Three state-wide amendments, six county-wide referendums and one local referendum provide the Key Biscayne electorate with plenty of homework before stepping into the Community Center polling booth on Nov. 3 or filing an early ballot.<\/p>\n
Here is a glance of what to expect:<\/p>\n
Key Biscayne: Voter Approval Required for Certain Stormwater and\/or Flood Prevention Projects Exceeding $50,000,000<\/p>\n
It is proposed that the Village charter be amended to require a majority vote of the qualified electors to approve any stormwater and\/or flood prevention project(s), whether separated into separate projects and\/or phases, that are estimated to collectively cost over $50 million within a period of three fiscal years.<\/p>\n
Shall the above-described amendment be adopted?<\/p>\n
Yes ( ) or No ( )<\/p>\n
The referendum<\/a> for Village of Key Biscayne voters — the first since the $100 million General Obligation Bond passed in 2020 with a 56.54% approval \u2013 would require a 51.1% approval when it comes to certain $50 million-plus (over a three-year cycle) infrastructure projects, like the current stormwater proposal being considered.<\/p>\n The Key Biscayne Neighbors Association gained enough signatures to earn this a spot on the Nov. 3 ballot after some $8 million had been spent putting an overall stormwater plan in place that was eventually abandoned.<\/p>\n Also on the Key Biscayne ballot, all five candidates for the three available seats for Village Council will be listed, including Claire London, who decided this past week to step aside from the race<\/a>.<\/p>\n Constitutional Amendment 1: Budget Stabilization Fund<\/p>\n This measure proposes to increase the amount of funds that may be retained in the budget stabilization fund from 10% to 25% of general revenue collections, require the legislature to transfer the lesser of $750 million or the amount required to reach 25% of the general revenue collections each year unless certain conditions are met, and allow the Legislature to withdraw funds for “critical state needs.”<\/p>\n Basically, this amendment would increase the amount of money that goes toward the state\u2019s rainy day fund each year.<\/p>\n The amendment would allow the Legislature to pull money from the fund during times of \u201ccritical state need\u201d with a two-thirds vote. The Legislature could suspend the constitution\u2019s requirement to transfer the money in financially difficult years.<\/p>\n The last time the state withdrew money from its rainy day fund was in 2008, when the Great Recession was taking place.<\/p>\n Constitutional Amendment 2: Exemption of tangible personal property on agricultural land from taxation<\/p>\n This amendment proposes to exempt tangible personal property habitually located or typically present on land classified as agricultural, used in the production of agricultural products or for agri-tourism activities, and owned by the landowner or leaseholder of the agricultural land from ad valorem taxation.<\/p>\n If approved, this amendment would first apply for tax years beginning Jan. 1, 2027.<\/p>\n Floridians on agricultural land pay annual taxes on their farm equipment and other \u201ctangible personal property\u201d \u2014 basically everything of value that isn\u2019t the land or the buildings on it. Florida law already allows certain personal goods, like cars, to be exempted from that tax.<\/p>\n This proposed amendment would end personal property taxes for Florida farmers on farm equipment and “other tangible personal property” if they are on agricultural land, used in agricultural production and owned by the landowner, starting in 2027.<\/p>\n If voters support it, the plan would cost Florida\u2019s local governments about $31 million in the first year, rising to $32 million and then $34 million in the two years after.<\/p>\n Constitutional Amendment 3: Increased homestead exemption; lower cap on increases in non-homesteaded property assessments<\/p>\n The most talked-about amendment, this amendment increases the homestead exemption, for all non-school taxes, to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, and adjusts for inflation thereafter. It requires the Legislature to prescribe a uniform procedure for counties and municipalities, for their respective levies, to increase the homestead exemption up to full assessed value, and allows special districts, subject to referendum approval, to do the same.<\/p>\n Persons who are not Florida residents on Dec. 31, 2026, will receive the existing homestead exemption upon qualifying for a homestead exemption, with the increased homestead exemption beginning with the fifth year of exemption, to the extent permitted by the U.S. Constitution.<\/p>\n This amendment also reduces the annual cap on assessment increases for non-homestead properties from 10% to 5%.<\/p>\n This amendment also requires counties and municipalities to use property taxes solely for public safety, education and schools, infrastructure, natural resources, bond debt service, retirement benefits for employees, and operations and administration. Other expenditures may be approved by county officers or county or municipal governing bodies and would take effect Jan. 1, 2027.<\/p>\n In August, the State of Florida’s Office of Economic and Demographic Research revised what the passage of Amendment 3<\/a> would cost the Island. Village of Key Biscayne CFO Benjamin Nussbaum said the revised potential loss changed to:<\/p>\n \u2022 $1,051,068 in 2027-28<\/p>\n \u2022 $2,039,220 in 2028-29<\/p>\n \u2022 $2,245,804 in 2029-30<\/p>\n