This is a production of WEDU PBS, Tampa, St.

Petersburg, Sarasota.

[music] Coming up in advance of next year's midterm elections, Florida may be one more state redrawing its voting maps, setting the stage for what's called mid-decade redistricting.

Also on tap for lawmakers in January, the battle over management of state lands.

Plus real estate analysts warnings about Florida home prices.

And our panelists reveal their big stories of the week.

That's next on Florida This Week.

[music] Welcome back everybody I'm Lissette Campos.

Joining us today in the studio in Tampa is Janelle Irwin Taylor, the president and founder of Summit Communications Strategies and a Democrat.

We have Mitch Perry, senior reporter of the Florida Phoenix, and Danny Kushner, a real estate broker, businessman and a former Republican candidate for Florida's 15th Congressional District.

Well, we are almost to the end of 2025, and with a new year comes a new Florida legislative session.

Lawmakers will meet on January 13th, 2026, and debate bills for 60 days.

One of the biggest items on their docket is property taxes, which is raising plenty of alarms in the real estate industry.

Four out of seven proposed constitutional amendments aimed at reducing property taxes for homeowners have now moved through House committees.

The Republican controlled State Affairs Committee voted along party lines.

The proposals include House Joint Resolution 201, which eliminates all non-school related taxes for homesteaded properties.

It's projected to cut local government revenue by $14.1 billion in that first year.

New economic analysis from realtor.com shows that eliminating homestead property taxes could raise home values 7 to 9%.

It's a windfall for existing property homeowners, but it is likely to hinder entry into homeownership for the very first time home buyer.

I'd like to start with you, Janelle.

There's you know, there's a good part.

And then there's the concerning part.

What should voters be looking at when they're weighing in and making their own decisions?

So I mean, first of all, any type of study on how much of an impact something is going to have, obviously that's an estimate, right?

It could be more it could be less.

We don't know.

But one thing is sure, there is the very real possibility that if we were to eliminate property taxes, it taxes, it would increase the cost of homeownership for people who are first entering the the homeowner market right.

And that that is especially shocking and worrisome considering the fact that property taxes account in most cases, on average, nationally for less than 1% of your home's value.

Even in the places where property taxes are the highest, you're talking one and a half, 2.5%.

So the difference there is pretty big.

There is not, you are not negating the increased cost of a home by not having to pay property taxes by those numbers.

So I think that that's something to look at because we already have an affordability crisis on our hands.

I think that there's also a little bit of an issue with supporters who say that this is something that could be, you know, that local governments are living outside their means that this will even without this revenue.

A lot of their focus is on efficiency, right?

Local government would still have more in their coffers than they did in 2020.

And while that may very well be the case in most cities, it does not account for inflation, right?

We all feel it.

We all know it, so whether or not this is actually the tax savings that people are touting it to be, I think that's what people need to be critically evaluating.

On the other side, you have the retirees, many who say that because they are hurting with inflation, everything else is going up that not having property taxes on their home would be a huge relief.

Danny, I'd like your opinion and followed by Mitch on that.

Absolutely, and and so you really never own your home as as a homesteaded property owner for the rest of your life.

You are beholden to the government to own your home.

If you don't pay your taxes, they can seize your property.

It's important to understand this is this is eliminating property taxes on homesteaded property, not property that you own for rental.

Not, you know, not investment property.

Not commercial property.

This is for your homestead.

And I would kind of go against a little bit on realtor.com and saying it's going to increase the prices by seven and 10%.

Okay.

We're in a market now that prices will not increase.

We're in a buyer's market.

So people are having a hard time right now selling their homes as they.

And their seeing that as a realtor.

Completely, but if you think about this so so eliminating property taxes on homesteaded property is going to make my property more valuable.

That's not a bad thing either as a homeowner.

So would you rather have to be paying property taxes or getting a better investment in your property?

You know, I understand the local governments, I have some concern, but local government is supposed to provide for infrastructure and safety.

For many years we've gone beyond that in our governments.

So does it allow us to maybe pare down some of that?

Maybe.

Danny makes the point a lot.

It sounds like what the governor's been making, boys and girls, has been making on a couple of fronts.

Uh, I would say this.

So.

So where are we at right now?

