 1215, an ad valorem tax exemption for farmers and agricultural lands. The committee adopted an amendment making technical changes and removing a requirement that implementing language be set by general law. Several agricultural and business groups supported the measure, and it was reported favorably by a vote of 22-4. The committee then heard CS for CS for HB 1169, a bill revising water management district planning, budgeting, reporting, and business practices, including restrictions on lobbyist expenditures and additional budget disclosures. An amendment removing the statutory section on management review teams was adopted after debate over whether those teams were still useful. The bill was reported favorably 19-8-7. Members then debated PCS for CS for HB 1221, which would redirect local option tourist development tax revenues toward property tax relief and give counties more control over certain local taxes. County, tourism, beach preservation, and hospitality groups opposed the bill, warning it would weaken tourism marketing, beach renourishment, and local services, while supporters argued it would provide property tax relief and accountability. The bill passed 14-12. Finally, the committee considered HB 4079, which would dissolve the town of White Springs. The sponsor and supporters described years of mismanagement, intimidation, and illegal conduct, while opponents argued dissolution was an extreme step and pointed to the ongoing election and other remedies. After extensive public testimony and debate, the bill was reported favorably 19-6. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• As mentioned, the problem of Riverside County is not... ...in the county.
• However, having the county investigate and audit its own system that governs in-custody deaths is a bit
• County.
• We reviewed multiple governance models, including whether the Alameda County Board of Supervisors should
• SB 1400 would modernize Alameda Health System's governance and give the Alameda County Board of Supervisors

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of housing, local government, and governance bills, beginning without a quorum and proceeding as a subcommittee until quorum was established. SB 1003, by Senator Grayson, would create an Infrastructure Partnership Financing Program to help local governments and developers fund infill housing infrastructure; supporters said infrastructure costs often prevent projects from penciling out, while a senator questioned whether the state would actually fund the new program. The bill passed the committee 3-1 on call. The committee also adopted a consent calendar covering SB 1169, SB 1086, SB 1126, and SB 1439-1442, also 3-1 on call. SB 1014 would require local jurisdictions to provide early good-faith estimates of on-site and off-site improvements and bar undisclosed later requirements; Habitat for Humanity, SPUR, and housing advocates supported the bill, while the City of San Mateo opposed the preliminary-application timing. Members raised questions about the 30-business-day deadline and coordination with other agencies. The bill passed 4-2 on call. SB 1036, which would require fee credits for prior site uses when redeveloping a site with similar prior uses, drew broad support and no opposition and passed 5-0 on call. SB 1145, a district bill for the Concord Naval Weapons Station reuse project, would streamline CEQA and federal base-closure review for qualifying projects; labor, the city, and county supported it, while housing legal advocates opposed unless amended over Surplus Land Act concerns. The bill passed 6-0 on call after discussion of affordability and enforceability amendments. The committee then heard SB 908, which would streamline permits for energy-code-compliant residential window replacements and limit city/HOA design restrictions; supporters said it would let homeowners and affordable housing providers lower energy costs, while local government groups opposed, citing local control and design standards. It passed 3-1 on call. SB 1172, the Local Tax Savings Act, would add guardrails and transparency to local tax-sharing consultant agreements; the City of Shafter and League of California Cities supported it, and it passed 4-0 on call. SB 1379 would separate the Riverside County Sheriff-Coroner offices and create an independent medical examiner; supporters cited in-custody death rates and public trust concerns, while the sheriff’s association and county representatives opposed on cost and local control grounds. The bill passed 4-1 on call. Finally, SB 1283 would expand streamlined permitting for EV charging stations to include canopies and on-site energy storage systems; EV industry supporters said the bill updates outdated rules, while cities and counties warned about safety review, liability, and litigation risk. Members discussed battery storage safety and local permitting authority, and the bill passed 4-0 on call. The committee also heard SB 1414, which would create an independent redistricting commission for San Bernardino County; supporters argued it would improve transparency and reduce political self-interest, while the county opposed due to its existing advisory commission and estimated implementation costs. The transcript cuts off during questioning on SB 1414, with no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• So homeowners, county governments, city governments know that each homestead has a slow growth pattern
• County governments will also know that their tax rolls will stay about the same for 3-year periods so
• It also shows the county government what the property tax rolls will be for 3 years.
• I think it allows county governments to do one percent a year, but it's only based on a third-year assessment
• But the original bill talks about how city and county governments cannot prohibit or cut funding for

