Grady Judd sounds alarm on Amendment 3

Well, hello, and welcome to historic Tampa Bay Fire Department Station 1, commissioned in 1911 and now serving as the Tampa Fire Museum. I couldn't think of a better backdrop, especially for the firefighters, to commemorate how far we've come as a profession, how we've worked through issues over the last hundred and so many years. So with that, today we are here to talk about Amendment 3 and how it's too good to be true. Good morning. I'm Wayne Bernoska, president of the Florida Professional Firefighters. We represent more than 33,000 firefighters and emergency medical personnel across the state. We're here today because Florida is facing an important decision about the future of our communities and the emergency services we all depend on. Let me start with something simple. Florida's firefighters support property tax relief. We understand that families are struggling with the cost of living. Firefighters pay taxes, too. We live in the communities we serve, and we want Floridians to be able to afford their homes and keep their hard-earned money. But we also believe that when you call 911, help should be there. Those should not be competing priorities. Amendment 3 proposes a significant reduction in Florida's largest source of local government funding. And part of the broader conversation that deserves more attention is the ultimate goal of eliminating property taxes altogether. But here's the reality. The cost of public safety doesn't disappear just because the funding source does. The calls for help won't stop coming. In Florida, firefighters and emergency medical personnel respond to a call for help approximately every 12 seconds. Every 12 seconds. And all the while, Florida continues to grow. More residents, more homes, more businesses, and more people dependent on emergency services. Our fire departments cannot make staffing decisions, build stations, purchase fire trucks, or prepare for the growth without reliable funding. Amendment 3 says that public safety is an allowable expense of the remaining property tax revenue. But allowing public safety funding isn't the same as ensuring public safety funding. There's a difference between saying emergency services can be funded and having a reliable plan to make sure they will be. That's why we're speaking up. We're not opposed to tax relief. We are opposed to making a permanent change to Florida's constitution without knowing how we're going to sustain the emergency services Floridians count on. Before we eliminate a funding source, we need to know what replaces it. A promise to fund public safety isn't the same thing as a plan to fund it, and Floridians deserve a plan. On behalf of the Florida professional firefighters, we are asking voters to protect the emergency services their families depend on. Vote no on Amendment 3. Good morning and thank you for being here. I'm Tripp Bars with the Florida Fire Chiefs Association. We represent nearly 2,000 fire service leaders all across the state of Florida. We serve as subject matter experts on legislative and regulatory issues that affect the communities that we protect. Our members share a fundamental responsibility, protecting lives and property and ensuring that emergency services are ready when Floridians need the most. Let me begin by saying that we understand why Floridians want property tax relief. Families are facing real affordability challenges, and we recognize the importance of making Florida an affordable place to live. But we also have a responsibility to ensure that our communities remain safe. Fire rescue and emergency medical services are, indeed, essential services. When someone suffers a heart attack, a family is trapped in a burning home, or a hurricane threatens a community, residents depend on the firefighters and paramedics to respond. That readiness requires trained personnel, modern equipment, strategically located stations, and most importantly, dependable funding. Amendment 3 proposes significant changes to local property tax revenue. While public safety is identified as an allowable use of remaining revenue, the amendment does not guarantee specific funding, any funding level for fire rescue and EMS, or establish a sustainable replacement revenue source. That is our concern with Amendment 3. There has been considerable discussion alleging overspending in local government, so let me offer some perspective from the fire service. Local governments go through extensive budget development and review processes. This includes publicly noticed meetings, public hearings where residents can examine how their tax dollars are allocated. We should always expect accountability, transparency, and responsible spending. But we must distinguish the difference between wasteful spending and the actual cost of delivering essential services. Over the last five years, the fire service has experienced unprecedented cost increases. In some categories, the cost of essential equipment and protective clothing required to keep our firefighters' safety has increased by as much as 70%. Fire engines and ambulances have also become significantly more expensive. A standard fire engine can now cost a million dollars. These are not luxury purchases. They are essential tools that firefighters and paramedics need to save lives and property. Personnel costs have increased as well. In some regions, entry-level firefighter wages have risen by nearly 60 percent as departments compete for qualified personnel while serving their rapidly growing communities. These are the realities behind a public safety budget. As Florida grows, communities need additional firefighters, equipment, stations, and emergency response capacity when the cost of those resources rise the cost of maintaining even the same level of service rises with it we cannot simply reduce the number of emergencies we respond to nor can we assume every local government has sufficient savings or alternative revenue sources to absorb substantial recurring revenue losses without making some difficult decisions the impact will vary across Florida but smaller and rural communities may have fewer alternatives when revenues decline and operating costs continue to rise we should always look for efficiencies but efficiency alone cannot eliminate inflation replace aging fire engines or provide the additional personnel needed to serve that growing population the Florida Fire Chiefs Association believes meaningful property tax relief and dependable emergency services must go hand in hand Before making a constitutional change of this magnitude, Florida needs a comprehensive, sustainable plan that evaluates the long-term financial impact for local governments and identifies how essential services will be funded. We are not asking