A month before the regular session begins, they passed in this committee, as you mentioned, four proposals, all joint resolutions, which are constitutional amendments, whether we'll see that happen, whether that will be that many in November of next year.

Far too soon to say.

Governor DeSantis says he wants this one.

You mentioned actually that one.

That's a Kevin Steele supported one that would basically get rid of all homestead non-school related, uh, it's homestead property taxes.

That's the most simple one there are like I said three others that were passed.

But interestingly only one of those others that passed has a Senate companion right now.

Senate has really hasn't weighed in on this much so far.

And that's obviously the other part of the legislature.

Um, and we're you know, I still feel we're very early on the third reading of this, of this nine inning ball game, to use a baseball metaphor, in terms of what is actually going to go before the voters and how it's all going to play out.

You know, different counties rely on property taxes more than others do.

And so it's not going to be even for each, each local government and how much they're going to deal with this.

Blaise Ingoglia has made the predicate for he's already trying to do the prebuttal, which is that local governments are going to cry and complain that this is going to hurt them so much, especially public safety.

They're saying that none of this will hurt public safety.

By the way, they're saying that every one of these measures would not touch police and fire at least the first year.

Um, and so but he's also laying the predicate.

Yeah, there's excessive government spending going on.

And that's something that we're still, by the way, waiting for that DOGE or FAFO audit to come out, actually specifically list that government excessive government spending.

We haven't seen that yet.

We just seen the numbers that he says is way too much than it was five years ago.

And we also have heard from Florida House Speaker Danny Perez, who's been arguing that in October, when the lawmakers proposed eight different options, um, you know, to pick from that.

The governor was incredibly critical of them.

However, they're still waiting for the governor to outline a plan of his own.

And so, I believe.

Yes, number three.

[laughter] And in fact, he was in Tampa this week.

And he talked more generically about how he wants this, but he hasn't come close.

And you know, is his office going to write something up and give it to a legislator to push through or, you know, you know, the time is moving on this thing.

So, you know, he's got to come through.

As a homeowner myself, I would rather enjoy savings on my property insurance than my property taxes.

That's what the Democrats have been saying.

You know, they say that's where we should be looking at right now.

And so many voters want insurance reform to be in that legislative session that we're talking about so many things.

Let's move on to our next segment.

Another hot topic in the upcoming legislative session how the state manages public land.

Florida lawmakers are weighing the merits of new bills that are aimed at updating rules for reviewing and potentially selling state owned parcels, and that includes some conservation areas.

Supporters say that it's about efficiency, but critics warn that it could weaken protections that were strengthened just last year, take a look.

Florida controls more than 12 million acres of public land.

Its parks, forests and preserves woven into nearly every part of the state.

But as population growth booms, lawmakers say the system that governs those lands needs another look.

House Bill 441 and Senate Bill 546 would revise how the state land is reviewed, appraised and potentially sold or exchanged.

Information would also be posted online before any sale or land swap is considered.

Supporters believe the changes make the process more consistent and allow underused parcels to be redirected into higher priority conservation work.

On the other side, opponents say the State Park Preservation Act, already in place and approved by lawmakers during the last legislative session, had broad public support and banned large scale development inside state parks.

They worry that changes could erode protections for conservation lands that are not well defined or publicly visible, making it easier to dispose of land that could hold long term ecological value.

House Bill 441 and Senate Bill 546 still have committee stops ahead of the January session, and lawmakers from both sides say that revisions are expected.

And Danny, I'd like to start with you on this.

Your family for generations has owned land.

You are now in the real estate business.

How do you view this?

Well, and I think I bring a different perspective as well.

I spent ten years working with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and during that time, it was when Governor Scott became governor, we really started looking at our land.

So look at it this way that the district would want to, SWFWMD would want to purchase a piece of land to protect a spring.

Maybe they need ten acres around that spring.

Well, the landowner owns a thousand of those acres.

He's not going to sell that ten acres.

He wants to sell it all.

So then the district came in and bought 1000 acres when they only needed ten.

So we did that for years until we had about 350,000 acres under public control in the Southwest Florida Water Management District, of which we might have only needed 250.

So the district put together a plan to say, okay, let's sell this land out of that ten acres that we needed, and we bought a thousand, maybe we can sell 500.