Transcript Highlights:

• However, having the county investigate and audit its own system that governs in-custody deaths is a bit
• We reviewed multiple governance models, including whether the Alameda County Board of Supervisors should
• We reviewed multiple governance models, including whether the Alameda County Board of Supervisors should
• SB 1400 would modernize Alameda Health System's governance and give the Alameda County Board of Supervisors
• SB 1400 would modernize Alameda Health System's governance and give the Alameda County Board of Supervisors

Committee: Senate Local Government

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• government.
• So I wanted to ask, did any counties or local governments request for you to file this amendment?
• I wanted to ask, did any counties or local governments request for you to file this amendment?
• We talked about Orange County and Seminole County.
• government...

Summary: The Senate convened with opening prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several member introductions of guests and staff. The chamber then took up returning messages from the House and acted on several bills, including transportation facility designations (SB 628), affordable housing/Live Local Act changes (HB 1389), utility services (HB 1451), education (HB 1279 substituted for SB 7038), data centers (SB 484), and land use/development regulations (SB 208/HB 399). Several other measures were temporarily postponed, including education, emergency services, and environmental rule ratification bills. On SB 628, the Senate concurred in the House amendment and passed the bill 31-4. On the affordable housing bill, senators discussed the fourth iteration of the Live Local Act, including a new provision allowing certain affordable housing on religious institution property, removal of accessory dwelling unit language, and changes to tax exemption and expiration provisions; the Senate concurred in the House amendment and passed the bill 35-0. On the utility services bill, the House amendment shortened the surcharge phase-out timeline and advanced reporting dates; the Senate concurred and passed the bill 30-6. The education package was substituted with the House companion, amended to include agreed-upon provisions on student health and safety, early learning, math, virtual instruction, career and technical education, school choice, accountability, tuition protections, and financial aid, and passed 36-1. The data centers bill drew extensive debate over transparency and ratepayer protections. Senators questioned the removal of the Senate’s nondisclosure agreement prohibition, the 12-month confidentiality period, and whether costs could be shifted to residential and commercial customers. Supporters said the amendment strengthened ratepayer protections and maintained local land-use authority, while critics objected to the loss of transparency and the possibility of local NDAs. After debate, the Senate concurred in the House amendment and passed the bill 31-6. The land use and development bill generated the most contentious discussion. Amendments addressed a Fontainebleau/Miami Beach resort water park issue, a sunset provision, and a major rural boundary/property rights proposal affecting counties such as Orange and Seminole. Senators debated whether the rural boundary language protected property rights or undermined local planning and environmental safeguards, with concerns raised about takings, county liability, and the use of an Attorney General opinion. The transcript cuts off during extended debate on that amendment, so no final vote on the land use bill is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c><00:37:26.079><c> county</c> strengthens government, county strengthens government, county government
• </c> county government. county government.
• </c> and county government. and county government.
• </c> and County Government. and County Government.
• ><c> a</c> county government committee from a county government committee from a county<05:33:25.280>

Committee: House Municipal and County Government

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and county governments are run.
• Just in Orange County alone, where I represent, Orange County government is going to see a $145 million
• Right now, the county government is three times the size of the Florida National Guard.
• And I don't think, and I don't wish that on you, to have to deal with that for county government.
• The legislation does not appear to align with how county government operates.

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the time given to counties or to municipalities and local governments to review this, I believe it's
• counties must abide.
• Gantt: So local governments, and when we talk about county charters, that has direct input from the same
• County.
• It will align Winter Springs with other Seminole County cities and current government models.

Transcript Highlights:

• the county attorney in Orange County is wrong.
• So I wanted to ask, did any counties or local governments request for you to file this amendment?
• So I wanted to ask, did any counties or local governments request for you to file this amendment?
• I wanted to ask, did any counties or local governments request for you to file this amendment?
• And then look the other way when the Attorney General of the state tells you that the county government

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman: under what theory of good government does it make sense for the cities and county to govern
• Chairman: under what theory of good government does it make sense for the cities and county to govern
• The city and county simply to govern together. Thank you. That's all. Thank you.
• In fact, FBI raids have taken place at different levels of local government in Alameda County.
• And this is just one effort. ...levels of local government in Alameda County.

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman: Under what theory of good government does it make sense for the cities and county to govern
• So what this bill would do would require the city and county simply to govern together. Thank you.
• In fact, FBI raids have taken place at different levels of local government in Alameda County.
• In fact, FBI raids have taken place at different levels of local government in Alameda County.
• This information is currently provided in statute to city and county governments.

