St. Petersburg City Councilmember Copley Gerdes said Gov. Ron DeSantis’ push to expand Florida’s homestead tax exemption could create a financial challenge for the city that extends far beyond the first two years of projected revenue losses.
Gerdes, who represents District 1, said he supported the City Council’s May resolution urging state lawmakers to carefully consider the financial impacts of the governor’s property tax proposal, before moving forward.
“I support the resolution,” Gerdes said. “The impact is probably far greater than we realize today. We can put an estimated number for the loss, but we don’t know how this will impact five years from now. I think it will have a major negative impact.”
DeSantis announced the proposal May 27 in Tampa, calling for a special legislative session during the week of June 1 to consider a constitutional amendment aimed at providing broad property tax relief for Florida homeowners. The governor’s proposal, titled “Save Our Homes from Excessive Property Taxes,” called for increasing the homestead exemption and creating a path toward the eventual elimination of property taxes on homesteaded homes.
The governor argued that local government property tax collections had nearly doubled over the past seven years, increasing from about $32 billion to $60 billion statewide, and projected they could reach $83 billion by 2032 without reform.
“Florida homeowners need relief,” DeSantis said in announcing the proposal. “Now is the time to stand up for taxpayers, enact a historic reform, and save the home of every Floridian.”
The Legislature later approved CS/HJR 1F, a proposed constitutional amendment. According to the Florida House, the measure proposes changes to the state constitution to revise limits on annual assessment increases for certain real property, increase the homestead exemption, limit the use of ad valorem taxes levied by counties and municipalities and set an effective date. The measure was signed by officers and filed with the Secretary of State on June 16.
If approved by voters, the amendment would take effect Jan. 1, 2027. The enrolled text states that the homestead exemption for non-school levies would increase to $150,000 beginning Jan. 1, 2027, and to $250,000 beginning Jan. 1, 2028. School district levies would remain treated separately.
The enrolled amendment would also reduce the annual assessment cap for certain non-homestead property from 10% to 5% beginning Jan. 1, 2027, for levies other than school districts.
St. Petersburg officials began raising concerns before the special session convened. During a May City Council meeting, members approved a resolution urging the Florida Legislature to carefully consider the impacts of property tax reform before moving forward with the governor’s plan. The St. Pete Catalyst reported that the resolution came as city leaders questioned how the city would continue providing services if one of its largest revenue streams were reduced.
Property taxes help fund many of St. Petersburg’s day-to-day operations, including police and fire protection, road maintenance, parks, libraries, code enforcement and administrative services. They also support major infrastructure investments, including stormwater improvements and resiliency projects.
A city analysis shared with members of the Pinellas County legislative delegation estimated that the proposal could cost St. Petersburg about $38 million in ad valorem revenue in fiscal year 2028, and $75 million in fiscal year 2029.
Gerdes said those numbers are only part of the concern. St. Petersburg is anticipating roughly $240 million in ad valorem revenue, while police and fire costs total about $248 million.
“There’s already an $8 million delta,” Gerdes said. That gap, he explained, would have to be filled from somewhere else in the city budget, so the question becomes this: where do you get the $8 million? Gerdes said: “It’s not going to impact one place, but impact across the city.”
Gerdes also pushed back on the governor’s argument that cities can absorb property tax reductions because tax collections have risen with property values.
“As our city grows, so do our needs,” Gerdes said. “As do our needs from ad valorem tax. It’s based on growth. The city government isn’t better off from it; the city residents are better off from it.”
DeSantis frames the proposal as a response to rising homeowner tax bills and local government revenue growth. St. Petersburg officials say the same growth that increases taxable value also increases demand for police, fire, infrastructure, parks, stormwater systems and other municipal services.
Council members raised similar concerns during the May discussion. Councilmember Lisset Hanewicz said property taxes pay for police and fire but do not cover everything, warning that a major revenue loss would have to be made up elsewhere. Vice Chair Richie Floyd said there would not be “a magic wand” to avoid service cuts if the proposal moved forward.
The governor’s original proposal included provisions requiring remaining property tax revenues to be spent on core public needs such as public safety, education and schools, infrastructure and natural resources. It also proposed a state trust fund to help local governments continue core services if revenues declined.
Gerdes’ concern is that St. Petersburg’s needs will not shrink if the city’s revenue does.
The proposal now moves from Tallahassee to voters. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it must be approved by voters before taking effect. If approved, the first phase would begin Jan. 1, 2027.
For Gerdes, the immediate fiscal estimates are not the end of the debate. They are the beginning. “We don’t know how this will impact St. Pete five years from now,” he told Poliverse.