So this really goes back to.

Happening for decades.

It's been happening for a long time.

This this legislation just might codify and make it more statewide where other agencies will do the same.

But we had been doing that here in west central Florida, then put it back to property taxes.

You're putting land back on the tax rolls when the state owns it.

It's not paying property taxes.

But if we sell land that we don't necessarily need, we put it back on the tax rolls.

It can help offset some of the costs with maybe reducing property taxes.

And this is certainly an issue that brings to mind the protest of residents.

Of course, you know, protesting pickleball courts and.

Golf courses about knowledge.

I believe there's a St.

Johns Republican.

Uh, Kim Kendall is the representative who's sponsoring this in the House because there was a piece of, uh, very precious piece of land in her county that was about to be purchased that nobody knew about.

And it was.

And that's there was an outrage there, basically.

And that's where she's coming from with this legislation.

And it does echo, which came out from last year, from the summer of 2000 2020 for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Spring.

This plan out of nowhere, seemingly that was going to go at golf courses and other public amenities to nine different state parks, including, uh, what's going on?

Honeymoon Island over here in, uh, in Dunedin in Pinellas County.

And so, uh, so it's kind of your setup you talked about maybe there's some conflict there between these two bills, and we'll have to see that.

I don't know how it's going to play out, but it comes from the same spirit, I believe, which is essentially we need to know, not that you stop in terms of this particular bill, you know, stop this from happening, but you've got to put a much more clear out there and give the public much more knowledge about something like this happening.

And that's the hard part, because even in our research preparing for this episode, it was hard.

It's hard to find information that's out there detailed, legitimate information.

Janelle, we've heard from both Republicans and Democrats who have some real concerns about how we're managing our land in the state.

And that's the really beautiful thing about Florida, right?

Like, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat in this state, we do value our environmental protection in this state.

You see, you know, a majority of our Republican congressional delegation, you know, fighting back against offshore drilling proposals.

So, you know, efforts to protect wetlands in our state are springs.

Um, so I think one of the things that's important to look at with this legislation is that Anna Eskamani is a co-sponsor.

She is perhaps one of the most progressive lawmakers that we have in the state right now.

And she's joining with Republicans in supporting this legislation.

What that tells me is that what we are looking at right now is not what the final product will be.

So there's plenty of time.

Legislative session hasn't even started yet, it's not January.

In order for them to work out the kinks.

And for those of you out there who are concerned about this, now is the time to let your lawmakers know so that they can push through changes in the amendment process throughout the committee stops that this bill is going to go through.

Well, one highly talked about issue that lawmakers are not expected to include in the regular session, after all, is voter redistricting.

So the reaction from governor DeSantis is that he's planning a special session for that.

DeSantis wants lawmakers to redraw Florida's congressional map, joining six other states pushing mid-decade redistricting.

In an exclusive interview with the Floridian, the governor said that a special session for this could happen between March and May.

The timing allows Florida to watch U.S.

Supreme Court as it reconsiders parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

That law allows minority voters to challenge maps that they see as discriminatory.

Florida has constitutional limits as well to consider both the state House and the Senate must approve redistricting in order for this to move forward.

Quite complicated, and yet so important.

Mitch, how do you see this?

Well, so the governor threw a new bomb in this week when he said he wants a special session.

The house has already scheduled this week.

They had a committee meeting, and they have one for next week.

And in a way, he's basically saying you're not going to matter okay.

He's already got this battle going with the house already because he wants it to be done in the springtime.

After the session ends in March.

The Senate, by the way, has been so quiet about this until this week when Senate President Ben Albritton, who said, we're not really doing anything about it right now.

But senators, you know, hold your hold your power drive because, like, you know, hold your documents, you know, there's litigation that's probably going to follow this.

It always does.

And so be very careful.

So where are we at on all this.

Well, DeSantis said this week in Tampa that actually he's going to be forced to do this because of course, the Dems are saying Democrats are saying this is a violation of the Fair District amendments because you're not allowed to gerrymander illegally in the state.

You can't do it to favor a party.

Whereas Donald Trump said, hey, we're worried about losing the Congress next year.

Republican states.

Go, go change the redistricting here.

But governor DeSantis said, no, no, we're not doing that at all.

