HomeMy WebLinkAbout0871 . r
- a
a
j
- -
~ t _
. -
- ,a'~ _ - -
_ + _
~ ~ -
( _ ~ ~
classification based on factors wholly unrelated to use of the
land. The court there reasoned that:
. there is no deprivation of a or ri ht
in-den n c a tax treatment to s ro rt
owner since there s no n t to e s c a
, treatmen in a rst stance. a on y poten-
t a oanstitutiona question ere involves an
equal protection. issue, which can only be satis~
_ fled upon the showing of a valid exercise of the _
state's police power.
Id. at 539 (emphasis added).
The esphasized language discloses the flaw in the Rainey
analysis. It does not follow that because the legislature has
the option to extend favored treatment "in the first .instance' -
it need not apply the constitutionally prescribed criterion
once it has determined to grant ttse preference. The phrase,
'by general law," indicates only that the legislature has discre-
tion in deciding whe*~er or not to exercise the constitutional
authority to cla_asify land as agricultural. It does not, as _
the majority suggests, give the legislature the discretion to -
determine how the land shall be classified. Any doubt as to
that discretion is removed by the final phrase in the provision
and by the clear intent of the provision that any special tax
treatment for agricultural land shall be based solely on the f
character or use of the land. I am not persuaded by the argu-
ment *hat the "character or use' requirement relates only to
assessment but not to classification of land. Qnless land is
classified agricultural, it will never be eligible for the
s~ special assessment. If it is so classified, the special assess-
ment follows. Onder the majority's construction of the provision,
tae legislature could extend favored tax treatment to a select
number of agricultural land aa+ners by simply designing the
classification in such a way as to exclude_.all others. I cannot
concur with an opinion construing the provision to permit the
- legislature to circumvent its clear purpose. That purpose is
to authorize favored treatment for agricultural land provided
that any tax advantages shall result solely from the character
or use of the }and. 3y classifying land as agricultural-or
non-agricultural based on criteria wholly unrelated to use,
- -15-
600K~~~ PAGE 8~,