Floridas proposed property tax amendment could eventually reduce local government revenue by nearly $12 billion a year, according to a new analysis from the states Revenue Estimating Conference.The report estimates Amendment 3 w ould cut local property tax collections by approximately $11.8 billion during the 2031-32 fiscal year. Supporters of the measure dispute that projection, arguing it overstates the financial consequences and underestimates the ability of cities and counties to reduce spending.WATCH: State economists: Property tax amendment could cost Florida local governments $11.8 billion annually FL Property tax proposal could cost local governments $11.8 billion annuallyThe amendment would substantially increase property tax protections for homeowners while also tightening assessment limits on businesses, rental properties and second homes. The changes would apply to non-school property taxes.Among Florida cities, Tampa is projected to face the largest reductionapproximately $128.5 millionfollowed by Miami at $124.4 million and Orlando at $100.1 million.The estimated impact extends beyond Floridas largest cities. West Palm Beach could lose approximately $52.5 million annually, while Tallahassee could see a reduction of about $19.7 million.Supporters challenge the projectionsFlorida Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia, one of the amendments most prominent supporters, has spent months arguing that local governments have increased spending faster than necessary and can absorb lower property tax collections without reducing essential services.The numbers work, Ingoglia said during a June appearance. The only people who are complaining about it are the people who actually have to cut back. We are on the side of the taxpayers here.Ingoglia has traveled across Florida conducting spending reviews and highlighting what he characterizes as excessive or wasteful local government expenses. He said his office would continue advocating for taxpayers as the proposal moves forward.Local government officials and other critics have warned that the revenue reductions could force communities to eliminate positions, delay projects, increase fees or seek additional state funding to maintain services.They have also characterized the proposal as a tax shift rather than a straightforward tax cut, arguing residents could ultimately pay through higher service charges or reduced access to local programs.Democrats warn of service cutsFlorida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried said Republican supporters are unfairly portraying cities and counties as responsible for the states affordability problems.What theyre doing is making our local governments the big boogeyman, Fried said.Fried argued the amendment could transfer more decision-making power from local communities to state leaders, particularly if cities and counties become dependent on Tallahassee to replace lost revenue.Instead, they want to shift services away from the people, put the power into Tallahassee, and then Tallahassee makes the decisions of whether or not that light is fixed in front of your kids school or the pothole, or that you actually are having lit parks at night, she said.Votersand a judgewill weigh inAmendment 3 must receive support from at least 60% of voters to pass. If approved, the non-school homestead exemption would rise to $250,000 by 2028.The proposal is also facing a legal challenge before it reaches the November ballot. At least three groups are suing over the amendments ballot language, arguing the summary presented to voters reads more like a campaign slogan than a neutral explanation of the measure.A judge is scheduled to consider arguments over a possible rewrite during a July 29 hearing. ...read more read less