We're going to be forced to do this because of the US Supreme Court rules on this.

As you just mentioned, the Voting Rights Act, section two, specifically about that.

It's going to compel the state to have to do something about this.

That's what he's predicting.

And experts say that's probably going to happen, this conservative Supreme Court.

But we don't know that yet.

He's also saying that it's a matter of fairness and the respect that the Florida did not kind of got robbed in 2020, the US Census Bureau, and they should have had an extra congressional seat.

So he has been hoping for another census, as it were.

That's not going to happen.

And he acknowledges that this week.

So his contention is we have to do this.

We're going to be forced to do this, but we're not doing it for the reason why Democrats think we're doing this, because we're not trying to add more Republicans.

Well, there are so many developments that are, you know, ready to drop when you look at the map of the United States.

There's more than 14 different states that are in various phases of redistricting.

Um, Janelle, how do you how do you see this winning?

Because the argument that it's only Republican states doing this is inaccurate.

They're both doing it there.

As long as there has been politics in the United States of America, there has been gerrymandering.

And it does not conform to party lines.

Right.

So Democrats have gerrymandered, Republicans have gerrymandered.

Everybody has gerrymandered.

What what strikes me the most about this is that in this case, everybody.

California Governor Gavin Newsom included saying the quiet part out loud, like they are actively saying, this is what we're doing.

We need to get more seats for our party.

For Republicans, it's to protect against what's expected to be a rough, uh, midterm.

Rough midterm election.

And for Democrats it's in response to that.

So you know I think that that's that's the biggest part for me.

But even though this is a big deal I don't want to downplay it.

It doesn't change the number of Republicans and Democrats that you have in a state.

And I say that to say this, if there is redistricting and it benefits Republicans, there is always the chance that that blows up in their face.

Because if you have what we have been seeing in off year election so far, the recent overperformance in Tennessee, what we saw in Virginia and New Jersey earlier this year.

There's no guarantee.

There's no guarantee, and they might end up diluting some of their powerhouse seats to make other seats more competitive for them and then lose both.

I'm not saying that's going to happen, but it's a risk they run.

Danny, in the time that we have left, I'd like to hear your opinion on this.

I love consistency and Lord knows we have not been consistent as a nation for many years.

And you know, I like the every ten year thing.

Do the census, do the redistricting, whatever party's in power.

They get to do it.

It's just the way it is.

But lately, it just seems we're reacting to so many different things that I don't think is good for our country.

So I'm not a big fan of this at all, I have to admit.

But I understand, just like Janelle said, with Gavin saying the the quiet part out loud.

But Gavin said that, Gavin Newsom said that because Greg Abbott already did in Texas because he was ordered to by President Trump.

Yeah, none of them are being very quiet.

Saying the quiet.

Part out loud, not just Gavin Newsom.

Well, the from the news standpoint, the good news is, is that this will give us plenty of panels to talk about.

My goodness.

Before we move on to our next segment, another reminder, mark your calendars for January the 13th, 2026, the start of the regular legislative session.

We will be covering developments in Tallahassee with our panels right here on Florida this week happening in Washington, D.C., but impacting our state is offshore oil drilling.

Florida lawmakers are pushing back on President Trump's plan for oil drilling in the state's Gulf Coast.

In a letter to the president, eight Republican Florida congressional members say they are concerned that oil drilling could have negative impacts on the state's economy and specifically the tourism industry.

Among the lawmakers who signed the letter are Tampa Bay representatives Vern Buchanan and Laurel Lee, but also is the representative, Byron Donalds, who currently has Trump's endorsement in Florida's governor's race.

And some people might be very surprised by that.

Janelle, I'd like to start with you.

Uh, I mean, there tends to be in this presidential administration an understanding that you're either with the president or you're against him.

So it is fascinating to some degree that Byron Donalds is in a sense opposing him.

But I think on this, I think he's made a calculus that the president can be moved.

And it is a critical, critical issue for the state of Florida.

I don't remember the exact numbers because it was so long ago.

But, you know, when the BP oil spill happened, right, like that just crippled tourism in the state of Florida and not just in the areas that were impacted.

It was impact.

