With mail-in voting underway, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri warned that a property tax proposal on the November ballot may offer homeowners an appealing promise of relief but could threaten public safety and other programs.
Gualtieri, appearing on Monday’s episode of State Affairs’ “Between the Lines With Dara Kam” podcast, said Amendment 3 lacks a viable plan for replacing billions of dollars in lost revenue.
The ballot measure, backed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, would increase the nonschool homestead tax exemption to $150,000 on Jan. 1, 2027, and to $250,000 on Jan. 1, 2028. After that, the exemption would be adjusted annually for inflation.
It would also lower the cap on annual increases in assessed values of non-homesteaded properties to 5% from 10%. That could help shield businesses and second-home owners from property tax spikes.
Sheriffs, police chiefs, fire chiefs and local government officials are among the plan’s harshest critics. The industry group Florida Realtors, meanwhile, has pumped $18 million into a political committee backing the proposal.
Gualtieri argued the measure could substantially reduce local government revenue without specifying how counties and cities would maintain services residents rely on.
“The concept is a good idea … to provide people with tax relief, and we support that, but not this plan because it’s not a plan,” Gualtieri said.
State economists estimated Amendment 3, if passed, would result in a $12 billion annual revenue reduction for local governments once the plan is fully phased in. Schools would be shielded from the reductions.
Gualtieri estimated that Pinellas County’s general fund could lose about $180 million in the first year if the measure passes. The sheriff’s office accounts for roughly half of the county’s spending, he said, and Gualtieri’s budget is largely for personnel costs.
READ MORE: 'Crime, costs and corruption': José Javier Rodríguez on the battle for Florida’s AG office
Gualtieri said the county could have fewer deputies available to respond to calls, meaning slower or different responses to lower-priority issues. Cuts could hit community policing programs, marine patrols and K-9 units.
“The money’s in the people, and so if you have to cut, that’s where you got to cut,” he said, adding that officials do not know exactly which services would be reduced. “I think there’s no doubt — zero — that there has to be position cuts.”
DeSantis is encouraging voters to support the proposal. He dismissed as “fearmongering” warnings from the Florida Sheriffs Association that the revenue reduction would hurt public safety and suggested the state could provide grants to agencies facing budget shortfalls.
“I don’t think we’re at odds with the governor as far as the concept goes. What we’re at odds with is what this is — which is no plan, nothing mapped out, no pathway to success with it — and a lot of concern because there is none of that,” Gualtieri said.
He said the potential cuts to law enforcement services could extend beyond traditional policing.
For example, Pinellas Safe Harbor — a sheriff’s office program providing shelter, job and life-skills training and mental-health services to homeless people — costs about $2.8 million a year and could be among the first programs cut.
The Pinellas Sheriff’s Police Athletic League, which offers after-school and weekend programs for children, also could be vulnerable, Gualtieri said.
Eliminating services intended to prevent homelessness or keep young people engaged could affect residents and the wider criminal justice system, Gualtieri said. People could return to the street or go to jail, he said, while children could lose programs designed to provide structured activities.
Outside of the sheriff’s office, Pinellas County’s emergency medical services fund could face a separate $20 million reduction, he said.
“Who is going to make up that $20 million for paramedic salaries so that we have people out there to respond to the medical emergencies?” Gualtieri said.
Counties forced to seek state funding to cover revenue gaps could also lose local discretion over how — and which — services are delivered, he said. The concerns may be especially acute for small or fiscally constrained counties.
“It’s called the ‘green leash,’” Gualtieri said. “When you’re going to Tallahassee because you’ve got to beg for money because you can’t afford to pay your bills, then they’re certainly going to control what goes on at a local level.”
If property tax revenue drops sharply, local governments could seek other ways to pay for services, including new fees for services such as fire protection or parks, the sheriff said. In that scenario, residents might pay less in property taxes but face other charges, shifting rather than eliminating some costs.
“The shift is real,” Gualtieri said. “I think it’s a very fair probability that you’re going to see these buckets of fees, these non-ad valorems that are going to get tacked on, and so you’re saving in the left hand but you’re paying out in the right hand. That’s not right. That’s not what the people want. They want real relief, not fake relief.”
Dara Kam is the senior Statehouse reporter for State Affairs Florida. Reach her at dkam@stateaffairs.com or on X @TheDaraKam.
