HomeMy WebLinkAbout0860 y
a y~.
i - -
17
t-_
' l
f~
- - - - - - - _ 1
agricultural. The criteria to be considered is assessiaq Property
under subsection (b)~(a), however, differ Eros the standards used in
subsection (3)(b) to detaraine its classification. In Straughn v. _ -
1C i 1C Land Managasent, Inc.-, 326 S0.2d 421 (Fla. 1976), ve elucidated
this-distinctioa between classification and assessaeat. There, ve
rejected as argusnt that Sectica 193.461(4)(c), Florida Statutes
(1975), iapsaissibly iapiages apace the constitutionally authorized .
assessseat under Article VII. Sectiaa 4(a), Florida Constitution. _
That statute creates a rebuttable pres~sptioa that land which is
purchased foz sore than three ties its appraised agricnltwcal value
is not used prisarily for cASSiercial agricultural purposes, rhich _
use is a prerequisite to an agricultural classification. The Circuit -
Wnzt of Polk Countp, Florida, declared Section 193.461(4)(c), Florida
- Statutes (1975), unconstitutional as a violation of the requirement
~ ~ in Article VII, Section 4(a), that assesssent be wade solely oa the
basis of character or use. In reversing this ruling oa appeal, rre
concluded that the statute affects only the classification of land
for tax purposes, rather than its assessment:
Nor are we persnadad that the challenged
statute is uaoonstitntioaal wader Article VIZ,
- Section 4(a), Florida Constitution, which
pspvides that •agricultural land or laced need
exclusively far ~n-coesercial recreational
putgoses say be"classified by general law and
assessed solely on the basis o~ character or
use.' It is alleged that the statntorp -
gresusptioa ispinges upon the aatnre of-the
assessseat authorized by the Constitution.
uTe conclude. however, that the challenged
statntosy language affects only the _
classification of purportedly agricultural
Property, aot its assessaeat.
326 So.2d at 424 (esphasis is original). _
In the case before us, the statute in gnastio~n also affects only the
classification of land.
- Although Article VII, Section 4(a) of our State Constitution
~ mandates that the asses~nt of agricultural land be based neon its
character or use, no siailar restriction governs the criteria
sccordinq to which such lastd is classified. In Rainey v. Nelson, 257
So.2d 538 (Fla. 1972), ve sustained a legislative enactseat which
classifies land as aonagricnltural according to criteria cooQletely
-4- ~
~3~7 P~