It was affecting tourism in areas where the beaches were pristine still, and so much so to the point that we had our tourism bureaus visit Florida, visit Tampa Bay, Clearwater, things like that going out there and advertising to the rest of the country and even the world.

Hey guys, our beaches are fine.

You can still come here.

Nobody wants to see that happen again because it crippled an industry for years.

You know, it's I pollution too.

I mean, I don't I've been to California a few times, and you can look out on the waters and you see the oil rigs out there certain places.

And I don't want to see that in Tampa Bay off of our coast.

I would wonder if if there was one, 4 or 5 miles off of Mar-a-Largo what the president would think the value of his property would do.

You know, we look at locally, Apollo Beach is a great example in west central Florida.

You can live on the water in Apollo Beach fairly reasonably because you have industry just to your north.

The kind is in the way.

It's kind of an eyesore.

In some cases.

You've got to have it.

What's going to happen in Tierra Verde when there's an oil rig six miles or four miles off the coast?

Will it cheapen the value?

And so many voters, you know, have been very vocal in favor of not doing this.

We passed a Constitution Amendment 2018 off of state waters that you can't do this.

You know, Trump extended the moratorium back in 2020, actually, when he was running for reelection at the time.

It's interesting that now he's changing his tune here.

But no, it's a safe thing.

You mentioned Donalds and DeSantis and all the other Republicans opposing this, of course, because their number one constituency is their voters and not Donald Trump on this issue.

And it's very strong.

As you said, the public is not for this at all.

Um, we'll see if this happens.

Trump is definitely wants to expand oil drilling.

I have no doubt about that.

But I think that he's very close to people in Florida, obviously, and I think he's going to get pushed back on that.

Well, let's talk about the big stories of the week.

Um, there's so much going on.

We can't pack everything in.

But, Janelle, I'd like to start with you.

What do you think we should be looking at?

There are so many.

It's hard to even pick.

But I always like to stay local, because local politics has so much more of an effect on people's lives than anything that happens federally.

Not to, you know, discredit any of that, but the St.

Petersburg mayoral election is shaping up to actually be quite the contest.

You have an incumbent mayor and mayor, Ken Welch, who full disclosure, I briefly worked in his administration.

Um, who it looks like he's going to face a couple of credible challengers in City Council member Brandi Gabbard and potentially now former governor, former U.S.

Representative Charlie Crist.

Neither of them have actually filed to run.

Brandi Gabbard has said she will.

Charlie Crist has said he's mulling a bid.

We expect to probably not hear for sure until after the holidays.

That's kind of the poop or get off the pot point in time, but it'll be interesting to see how this race starts developing because you don't expect an incumbent, especially the first African American mayor of a city, to face such opposition for reelection.

So it will be a fascinating race to watch.

Danny... You know, I started with the talking about the, uh, the boats that that our military is, uh, destroying, coming into America, bringing drugs.

And in the beginning of that happening, I had a little bit of, uh, you know, it worried me a little bit.

Yeah, it worried me a little bit.

Was there due process?

Whatever, but the more I started thinking about it, you know, I realize they are bringing drugs into America.

We've had the war on drugs for how many years?

We're finally doing something about it.

And the president said something this morning.

I heard that was fascinating.

He said last night.

For every boat they destroy, they're saving 25,000 Americans from drugs.

And now that may be high numbers, but if they even save one American.

This is a war on America.

And these people are killing Americans.

So I think that's a big thing that we need to really focus on.

What is the end game here?

Saving America.

Mitch, the first black bear hunt in a decade, is taking place beginning this weekend in Florida.

It's going to go to December 28th.

Very controversial FWC.

FWC says it's because they have to control the population, but the population is only roughly around 4050 bears.

The last count we have right now, a lot of scientists say they're not relying on the science on this.

And the public is very much against this.

So and they're still court proceedings.

It might stop in the middle of this.

But anyway it's going to take place begin this Saturday.

Thank you for coming in.

On a final programing note, the team at Florida This Week wants to personally thank all of you, our viewers who showed your support this past Giving Tuesday.

Your support to WEDU is vital to our coverage of current affairs and the open dialog that we strive to achieve on this show.

Consider donating to.

As the year winds down.

It is a tax deductible contribution again from all of us at Florida This Week.

Thank you so much for watching.

We'll see you next week.

[music]