Florida's Constitutional Amendment Questions on November Ballot: My Thoughts

   On my previous post I addressed the more controversial amendment being voted on, on November 8th, Amendment 2: the legalization of medical marijuana. If you missed it, feel free to click here. In this post I will be evaluating the less contentious amendments that will also be voted on; Amendment 1: The Florida Solar Energy Subsidies and Personal Solar Use Initiative, Amendment 3: The Florida Tax Exemptions for Disabled First Responders, and Amendment 5: The Florida Property Tax Exemptions for Senior Citizens. I noticed that there is no Amendment 4? Huh?
   From the perspective of a Floridian, it would be common-sense to use energy from the sun in 'The Sunshine State'. Unfortunately, Florida ranks third in the nation for rooftop solar potential and fourteenth for cumulative solar capacity installed. Florida’s solar policies lag behind many other states in the nation: it has no renewable portfolio standard and does not allow power purchase agreement as stated by the Solar Energy Industries Association. According to  PalmBeachPost.com, Amendment 1 was put on the ballot with more than a million signatures, and it rightfully obtains the support of 73 percent of Florida voters. It is obvious as to why that would be. Amendment 1 ensures that Floridians will always have the right to own their own solar equipment and to generate their own electricity. It also makes sure that solar has to play by the same consumer-protection rules as other energy sources and it puts these rights and protections into Florida’s Constitution (which means that neither policymakers or special-interest groups will ever be able to weaken them). The approval of Amendment 1 would also create the economic certainty necessary to encourage Floridians considering solar to proceed with that investment with the knowledge that their rights are protected and that the health, safety, and welfare of the public will be protected for both solar and non-solar customers. Florida should continue to encourage both utilities and individual consumers to invest in solar-power generation because it is evidently upon us.

   My initial reaction to Amendment 3 was that the sacrifices made by first responders are without question, and they should be honored for their service. I went on to research this topic and I came across a few websites that convinced me otherwise. Don't get me wrong, I am an adamant watcher of the videos of police officers and their families reuniting after some time apart or a traumatic event that had kept them apart. One very compelling site that I visited was the Tampa Bay Times and they argued that "each new exemption shifts the burden to the rest of the state's taxpayers to provide revenue for local governments and public schools and instead of carving out more and more exemptions, lawmakers should be working to make the tax system fairer for everyone." Other sites such as the Miami Herald do not make compelling argument as to why Floridians should vote yes. This amendment comes down to the distribution of taxpayers money and I believe that the logistics need to be figured out before voting to change something that has not been thought through in detail.

    From my understanding, Amendment 5 is basically a second draft to a law that is already enacted in 2012. Now amendment 5 now considers the rising property values that would otherwise not allow senior citizens to fit the criteria that would exempt them from paying property tax. According the Local 10 News Group out of Pembroke Park, Amendment 5 would fix this by recognizing the property value based on the initial purchase price of the home. This would also prevent future problems in which the elderly are suddenly confronted the a hefty financial bind. If Amendment 5 were to be enacted it would not affect the local governments or anything frankly, because an unspecified version has already been put in place and senior citizen's have not been paying property tax of years. Amendment 5 is basically a safe-hold to ensure that the already existing bill is not infringed upon and senior citizens need not to worry if there is a loophole in the system.
Although these amendments are minimal problems to some, they have a very broad domino effect that affects many communities in Florida. I was very surprised that these amendments are only being considered now because most of the answers to these topics are common-sense solutions. I was also shocked by how quickly my opinion was changed about Amendment 3. The research I conducted really evaluated the amendments and the side that I was on initially did not have enough plausible evidence to really convince me that, that was the correct option to choose. If you are voting on November 8th, just be sure you know what yes and no really means (the Local 10 News Group was very helpful with that) and choose the most plausible and sensible answer.