Welcome to Committee Week 4 of the 2026 Session 



Both chambers convened this week for their fourth round of interim committee meetings. Committees heard from agency leaders and subject matter experts on key state issues. The remaining interim committee schedule is as follows:  

• December 1-5, 2026  
• December 8-12, 2026  

Regular session will begin on Tuesday, January 13, 2026. 

On Thursday, the House Select Committee on Property Taxes heard all 8 of the property tax proposals put forth as part of the Speaker Perez Memo last month. The proposals make significant changes to the tax base through expanding or carving new homestead exemptions, tightening assessment caps, and eliminating non-school homestead property taxes altogether (HJR 201). Each proposal prohibits local governments from reducing funding for law enforcement services below FY 26 or FY 27 funding levels; however, the proposals provide no mechanism for revenue replacement or implementation. FAC along with many other local government representative opposed the proposals on the basis that they are tax shifts that do not contemplate core components of Florida’s public safety and community well-being established in statute and the Florida Constitution. 



To watch the committee hearing, click here. 

Counties retain all statutory and constitutional responsibilities, including: Sheriff operations, Jails and corrections, Courts and justice system facilities, EMS and fire response, Public health and indigent care, Infrastructure and roads, Water quality and stormwater, Elections administration, and all constitutional officers’ operations. 

For HJR 201—Elimination of non-school homestead property taxes, state estimates provide a $14 billion impact on local governments (county, city, special districts) for the first-year implementation in FY 2027-28 if approved by the voters. FAC estimates the statewide county share of this impact to be roughly $9 billion. 

To assist each county, FAC has estimated the impact of each proposal, based on adopted estimates by the state. To view county-by-county analysis of the adopted impacts, click here.   

• HJR 201—Elimination of non-school homestead property taxes  
• $14 billion statewide first-year impact ($9 billion county share)  
• HJR 203—10-year sunset of non-school homestead taxes,  
• $4.3 billion statewide first-year impact ($2.9 billion county share)  
• HJR 205—Non-school homestead elimination for seniors over 65+  
• $5.7 billion statewide first-year impact ($3.5 billion county share)  
• HJR 207—Additional 25% exemption for non-school homestead taxes  
• $3.5 billion statewide first-year impact ($2.3 billion county share)  
• *HJR 209—Additional 100,000 exemption for insured properties on non-school homestead value 
• $3.6 Billion first-year impact ($2.2 billion county share) 
• PCS estimate: $9.5 Billion first-year impact ($4 billion county share) 
• HJR 211—Eliminate Save-Our-Homes Portability Cap for non-school homestead  
• $43 million first-year impact ($27 million county share)  
• HJR 213—Modifications to the assessed value growth rates 
• $1.7 billion first-year impact ($1.1 billion county share) 
• HB 215—Combined Save-Our-Homes differential for married couples 
• $44.5 million first-year impact ($24.2 million county share) 

On Tuesday, Senate Community Affairs heard SB 208 Land Use and Development Regulations by Senator McClain. The bill revises laws on compatibility, infill residential development, and building design regulations. The bill broadens the concept of compatibility by declaring that any residential use within the same land-use category is compatible, significantly limiting local government discretion. The bill defines infill residential development as development of one or more parcels of no more than 100 acres in size within a residential future land use category and a residential zoning district that is contiguous on the majority of all sides by residential development. The bill provides that an application for an infill residential development must be administratively approved without public hearing and treated as a conforming use if the proposed development meets certain standards.

The bill also sets new rules for fees and prohibits local governments from applying building design standards in PUDs or master planned communities unless those standards were included at the time of approval. FAC opposed the legislation seeking to narrow the scope of preemption.  



To watch the committee hearing, click here. 

On Wednesday, the Office of Economic and Demographic Research’s (EDR) Amy Baker provided baseline information for senators in understanding how the state estimates ad valorem taxes including potential impacts from legislation.  

The presentation explained how Florida’s Revenue Estimating Conference (REC) produces the official ad valorem forecasts used for statewide and local government budgeting. These forecasts must be adopted unanimously by the four principals (EDR, House, Senate, and Governor) and are required for all state agencies to use. In 2025, the REC implemented significant changes to the ad valorem forecasting system, shifting to a more detailed, bottom-up approach that begins with county-level forecasts and aggregates them into statewide totals. This updated structure incorporates confidential parcel-level data along with new variables such as new construction, value changes, tangible personal property, centrally assessed property, and parcel counts. The improved methodology provides more precision and captures local variations in property values across both countywide and school tax rolls. 

Finally, the REC notes that the next ad valorem forecast will be released on December 29, and all previously adopted impacts will be recalculated using that updated forecast, along with relevant demographic and economic projections. 

Senators asked questions regarding the impact of the House property tax proposals. Senator Hooper suggested that the Senate’s Finance and Tax Committee is “their Select Committee” and Chair Avila likened the Senate’s approach to conducting a military “mission analysis” to understand the issues and develop “COAs” courses of action, with analysis to develop “a strong foundation” for a “methodical approach” to solving the problem. 



To watch the committee presentation, click here.