Jacksonville City Council members split as Florida lawmakers explore eliminating property taxes for homesteaded homes

Debate in Tallahassee could reshape local revenue as councilmembers weigh relief against service impacts

Property-tax elimination proposals moving through Florida’s 2026 legislative session have drawn public positions from a cross-section of Jacksonville City Council members, underscoring a local split between demands for tax relief and concerns about how core services would be funded if ad valorem revenue is reduced or removed.

The measures under discussion are framed as constitutional amendments that would go before voters, meaning any major change would be decided statewide. Several proposals focus on homesteaded properties and would reduce or eliminate non-school property taxes that support cities, counties and special districts. Property taxes are a primary revenue stream for local governments, and councilmembers who responded publicly concentrated on budget impacts, public safety staffing and neighborhood services.

Public safety and basic services are central concerns

Some councilmembers argued that eliminating property taxes would harm the city’s ability to sustain services residents expect, pointing repeatedly to police and fire protection, road maintenance, parks and neighborhood programs. Among those raising objections, District 9 member Tyrona Clark-Murray said the loss of property-tax revenue would be “detrimental” for municipalities statewide and would threaten funding for essential services. District 10 member Ju’Coby Pittman warned that removing property taxes could widen disparities, particularly in districts with longstanding infrastructure and safety needs.

Other members did not reject tax relief outright but called for details on replacement funding. District 12 member Randy White said he wants more information and emphasized that any approach must demonstrate public safety will remain fully funded. District 6 member Michael Boylan said shifting local fiscal decisions to Tallahassee is concerning without a clear alternative that preserves service levels.

Supporters cite affordability pressures and prior tax-cut efforts

Several councilmembers voiced support for continued property-tax reductions, tying their positions to rising housing costs and household budgets. At-large member Terrence Freeman said he supports continuing to cut property taxes and working toward eliminating them for homeowners over time. Council President Kevin Carrico described the proposals as a form of relief for property owners and pointed to a recent local effort to reduce Jacksonville’s millage rate as evidence that further reductions are achievable if paired with efficiencies.

At-large member Mike Gay said he supports lowering taxes and reducing wasteful spending, while also seeking a full plan that identifies how essential services would be funded under an elimination model. At-large member Nick Howland said he supports the state exploring “meaningful property tax relief” as housing costs rise, indicating he is monitoring the legislative discussion.

Some propose narrower reforms instead of full elimination

District 11 member Raul Arias said he supports tax relief but emphasized that a strategic funding plan is necessary to avoid undermining critical needs. District 7 member Jimmy Peluso said he favors expanding homestead exemptions and revisiting limits on annual assessment increases, while arguing that fully eliminating property taxes would be too harmful for local governments.

• Supportive or generally supportive of elimination efforts: Freeman, Carrico, with conditional support expressed by Arias, Gay and Howland.
• Opposed or warning of significant harm: Clark-Murray, Pittman, Peluso, Carlucci, with concerns also emphasized by Boylan and White.

Across responses, the recurring dividing line is whether statewide tax relief can be paired with a defined, sustainable replacement revenue model that protects public safety and neighborhood services.

The next phase of the legislative process is expected to clarify which proposals advance and what funding mechanisms, if any, are formally attached—details that local officials say will determine whether property-tax elimination is viewed as feasible or fiscally destabilizing for Jacksonville.