The future of mobility is being built today, and Florida is leading the way. Nov. 11-13 in Orlando! The Florida Automated Vehicle Summit @FloridaSummit is Florida’s premier mobility conference, bringing together the brightest minds in transportation, technology, business, and public policy. Big ideas. Breakthrough technology. Conversations that shape the future. @waymo @Tesla @zoox @Uber @ford @USDOT @FDOT_Secretary Join us as we explore what’s next for Florida mobility. xitter.cf/flpolicyproject/status…

One fascinating thing I’ve noticed about Amendment 3: I can’t find a single major independent conservative policy organization that endorsed it in full. -Florida TaxWatch says no. -The Tax Foundation raises serious concerns. - @GroverNorquist’s Americans for Tax Reform warns of fiscal risks. When groups that have spent decades fighting for lower taxes and smaller government won’t fully endorse your tax cut, perhaps the problem isn’t them. It’s the proposal. floridataxwatch.org/florida-…

Amendment 3 isn't a tax cut. It's a $12 billion tax shift. Cutting property taxes for some homeowners doesn't make the cost of roads, deputies and firefighters go away. Someone still has to pay billions a year. Under Amendment 3, it's renters, young families, small businesses and new buyers, who are the people who never got the tax cut. The Tax Foundation's new analysis shows who pays: 🔴 Renters. They get no tax cut. A third of Floridians rent, and nearly half do in Miami-Dade. When landlords' taxes go up, research shows half or more gets passed on in rent. 🔴 Young families and first-time buyers. Picture two identical houses on the same street. One owner gets a $250,000 exemption. The other bought in 2027 and gets $50,000 for five years. That gap can easily mean $2,000 or more a year, for the same house and the same services. 🔴 Police, fire and EMS. They get zero guaranteed funding. Rural counties like Bradford, Dixie, Lafayette and Union are already at the constitutional tax limit, so they can't raise rates. They'll have to cut services or add fees. 🔴 Everyone, eventually. The $12 billion figure doesn't include the Legislature's new power to exempt homesteads entirely. State economists say that cost can't even be estimated. 🔴 Future voters. This goes into the constitution, so fixing the damage will take another statewide campaign. Homeowners, even if you'd save, the money comes back around. You'll see it in new fees and special assessments, higher prices from local businesses, and fewer deputies and firefighters when you need them. Yes, local government spending deserves serious scrutiny. But reducing property taxes doesn't automatically reduce government spending. Without corresponding spending cuts, the costs may simply shift to renters, young families, and small businesses through higher taxes, fees, and assessments. This isn't tax relief. It's a tax shift. Read the research: taxfoundation.org/research/a…

Amendment 3: The War on Starter Homes Nobody Saw Coming I’ve spent a lot of time studying Florida’s housing market, and I see a perfect storm forming. An aging population. A coming wave of older homes entering the market. Builders offering incentives existing homeowners can’t match. Rising insurance and ownership costs. And first-time buyers increasingly priced out. Now add Amendment 3. It could push home prices higher as tax savings get capitalized into property values, without adding a single home to the market. But here’s the unintended consequence nobody is talking about. Florida says it wants more starter homes. Amendment 3 could give local governments a financial incentive to approve fewer of them. The $250,000 non-school homestead exemption will be indexed to inflation, eventually exceeding $300,000. That means many starter homes could generate little or no municipal property tax revenue while still requiring police, fire, roads, and other services. We’re asking communities to build more affordable housing while potentially making those homes less financially attractive to approve. Making homes cheaper to own doesn’t necessarily make them cheaper to buy. And making starter homes a fiscal liability won’t help us build more of them. Read the full thread. This is about much more than property taxes.