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of local government and housing-related bills, with testimony often centered on regional coordination, permitting reform, and local control. SB 802 by Senator Ashby would require Sacramento-area jurisdictions to form a joint powers authority to coordinate homelessness and housing response; supporters argued the region has long lacked accountability and coordination, while Sacramento County, Folsom, and others opposed the mandate as an unprecedented state-imposed JPA. The bill drew extensive support from local officials, business groups, service providers, and advocates, and opposition from county, city, and nonprofit representatives who said a local process was already underway. Committee members expressed support for the concept, but the bill was held pending a quorum and later discussed again with strong encouragement for regional collaboration. The committee also heard SB 222, SB 677, SB 908, SB 226, SB 828, and SB 1193. SB 222 would streamline permitting for residential heat pump and water heater installations; supporters said it would lower costs and speed clean-energy adoption, while local government groups argued the main barrier is upfront cost, not permits. SB 677 would curb what the author described as abusive appeals and delays in affordable housing approvals, with developers testifying about frivolous subdivision map appeals and TEFRA hearing delays; the California Native Plant Society sought an amendment to preserve appeals on habitat lands. SB 908 would simplify permits for energy-code-compliant window replacements, and SB 226 would clarify financing authority for a West Sacramento baseball stadium proposal; both passed unanimously. SB 828, prompted by the Esparto fireworks warehouse explosion, would tighten fireworks storage and licensing rules, expand inspection and seizure authority, and increase fines; it also passed unanimously after testimony from fire officials and a pyrotechnic operator who opposed it unless amended. SB 1193, a county-specific Alameda County transparency bill, generated the sharpest debate. The author argued it would prevent waste, favoritism, and conflicts of interest in discretionary spending by requiring board approval, a public spending log, and clearer whistleblower procedures. Alameda County and county associations opposed it as overly broad and burdensome, saying existing processes already provide transparency and that the bill would reduce flexibility during fiscal stress. After committee questions about the bill’s purpose and the county’s current practices, the measure passed 7-0, with the author indicating willingness to accept an amendment restoring a four-fifths vote threshold. The committee then moved out of order to SB 1090, which would impose a temporary moratorium on state housing density laws in Altadena through 2030 in response to post-fire displacement concerns. The author said the bill is intended to protect long-term residents from investor-driven redevelopment after the Eaton Fire, while acknowledging amendments to align the moratorium with affordable housing development timelines. The transcript cuts off during the presentation of this bill, so no final action is shown for SB 1090 in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• and county governments are run.
• Just in Orange County alone, where I represent, Orange County government is going to see a $145 million
• Right now, the county government is three times the size of the Florida National Guard.
• And I don't think, and I don't wish that on you, to have to deal with that for county government.
• The legislation does not appear to align with how county government operates.

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, a proposed constitutional amendment to reduce property taxes by lowering assessment caps on non-homestead property, expanding homestead exemptions over time, and allowing local governments to increase exemptions further. The sponsor argued the measure would provide broad property tax relief while requiring revenues to be directed to core services such as public safety, education, infrastructure, and natural resource projects, with a trust fund intended to help local governments transition. Senators raised concerns about the lack of a fiscal score, the effect on counties, cities, school districts, and special districts, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. Several amendments were debated. Senator Polsky’s amendment to explicitly authorize user fees and non-ad valorem assessments to offset lost property tax revenue failed. Senator Avila’s amendment broadening permissible uses of ad valorem revenue to include county constitutional officers and other expenditures approved by local governing bodies was adopted after debate over whether the bill would otherwise underfund essential functions. Senator Smith’s sunset amendment, which would have made the constitutional changes expire after five years, failed. Senator Smith’s amendment to allow tourism development tax revenue to support public safety and education also failed. Senator Graal’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund language was adopted, with supporters arguing the Constitution should not promise an unfunded account. Additional late-file amendments were considered. Senator Berman’s proposal to change the ballot title to more neutrally describe the measure as affecting property taxes and local community service reductions failed. Senator Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal was adopted, preserving school taxes. Senator Smith’s amendment narrowing the non-homestead assessment cap reduction to small businesses only failed. The committee then returned to the bill as amended and continued questioning the sponsor about eligibility, fiscal impacts, and whether the proposal could lead to local governments offsetting lost revenue through special assessments or other charges.