that local governments be exempt from accountability. We are seeking that the cost of protecting our communities be honestly recognized and responsibly addressed. We stand ready to work with the governor, the legislature, local elected officials, and other stakeholders to develop responsible solutions that recognize both the needs of taxpayers and the essential role of public safety. Our responsibility is to speak for the communities we serve, the firefighters and paramedics who answer the call, and the residents who expect help when they need it most. The question is not simply how much local government spends. The question is whether we have a sustainable plan to pay for the services Floridians depend on every day. Property tax relief matters. But so does knowing that when you pick up the phone and call 911, help will arrive. Thank you. Good morning. I'm Michael Lewis. I'm a trustee with the Florida Professional Firefighters. I'm also a firefighter paramedic with IFF Local 747 in St. Petersburg. This morning, I'd like to talk about what public safety funding actually means for the firefighters that respond to your calls for help. When someone calls 911, they're not thinking about property taxes or local government budgets. They're thinking about their child who can't breathe. They're thinking about a parent who may be having a heart attack. Or they're thinking about the fire that's quickly spreading throughout their home. And there's really only one question on their mind. How fast is help going to get here? And the answer to that depends on several things that take effect long before the call is ever made. It depends on having enough trained firefighters and paramedics on duty and ready to respond. It depends on having fire trucks, ambulances, and equipment ready to respond. And it depends on having fire stations that are located where they are needed so that help can arrive quickly. None of these things happen by accident, and none of them happen without funding. Amendment 3 would significantly reduce local property tax revenue, but it does not create a reliable plan to replace those funds for emergency services. And when fire departments face funding pressures, there are not a lot of non-essential services to cut. We are talking about people, firefighters and paramedics. We're talking about fire trucks, equipment, training, and fire stations. The things we need to be able to answer your call for help. Florida has spent decades building strong, dependable, professional emergency services. We should be working to make them better, not creating uncertainty about how we're going to sustain them. And remember, the calls don't stop coming just because our budget has tightened. People will still have heart attacks, car accidents will still happen, and homes will still catch on fire. And firefighters will still show up to do their jobs every day. We absolutely will. We have all taken an oath to serve and protect our communities, and we take that oath very seriously. But we need the funding and equipment to be able to answer your call for help. We support property tax relief. Like nearly all taxpayers, we are taxpayers. But we also believe that when someone in our community needs help, we owe it to them to provide the best service possible. Response times matter because people matter. And that's why I'm here today. We're asking that you vote no on Amendment 3. Thank you. Thank you very much. Grady Judd from Polk County and I'm here with my colleague Sheriff Hoffman, Sheriff Gualtieri, as well as the professional firefighters. Now when you look around today you go this has got to be serious or we wouldn't all be here because there's other things that we need to work on as well. But there's nothing more important or pressing than Amendment 3. And I ask you to focus in on this for a second. There are those out there saying, hey, it's no problem. We vote for Amendment 3. We save money and things go on like they normally do. That's just not true. And if anybody tells you that, they're not being honest with you. You cannot cut billions of dollars out of this state budget and not think fire services, law enforcement services, county jails, parks and recreation, stormwater mitigation, and all other road repairs and local services won't be affected. So, ladies and gentlemen, here's the issue. We've got the legitimate issue with the wrong solution. Let me say that again. We've got a legitimate solution issue with the wrong solution. Yes, we can have it both. We can have tax reduction and we can have an environment where you don't have to worry about public safety, how long it's going to take firefighters, law enforcement officers to arrive at your emergency, whether or not your stormwater ditches are going to be cleaned, whether or not we're able to do summer programs for children that otherwise would be running loose in the streets. But Amendment 3 doesn't do that. And do you know why I know that? Because when Amendment 3 was put on the ballot, there was zero financial analysis. The state legislature put this on the ballot with zero financial analysis. So when they say nothing's going to change, they can't tell you that because they don't know. The Florida legislature that put that on the ballot loses not one penny of tax revenue as a result of that. Only your cities and counties who are those responsible for providing EMS, fire, law enforcement services, county jails, and all your other local services. So the state doesn't lose a penny in revenue. Oh, and then they put Amendment 1 on the ballot and say, let the state hold more of your money in a rainy day fund. So while the state says they need more of your money in a rainy day fund, and they take no tax cut, they want to put this huge train wreck of an amendment on the cities and counties. That does not even pass the smell test. Listen, we work for you, and we're going to do what you say because you're the boss. But I don't want this amendment to pass, and in the ensuing months or year or two, you then come back and look at me and my colleagues and say, why didn't somebody warn us about this draconian effect of Amendment 3? Well, folks, we're here warning you. We're dialing 911 today. We're ringing all the alarms at the fire stations because Amendment 3 slashes and cuts and burns. It does not give government a haircut with the appropriate tools and scissors. It gives us a haircut with a weed eater. And as a result, you're going to be left with the bloody results. We can have both. It's really easy. Amendment 3 has no solutions to how we backfill. Next year, there's a constitutional commission that meets every 20 years where they can totally change the taxing structure and give us all the tax relief we deserve. And our promise is we'll work toward that. The