Floridians will have their say on six key amendments on Tuesday, from partisan school board elections to recreational marijuana and abortion rights. Each amendment needs a 60% supermajority to be approved and each has sparked intense statewide campaigns.
The amendments allow citizens to weigh in on some of this election cycle's most divisive issues. The complicated wording used with each measure can get mired in government jargon. Despite this, each amendment can be boiled down to a yes or no vote.
Amendment 1: Partisan election of members of district school boards
Amendment 1 would require members of district school boards to be elected in partisan school board elections, which means those running for office must identify with a political party instead of running in nonpartisan races.
Only voters registered with a political party can vote for candidates in their party’s primary election. Voters registered as no party affiliation can’t vote in any partisan primary election. If enacted, this change takes effect during the November 2026 election cycle.
A no vote means school board elections will stay nonpartisan, which is how the races are currently held.
“Educating our children should not be a partisan issue,” League of Women Voters of Alachua County President Janice Garry said. The statewide League of Women Voters has adopted a position opposing Amendment 1.
Supporters of the amendment say that making candidates side with a party allows voters to make more informed decisions on party lines, while those who oppose it say political parties could increase divisiveness in local elections.
Amendment 2: Right to fish and hunt
Amendment 2 enshrines forever in the state constitution the right to hunt and fish. A second provision in the amendment would declare that hunting and fishing are the preferred means to responsibly manage and control fish and wildlife. Hunting and fishing are currently protected by Florida Statute 379.104. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, more than 1.7 million Floridians hold paid fishing licenses, and 219,074 hold paid hunting licenses this year.
A vote for yes on this amendment supports establishing a state constitutional right to fish and hunt. A second provision in the proposed amendment would make hunting and fishing the preferred means “of responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife.” Supporters argue the amendment is necessary to curtail possible threats to fishing and hunting in the state; however, there have been no recent credible threats in the state to either of the activities.
A vote no means that rights to hunting and fishing stay as they currently are. If the amendment fails to get the 60% supermajority needed to pass, hunting and fishing will remain protected under Florida state law.
The Florida Wildlife Federation recommends its constituents vote no on Amendment 2. Sarah Gledhill, the organization’s president and CEO, said current laws from the state legislature are enough to keep hunting and fishing protected in the state, and more laws could cause issues for an already solidly enshrined pastime by muddying the legal waters.
“The measure is written in a way that is too vague,” said Gledhill. “It’s unnecessary going back to the fact that it’s been state statute already.”
Supporters of the amendment cite an unsuccessful initiative in late 2022 to ban hunting, fishing and ranching in Oregon. A constitutional amendment would make it more difficult for legislators to ban hunting or fishing in the future.
Amendment 3: Adult personal use of marijuana
The first of two hotly contested amendments in the state focuses on the recreational use of marijuana. Amendment 3 would modify current Florida medical marijuana laws to allow recreational consumption for adults over the age of 21 without the need for a medical certificate.
A yes vote legalizes the recreational use of marijuana in Florida by adults 21 and over and authorizes existing medical marijuana treatment centers to acquire, sell and distribute marijuana products and accessories.
A no vote supports keeping marijuana laws in Florida the same and continues to limit the use of marijuana to only those with a medical certificate.
Civil rights organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida have taken public stances on the two most notable amendments, citing positive benefits to the state economy and reduced spending on resources needed to criminalize marijuana use.
Amendment 4: Amendment to limit government interference with abortion
Amendment 4 is the other contentious measure this election cycle. It asks Floridians to take a stance on the state’s controversial abortion laws. Many civil rights organizations have taken public stances supporting the amendment, seeking to remove the government from the abortion conversation.
A vote yes on Amendment 4 supports limiting government intervention on the issue of abortion. If approved, this amendment would expand abortion access beyond the first six weeks of a pregnancy up to viability. Florida state law defines viability as the stage of development where the fetus can survive outside of the womb, which is around 24 weeks.
A vote no supports keeping Florida’s abortion laws as they currently are, with abortions banned outside of the first six weeks of a pregnancy.
Amendment 4 has seen the most polarization of any amendment on the ballot. Supporters include the ACLU of Florida, Democrats in the state and Planned Parenthood. Republicans and Gov. Ron DeSantis have been vocal opponents to Amendment 4.
Amendment 5: Annual adjustments to the value of certain homestead exemptions
Amendment 5 is possibly the most complicated topic of the bunch, as it deals with proposed changes to property tax exemptions.
The homestead exemption is currently fixed at $25,000. This amendment proposes that this value increase based on inflation to give homeowners an exemption that keeps up with rising costs. The adjustment does not affect the portion of property taxes that goes to schools.
A yes vote supports increasing the homestead exemption based on inflation. For those with the exemption, this change would reduce the amount homeowners pay in taxes each year. It would also decrease the amount of tax revenue available for local governments.
A no vote would keep the exemption fixed as it currently stands.
Florida’s House of Representatives conducted a legislative analysis on the potential changes to the exemption. According to the Revenue Estimating Conference, Amendment 5, if approved, would decrease non-school property taxes by $22.8 million in the 2025-2026 fiscal year. The conference also estimated a $111.8 million decrease in the same taxes for the 2028-2029 fiscal year.
Amendment 6: Repeal of public campaign financing requirement
The final amendment on the ballot deals with a proposed repeal of a constitutional provision that allows candidates to use some public funds for their campaigns. The current amendment has helped fund recent campaigns for statewide positions such as governor or attorney general.
A vote yes supports changing the public campaign financing requirement. This means candidates running for statewide office in Florida would receive no public funds to support their campaigns.
A vote no supports keeping the campaign financing requirement with no changes. This means candidates would continue to receive some public funding to run for office if they agree to campaign spending limits.
This issue has been strongly partisan since its introduction to the state legislature. Republicans have supported the change as they push to limit government spending while Democrats have opposed the change because the old amendment helps level the playing field for candidates with limited financial support.
Copyright 2024 WUFT 89.1
