Swanson v. Therrell

150 So. 634, 112 Fla. 474
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedOctober 27, 1933
Docket1
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 150 So. 634 (Swanson v. Therrell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Swanson v. Therrell, 150 So. 634, 112 Fla. 474 (Fla. 1933).

Opinions

Davis, C. J.

Chapter 15669, Acts of 1931, as amended by Chapter 15804, Acts of 1931, Laws of Florida, is an Act .authorizing the Broward County Port Authority to levy and impose special assessments on lands situated within Broward County Port District * and to provide a method of levying and collecting such assessments. The Legislative Act was approved by the Governor June 25, 1931.

Section 13 of the Act is as follows:

“This Act shall become a law immediately upon its' passage by the Legislature of the State of Florida and approval by the Governor, or upon its becoming a law without such approval, provided, however, this Act shall not become effective or operative until the same shall have been approved or ratified by a majority of the qualified electors residing within the limits of the Broward County Port District in a special election to be called by the Broward County Port Authority, which shall have authority and power to fix all rules and regulations therefor, if twenty-five per cent (25%) of the qualified voters residing in said territory shall petition the Broward County Port Authority for such an election within fifteen (15) days after the passage of this Act. If twenty-five per cent (25%) of said qualified voters' ■do not so petition the Broward County Port Authority as aforesaid within fifteen (15) days, then in that event this Act shall become, a law and be operative at the expiration of said fifteen (15) days.”

*476 No petition for an election under the Act was filed within fifteen days as authorized by said Section 13, so no referendum election was called or held to determine whether the Act should become effective and operative as therein provided. Because of this state of facts, the Broward County Port District Commissioners', acting under Section 13, proceeded to declare that the statute had become in full force and had become effective according to its own terms, without a referendum election. Acting upon such determination the Broward County Port Authority, the governing board of Broward County Port District, proceeded to publish the notices and to attempt to make the special assessments for benefits, authorized by the Act. Hence this injunction suit in the Court below brought by an affected party to restrain the execution of any of the powers and duties provided for by said Chapter 15669, Acts of 1931, supra. This case is here on appeal from ah interlocutory order upholding the equity of complainant’s bill.

That the resident Circuit Judge who owned certain taxable real property within the Broward County Port District, properly held himself disqualified to pass upon the constitutionality of a statute, the execution of which by thBroward County Port-Authority, would indirectly affect the amount of taxation imposed on such Judge’s property in the district for district purposes, though not involving any contemplated special assessment on it, we must affirm. See State, ex rel. Ake v. Tedder, Circuit Judge, 110 Fla. 361, 149 Sou. Rep. 329 Broward County Port Authority v. Ake, 111 Fla. 132, 150 Sou. Rep. 273. So the assignment of error relating to the order of - disqualification entered by the resident Circuit Judge, cannot be sustained.

The equity of complainant’s bill must be found, if at all, in the allegations' that the threatened special assessments, *477 complained of are unauthorized by any valid statute of this state. To support the contrary of- complainant’s contentions in this regard, defendants below, who constitute the Broward County Port Authority, rely upon two statutes— Chapter 15669, Acts of 1931, as amended by Chapter 15804 of the same legislative session, and Chapter 13941, Acts ,of 1929.

Whether or not Chapter 13941, Acts of 1929, would be sufficient to support the right to make the assessments attempted to be made, it is not necessary to decide. The resolution adopted by the Broward County Port Authority, as well as the notice published by it of its intention to make assessments, specifically refers to Chapter 15669 (Senate Bill 178-X) Acts of 1931, as authority, and no mention is made of Chapter 13941, Acts of 1929, at all. Therefore any consideration of the 1929 Act as authority for the assessments must be eliminated from consideration in this case.

Special or local assessments, whether in the form of ad valorem levies on property in a special taxing district, or otherwise, are not ordinary taxes levied for the purpose of sustaining the government, but are burdens in the form of taxation imposed by law upon real property for a public improvement, the extent of the burden being determined by the Legislature, of its duly authorized agency, with direct reference to such benefit as' the property may receive therefrom, and in the ratio of the advantage accruing. Taylor v. Palmer, 31 Cal. 240; Munson v. Board of Comm’rs. 43 La. Ann. 15, 8 Sou. Rep. 906; Rosewater, Special Assessments, 85; 25 Am. & Eng. Encyc. Law (2nd. Ed.) 1168.

The purpose sought to be accomplished by Chapter 15669, supra, was to readjust the special assessments provided to be levied in Broward County Port District, by changing *478 the same in part from a basis of general benefit to the entire district as a whole, to an apportionable special benefit assessment against the properties in the district severally. Section 1 of the Act expressly determined in terms that certain lands therein described were benefited specially in addition to the general benefits received by all lands within the district, and on the basis of that determination, provided, for individual assessments against the benefited lands, not to exc'eed in the aggregate fifteen per cent, of the cost of construction of the works of the district.

An Act of the Legislature undertaking to make a legislative determination of benefits to properties situated, within a special taxing district, whether in the aggregate, or severally, as to affected properties, is in its essence such a. statute as cannot be constitutionally made contingent on the result of a referendum election' for its ratification as an ordinary legislative Act can be on matters of general legislative concern, as has been upheld in State ex rel. Cheyney v. Sammons, 62 Fla. 303, 57 Sou. Rep. 196.

The reason for this is obvious. Affected property owners of a special taxing district possess -the constitutional' right to have the amount of special benefits, and the individual apportionment thereof, determined by the judgment of the Legislature itself on this question, which is a determinable question of fact. In lieu of such direct determination by the Legislature itself, a tribunal of some sort must be provided for or set up by the Legislature, and vested with, power to accord a full hearing to property owners on all the elements of benefit required to be considered by the lawmaking power, before a valid and binding apportionment and assessment of special benefits can be constitutionally-accomplished and made conclusive on the property owner. *479 Fallbrook Irrigation Dist. v. Bradley, 164 U. S. 112, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 56, 41 L. Ed. 369.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Town of San Mateo City v. State Ex Rel. Landis
158 So. 112 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 So. 634, 112 Fla. 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swanson-v-therrell-fla-1933.