legislature, which started all of this with the governor, meets in the spring. They too can craft, after they research, listen to the noise. You see or hear the ambulances or fire trucks? Yeah, that's your emergency services at work, and they're going to be on time because they're not affected by Amendment 3. But next year, the legislature can address this and appropriately fix it so we all get the tax relief we deserve, and we don't endanger public safety response, and we don't endanger the ability to deliver all the other local services, every one of which has a local constituency. Ladies and gentlemen, I want you to think about this. If Amendment 3 passes, the homeowner is going to get a reduction. Your ad valorem tax, your homestead tax is not going to go away. You'll get a reduction. But if you're renting, your taxes are going to go up because you see your landlords considered commercial property. So if you're renting and you vote for Amendment 3, you voted for a tax increase while you voted for a tax decrease. And there's no solution to fix that. We're providing the education and the information. I'll circle back to where I was. We work for you. It's an honor to serve you. We come to work every day to save lives, to put bad guys in jail, to keep your community safe. The question is, how much service do you want? How much protection do you want? Or do you want to buy a shovel and clean out your own stormwater ditch? Do you want to figure out, how do I get my child to school because there's no school crossing guards there's no animal control the detectives yeah you know that's a another item that goes on the chop block make no mistake services will be cut if they weren't we wouldn't be here today we'd be celebrating amendment 3 as a pass but we fear amendment 3 because there's no solutions for the future so with that the firefighters uh will ask any answer any questions that you have for us any questions you know the question was the realtors are funding the pro amendment 3. you know i saw a research paper last week the realtors association are putting 20 million dollars in a yes campaign in my world we call that a clue you see because there's a research that shows that if Amendment 3 passes, the value of homes goes up 7% to 9% in Florida. Also, it makes it that much more difficult for first-time homebuyers to buy houses because the houses are going up in cost, and so is the mortgage payments going up in cost. So it's parochial. It's self-centered on the realtor's part. They want it to pass because they've got another marketing tool, to bring more people to the state of Florida, to put more stress on the public safety system, with less resources to respond to the people. In my community alone, Polk County, we've added 150,000 new people in the last five years to our county. 850,000 permanent residents, over a million people when you consider those that come to work and to play in our county. Now imagine this for a second. The realtors are going to see that the houses go up in value and they get a larger percentage of that money. And now it's going to be more difficult for the first home buyers, but those that retire here can certainly afford it because they're going to sell their home up north for a lot of money. They're going to buy a house here at seven to nine percent more. And guess what? The first home buyer here is left out, but the realtor makes more money. And then when you get here because Amendment 3 passed, then we don't have the resources to provide the high level of service we did the year before or the year before. You know, that's a dumpster fire on top of a train wreck when you look at what's occurring between the realtors saying yes so we can make more money without any regard to your safety and security. So as a result, shame on you, realtors. You should be concerned about the people moving to the state of Florida, that they get the highest quality level of service. You should be concerned that first-time homebuyers can afford a home, not that the prices go up if this passes and you line your pockets. It's a trick. It's too good to be true. Think about it. First and foremost, I was invited by the professional firefighters. This is the professional firefighters from all over central Florida. This is my colleagues that are just a representation of my colleagues that's working with us. Look, we're trying to provide education. We don't want the people in the next year or two years or three years because, see, it's not just two cuts and it's over. Then the constitutional amendment, which doesn't come out, cannot be modified by the legislature, talks about the continuing on to eliminate homestead taxes, but it speaks of that without any funding mechanisms to replace that. Listen, philosophically, I couldn't agree more that we should not tax Homestead. But for decades, that's what we've done. Decades and decades and decades we've taxed property. We can do it differently. But Amendment 3 doesn't do that. Amendment 3 is the wrong solution to the right issue. But we can have both. Well, the real impacts are obvious. we're going to cut in this state billions of dollars out of local services and it transcends it's not just public safety it's not just firefighting it's not just saving people's life through EMS and fire rescue it's not just with getting there quickly to arrest people that are trying to break into your homes or rob your stores or stick a gun in your face it's not just housing bad guys in the county jail. But those are the of the most expensive things that local government does. It's also going to affect stormwater mitigation. And that's not a big deal until the rains come. And now you've got the rain in your yard and in your house. And it's not a big deal until summer comes and the summer programs have gone away. And it's not a big deal until social service programs that help the needy have gone away. And it's not a big deal until that pothole in front of your house that you drive through every day doesn't go away. And it's not a big deal about all of the other local services that you take for granted that you don't even think about. But listen to me, ladies and gentlemen, if you cut with these draconian measures and no opportunity in Amendment 3 to supplement, augment, or move resources, those issues are going to occur. My goodness, who wants to get put on hold when you dial 911 because we've got 25% less operators to answer your call? Who wants to be put on hold and then say, well, you know, this is an emergency, but it's not as big as the emergency in front of it, So your emergency will have to wait because you see the resources that we had did not grow with the population that poured into the county to buy the houses at seven to 9% more. Think about it. God bless y'all.