Constitutional Amendment Guide

This amendment would make school board elections partisan statewide (e.g., the candidate's party affiliation would appear on the ballot). This would reverse a 1988 Florida constitutional amendment that made school board races nonpartisan. A yes vote would make school board races partisan. A no vote would make no change and keep school board races nonpartisan.

This amendment would preserve fishing and hunting “as a public right and preferred means of responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife.” Existing authority granted to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission would remain in effect. A yes vote would add this statement to the constitution. A no vote would make no change to the constitution.

This amendment would allow recreational use of marijuana for those 21 years old or older (without requiring a doctor's recommendation). Restrictions on possession amounts and licenses for sellers would also be established. A yes vote would allow recreational marijuana. A no vote would continue prohibition of recreational marijuana.

This amendment would increase access to abortion in Florida by prohibiting state government from making laws that interfere with abortion services. It would reverse Florida's six-week abortion ban that went into effect on May 1, 2024. The key text states: "No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by the patient's healthcare provider." Parents or guardians would still be required to be notified before a minor has an abortion. A yes vote would increase access to abortion. A no vote would keep the six-week abortion ban in place.

This amendment would implement cost-of-living increases for some homestead exemptions. This would reduce taxes paid by some homeowners but would also reduce revenues to local government. This amendment does not apply to school board taxes. (Note: Property taxes are based on the value of the home. Homestead exemptions reduce the taxable value, thus reducing taxes owed by the homeowner.) A yes vote would implement the exemption. A no vote would make no change to the constitution.

This amendment would take away a state constitution provision passed in 1998 that provides public funds for those running for statewide office who agree to follow certain campaign spending limits. In 2010, an attempt was made to repeal the provision, but the attempt did not receive enough votes from the public to pass. A yes vote would take away the funding option. A no vote would keep the funding option.