The 2026 Florida Amendment Series: Amendment 1
Bottom Line: There will be three proposed constitutional amendments on Florida’s ballots in November’s general election. All three of those proposed amendments were referred by the Florida legislature. This is first of the three proposed amendments set to appear on our ballots this year.
The title of the proposed amendment:
Florida Changes to Budget Stabilization Fund Amendment
The summary of the proposed amendment as it will appear on voter ballots:
BUDGET STABILIZATION FUND.—Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to increase the amount of funds that may be retained in the budget stabilization fund from 10% to 25% of general revenue collections, require the legislature to transfer the lesser of $750 million or the amount required to reach 25% of the general revenue collections each year unless certain conditions are met, and allow the legislature to withdraw funds for critical state needs.
A "yes" vote supports amending the state constitution to:
- increase the amount of funds that may be retained in the budget stabilization fund from 10% to 25% of net general revenue;
- require an annual transfer to the fund equal to $750 million or 25% of the general revenue collections (whichever is lesser); and
- allow the legislature to suspend the transfer under certain conditions.
A "no" vote opposes amending the state constitution to make changes to the budget stabilization fund.
The Budget Stabilization fund is a dedicated fund the state can use to account for any unexpected emergencies or revenue shortfalls.
Support for Amendment 1 has been led by Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez who said: I think this is just a preparation of being prepared for the unexpected, and none of us know what the unexpected is, but we have a sample to look at in the 2000s when we had a recession. The state of Florida was not prepared for that recession.
Opposition to the proposal has been led by Governor Ron DeSantis who has said: This is a foolish constitutional amendment proposal. We already have a maxed out rainy day fund and have run the largest surpluses in state history. Any additional revenue should be used for lower taxes, including assisting local governments with grants so that homestead properties can be exempt from local property tax. Surplus revenue could also be used to remove tolls once the property tax issue is settled. I recommend a NO vote.
My recommendation is a “No” vote on Amendment 1. Florida's budget stabilization fund was created through a constitutional amendment passed by voters in 1992. Under the existing funding program for the stabilization fund, there is only one year in the history of the fund where the state withdrew more money than was deposited into it. That year was the 2008-2009 fiscal year during the peak of the Great Recession. Even then, there were surplus funds, in the fund to cover the state's needs, and the existing fund has a record balance. Given that in the 33+ year history of the fund there is only one year where it's served a critical purpose, and given that the existing funding mechanisms were sufficient, I don't see any viable reason to divert more state funds into this fund – which would require an economic event worse than the Great Recession to justify.
Proposed amendments require a minimum of 60% voter support to pass.