Efforts to exempt owner occupied houses from taxes in Florida and California

This house cost $50 million.  If it is the primary residence of the owner, it could be exempt from property taxes.

Cities rely on property taxes for the bulk of their revenue.  

Anti-tax fever in Florida, which already doesn't have an income tax, calls for eliminating property taxes on "homestead properties," that is owner-occupied housing ("Looming tax reform has Fort Lauderdale thinking about worst-case scenarios," South Florida Sun-Sentinel).

Fort Lauderdale officials say they are well aware of the fiscal fallout that might be coming and are already making plans for what could be a worst-case scenario: A staggering $72.8 million shaved from the city’s day-to-day budget.

DeSantis has called for the elimination of property taxes, referring to them as a burden that forces homeowners to pay perpetual “rent” to the government. Property tax reform would require a constitutional amendment passed by 60% of the voters.

If voters approve tax reform in November, cities across the state would likely have no choice but to slash budgets, with one caveat. They’d be prohibited from cutting spending on fire-rescue and police departments below current levels.

The anti-tax fever led primarily by Republicans increasingly leaves governments strapped for cash.  In Florida, this measure would take away billions of dollars in local revenue, with no replacement.  While school taxes would still have to be paid, according to the Pensacola News-Journal ("Florida House passes property tax proposal. Here's what it does"):

House staff have estimated that beginning in fiscal year 2027, the amendment will have a negative cash impact of $14.7 billion on local non-school property tax revenues. ...

What services would be at risk? Florida property taxes go toward critical infrastructure and services that are used by or impact taxpayers on a daily basis. These include things like: 

• Law enforcement
• Social services
• Parks
• Environmental programs
• Fire districts 
• Emergency medical services 
• Schools 
• Roads

The bill calls for a referendum, but I'm sure people who don't want to pay taxes will outnumber those who care about good government when it comes to a vote.

It reminds me of the disaster in Kansas, when then Governor Sam Brownback enacted supply side tax policies which posit that when you lower taxes, people and businesses are motivated to work, spend, and invest more. 

So far, Kansas did not achieve that outcome ("‘The Kansas experiment’ should be a warning to Republicans touting Trump’s big, beautiful bill," Boston Globe, "The Tax Experiment that Failed, Independent Lens/PBS, "Kansas abandons massive tax cuts that provided model for Trump's plan," Guardian).  

It definitely didn't in Kansas, where public reaction led to voting in a Democratic governor, and electing enough Democrats to the State Legislature so that the Republicans no longer had a super majority.

Besides raising sales taxes and fees, the primary course of action would be to cut back on government significantly, comparable to how UK local governments, with up to 3/4 of their revenues slashed by the national government, take austerity planning and governance to new levels, levels which significantly impact quality of life in negative ways.

California has a similar proposal moving to referendum, eliminating property taxes on homes lived in for 5-10 years ("California ballot proposal would exempt seniors from paying property taxes," ABC10).  Local governments already have austerity from Proposition 13 (Common Claims About Proposition 13, California State Legislature, "The Taxpayers Revolt! How Prop 13 Transformed California," KQED/PBS, "Prop 13: Winners and Losers From America’s Legendary Taxpayer Revolt," Trulia, "How California voters can update, improve Prop. 13," San Jose Mercury-News).  This would make it worse.

From the last article (the revision didn't pass):

California voters have an opportunity this November to correct decades-old legislation that has resulted in deteriorated public institutions and services throughout our state. It’s time to challenge the divisive and widespread anti-tax sentiment promulgated by powerful interest groups bankrolled by wealthy donors.

The California Schools and Local Communities Funding Act is a proposed constitutional amendment that would update and improve Proposition 13, the 1978 tax law that fundamentally crippled local governments.

A contributing factor to Prop. 13’s passage was the sentiment that older Californians should not be priced out of their homes through high property taxes. However, the proposition’s underreported giveaways to big business and corporations have exacerbated inequity and inefficiency in the state’s tax structure.

The new law would keep tax rates the same for individual homeowners, but would close the business loophole. It will periodically reassess commercial and industrial properties to full market value, while safeguarding homeowners, renters and agricultural land.