In the 109 times voters have amended Florida's modern-day Constitution, almost none of the changes could help or harm as many homes, lives and schools as the Jan. 29 initiative to revamp the state's property-tax system.

The one rival: the 1992 Save Our Homes amendment, which helped distort the tax system in the first place. This year alone it kept $404 billion in home values off tax rolls, shifting taxes to everyone else.

The new proposed amendment, part of the Legislature's largest-ever tax-cut package, seeks to gradually undo Save Our Homes. It offers exemptions of up to $195,000 for homes with a market-based assessed value of at least $500,000.

Now voters must ask like never before: What's in it for me?

The answer is typical of anything with the tax code: It depends.

Some save, some don't

Most new homeowners and buyers should see big savings. Others won't. And all voters must balance their sense of self-interest with social responsibility and trust in school boards and city and county halls.

The amendment would cut $9 billion to $16 billion from local government over four years. About 40 percent is from schools. Also facing possible cuts: Police and fire services, which are funded almost exclusively by property taxes. With Democratic lawmakers and unions opposed, the amendment faces trouble at the polls. It needs 60 percent voter approval to pass.

"There are folks around here who don't have much use for schools. But they need emergency help," said Maris Bluestein, 64, who lives in an ocean-front Pompano Beach apartment with her husband. "Hardly a day goes by without an ambulance going up and down Ocean Boulevard. There are lots of old people here."

Still, Bluestein said, she'll likely vote for the amendment to cut their $8,800 homestead tax bill.

The new system would decrease their taxable value from about $420,000 to about $260,000. The plan allows people to pay taxes on just $50,000 of the first $200,000 in value and $255,000 of the next $300,000. The Legislature could adjust the rates in the future.

But Bluestein said she's disappointed with the plan. It doesn't do enough, she said.

The super-exemptions don't apply to non-homesteaded properties, so the Bluesteins will get no relief from the $8,000 they pay in taxes for another condo they own.

Commercial properties also get next to nothing from the amendment. They've been among the hardest hit by tax-value run-ups.

But because since voters tend to be homesteaders, legislators offered them the lion's share of the savings to pass the amendment - about two-thirds of the bottom-line amount.

Stage breakdown

Every class of property-taxpayer, though, should get an average 7 percent savings this year in the first stage of the two-step tax plan.

This stage rolls back, caps and cuts tax rates for local governments, which could override some of the limitations only by super-majority votes.

Stage one also punishes local governments that spent more tax money when compared with a statewide average over the past five years. Price tag: $15.6 billion over five years, with schools exempted from the cuts. It passed the Legislature almost unanimously, and needs no voter approval. The second stage, the amendment, cuts the tax base, not tax rates.

The amendment wouldn't do much for about half of South Florida homeowners who do better under Save Our Homes, which limits taxable-value increases to a maximum three percent annually. If the amendment passes, homeowners can make a one-time, "irrevocable" choice at any point to keep Save Our Homes or use the new system.

Bluestein predicts her neighbors who pay far less in taxes will vote no, responding viscerally to the concerns of police and fire unions predicting layoffs and degraded services.

Promises, promises

Gov. Charlie Crist and House Speaker Marco Rubio have promised huge tax cuts to help fix Florida's economy. But they've also promised police and fire services will be fine because local governments will prioritize spending. Crist, criticizing widespread waste, said "dog parks" are likely goners.

The Republicans also made much of the first phase's caps and rollbacks. They'll help restrain the tax-and-spend powers of local governments, many of which gorged for years on massive property-tax collections during the real-estate boom.

The new tax rates can increase, but they are limited by the growth rate of new construction and average personal income, which generally rise at higher rates than the Save Our Homes cap.

Senate President Ken Pruitt said homeowners will pay more attention to city and county hall once their tax bills increase at the same rate as everyone else's.

Save Our Homes would disappear in the coming years as homeowners move or die.

But the Republican Legislature's Save Our Homes phase-out could fall victim to another legislative initiative approved in 2004: The 60 percent voter-approval threshold for constitutional amendments. It was placed on the ballot after citizens approved initiatives loathed by many Republican leaders, from reducing class sizes to banning indoor smoking.

Save Our Homes passed with by just more than over 53 percent of the vote in 1992.

Save Our Homes 'failed miserably'

Though Rubio has said Save Our Homes has "failed miserably," longtime homeowners such as like Thomas Hardt of Fort Lauderdale disagree. His tax bill has decreased. He said he is opposed to the amendment because it will erode government services.

The father of Save Our Homes, Lee County Property Appraiser Ken Wilkinson, said he favors the new amendment. It doesn't force people out of Save Our Homes and seeks to help affordable-housing providers, marinas and poor seniors.

Wilkinson said he's not sure if his citizens' group will drop a petition drive for November 2008 to allow homeowners to transport their Save Our Homes protection to a new home. Known as "portability," the savings-transfer was partly addressed by the new super-exemptions.

Wilkinson said he heard all the local government "fear tactics" about school kids and emergency services in the Save Our Homes campaign, including a TV commercial of a schoolbook cleaved by an axe. He expects more of the same now, to the new amendment's detriment.

"Negative impressions last a lifetime. Positive ones only last 90 days," Wilkinson said. "There's an old saying: When you don't know, vote no."