Florida's Legislature put Amendment 2 on the ballot. Why do some oppose it?

Romy Ellenbogen, Tampa Bay Times on Oct 20, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — When the Florida Legislature put Amendment 2 on the ballot with the goal of helping cost-burdened farmers, lawmakers did so near-unanimously.

But as Election Day nears, county Democratic Party groups are telling their followers to vote “no” on the proposal.

The state Democratic Party hasn’t weighed in on the amendment. But some county party officials say it would cut local governments’ budgets and support megafarms.

That has confounded Rep. Danny Alvarez, a Hillsborough Republican who sponsored the amendment. He’s afraid the proposal, which he sees as a bipartisan way to protect Florida’s food sources, is getting tied up in controversy over Amendment 3, a large property tax exemption pushed initially by Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Amendment 2 would give Florida’s agricultural businesses a tax break starting in 2027. It needs at least 60% of voter support to pass.

Alvarez said he didn’t expect the idea to be controversial. When lawmakers passed it, only Orlando Democratic Rep. Anna Eskamani voted against the idea during its final pass. Eskamani said at the time that she had concerns about small, rural counties losing tax revenue.

But Alvarez said he thinks the more divisive property tax proposal on ballots this year, Amendment 3, has gotten so much attention that people voting against it may also vote against any other tax proposal on the ballot.

“I would never have put or wished for this amendment to be considered the same year that the property tax one is,” Alvarez said.

What is Amendment 2?

Each year, Florida businesses get taxed for their “tangible personal property” — essentially everything of value that isn’t the land or the building on it.

Florida law exempts the first $25,000 of value from being taxed, along with certain goods, like cars.

Amendment 2 proposes removing the tangible personal property tax for Florida farmers. That means Florida would no longer tax items if they are on agricultural land, used in agricultural production and owned by the landowner, starting in 2027.

If passed, the plan would cost Florida’s local governments about $31 million in the first year of being enacted, rising to about $34 million two years later.

That’s a far smaller amount than if Amendment 3 passes. Amendment 3 proposes raising the homestead exemption on residents’ property taxes to $250,000 by 2028, a move that could save homeowners thousands annually but would also cost the state billions of dollars.

Unlike Amendments 1 and 2, there is a robust campaign on either side of Amendment 3, with television advertisements and direct mail flyers targeting voters.

What do people think of Amendment 2?

Alvarez said his idea to exempt agricultural equipment from annual taxes began years ago, when he rode on a million-dollar tractor on a Plant City strawberry farm.

Initially, Alvarez said he wanted to do away with the tangible personal property tax entirely for Florida businesses. The political will in the Legislature wasn’t there, though.

Alvarez narrowed his proposal to focus on agriculture, justifying the special exception for farmers because food security is a national security issue, he said.

“I want Florida to not be dependent on other countries or other states in order to survive,” he said.

Other supporters of the amendment include the Florida Farm Bureau and Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson.

But now, other Democrats are voting “no.” Hillsborough, Pinellas and Pasco’s Democratic Party groups have all recommended a “no” vote on Amendment 2, as have Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Democrats.

Vanessa Lester, the chairperson of the Hillsborough County Democratic Party, said Amendments 2 and 3 are different, but in the “same lane.” The party’s members took a vote on what they should recommend and came out against Amendment 2.

On their website, the Hillsborough Democrats note that Amendment 2 “doesn’t sit alone on the ballot.”

“We don’t need to take any more money out of local economies,” Lester said.

Along with fear that the amendment would hurt local government, the Hillsborough County Democrats said the amendment would help the state’s megafarms the most. The group suggested that a cap on the exemption would have made it more targeted toward smaller and mid-sized farms.

Alvarez said that rejecting Amendment 2 means rejecting the small farmer who can’t keep cows in the field. He said he couldn’t care less about “Big Sugar” — Florida’s powerful and well-funded sugarcane industry.

“I could not be more clear, I care about our strawberry farmer who is having a hard time making his loan back,” Alvarez said. He said he’s hopeful the amendment will still pass in November.

But if it doesn’t, he said he would try to put it on the ballot again in another year.

“Whenever I mention that your food security is national security, I get glazed looks all the time, and then I have to explain it,” he said. “And if you’re spending a lot of time explaining in politics, you’re losing.”