Gov. Ron DeSantis’ far-reaching proposed constitutional amendment aimed at slashing property taxes has drawn a legal challenge, in a push that critics hope could ultimately strike the measure from the November ballot.

A lawsuit filed in the Second Judicial Circuit in Leon County on Thursday alleges the ballot language of the proposal — which was hustled through the Republican-dominated Legislature during a short-lived special session — is “unconstitutionally biased, misleading and improper.”

The complaint was filed by a Fort Lauderdale-based firm on behalf of two former mayors — one from Stuart the other from Key Biscayne — and a days-old advocacy group dubbed “Save Our Voters From Misleading Ballot Language,” a play on the ballot measure’s title of “Save Our Homes From Excessive Property Taxes.” 

“Plaintiffs recognize the great importance of property tax reform, and understand the Legislature’s zeal to enact changes as quickly as possible,” the filing reads in part. “However, on an issue as important as this, voters are entitled to a fair, clear, accurate and nonmisleading ballot statement to assist them in making this critical decision.”

A representative for DeSantis did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd, who is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, said the department doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

If approved by 60% of the voters in November, the ballot amendment would increase Florida’s current $50,000 exemption for taxing primary homes – known as homesteaded properties — to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028. This would eliminate property taxes entirely for homes valued below that threshold, except for school-related taxes, which were carved out of the proposal. 

With no alternative funding mechanism offered, local officials say the cuts would force them to drastically reduce core services, including police and fire protection, or increase special assessments and fees to cover the difference – or compel them to turn to the Legislature to beg for the funds to keep their community afloat, leaving local control over spending priorities even more vulnerable to the political whims of Tallahassee.

Experts at the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Foundation have warned that the proposal could “shift property tax burdens in highly distortionary ways” and leave Florida’s tax code “far less stable and competitive.”

The lawsuit could trigger a judicial review of the ballot measure, which by law must be printed in clear and unambiguous language. The Florida Supreme Court has found that reviewing courts must examine whether the ballot title and summary “fairly inform the voter of the chief purpose of the amendment” and “whether the language of the title and summary, as written, misleads the public.”

Unlike proposed constitutional amendments offered by everyday voters, those brought by the Legislature are not automatically reviewed by the courts.

The legal complaint argues the ballot summary is misleading because its promises are inconsistent with the language of the actual amendment — with claims of “ensuring funding for core services,” “protecting small businesses” and requiring a “schedule for full elimination” — provisions that attorneys argue are not borne out in the amendment itself.

One of the lawyers behind the suit, Jamie Cole, hopes history will repeat itself. Nearly two decades ago, he brought a lawsuit challenging the ballot language of a constitutional amendment aimed at increasing homestead tax exemptions that was championed by the then-governor and rushed through the Legislature in 2007. Courts ultimately struck down the measure as misleading.

“The Florida Constitution belongs to the people — not to politicians, political consultants or advertising copywriters. Before voters are asked to rewrite it, they deserve a ballot question that accurately informs rather than persuades,” Cole wrote in an opinion piece recounting the 2007 legal fight.

Concerns about the impact of the property tax measure have reverberated through city halls and commission chambers and all the way to the editorial board offices of The Wall Street Journal, which in an opinion piece this week called the proposal a “mistake.”

“Florida has been a shining state upon a hill when it comes to low taxes, school choice and tort reform. So it’s a shame that Gov. Ron DeSantis is using his final months in office to push a poorly designed measure on the November ballot that would put his state on the slippery slope of a progressive property tax regime,” the article reads in part.

The governor has taken criticism for the proposal’s apparent aim to rely more heavily on non-homesteaded properties – including those owned by the state’s many wealthy part-time residents, a policy the editorial board said “sounds like New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani.”

Responding to the article on social media, DeSantis defended the proposal, which was amended by lawmakers, acknowledging that it would cut property taxes not just for middle-class Floridians, but the state’s millionaires and billionaires as well.

“Although the ballot measure passed by the Legislature differs from my proposal, it is the best opportunity Floridians have had in years to obtain meaningful relief,” DeSantis wrote. “It is not ‘progressive’; it applies to all FL homesteads, modest to extravagant.”

Kate Payne is The Florida Trib’s state government reporter. She can be reached at kate.payne@floridatrib.org.