CopyCited 58 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2005 WL 3310297
...However, in 1997 the Legislature made that authority conditional upon payment of ad valorem taxes or equivalent fees on facilities used to provide the telecommunications services. See ch. 97-197, § 2, at 3738-42, Laws of Fla. [1] Section 2 of the 1997 enactment created section 166.047, Florida Statutes (1997), which provides in pertinent part: 166.047 Telecommunications services.A telecommunications company that is a municipality or other entity of local government may obtain or hold a certificate required by chapter 364, and the obtaining or holding of said certificate serves a municipal or public purpose under the provision of s....
...sary for the facility to serve a public purpose under the municipal powers clause of the Constitution. [2] In the same act, the Legislature amended section
196.012(6), Florida Statutes (1995), to exclude the telecommunications services authorized in section
166.047 from the statutory ad valorem tax exemption for municipally owned property "used for governmental, municipal or public purposes" contained in section
196.199(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1995)....
...in s.
364.02(13), and for which a certificate is required under chapter 364 does not constitute an exempt use for purposes of s.
196.199," with exceptions inapplicable here. §
196.012(6), Fla. Stat. (1997). The amended provisions operate in tandem. Section
166.047(3) invokes the municipal powers provision of the state constitution to mandate ad valorem taxation, and the amendment to section
196.012(6) disqualifies municipally owned and operated telecommunications facilities from a statutory ad valorem tax exemption for municipal property....
...population, property used to provide those services does not serve "municipal or public purposes" and therefore is not exempt *266 from ad valorem taxation under article VII, section 3(a). III. CONCLUSION For the reasons we have stated, we hold that section
166.047(3), Florida Statutes (1997), as enacted in chapter 97-197, section 2, Laws of Florida, and the amendment to section
196.012(6) contained in section 3 of the same act are not unconstitutional on their face....
...[16] The First District's opinion clearly articulates why the provision of telecommunications services should be considered a municipal purpose: [I]f municipality-owned property is being used by the municipality for a public purpose, the legislature may not remove the exemption. Yet, that is precisely the purpose of section 166.047....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 437219
...ax exempt pursuant to article VII, section 3(a). In reaching that conclusion, the trial court relied on our opinion in Gainesville I. There, we affirmed the trial court's determination that section 2 of chapter 97-197, Laws of Florida, which created section
166.047, Florida Statutes, [1] and a portion of section 3 of chapter 97-197, which amended section
196.012, Florida Statutes, to provide that a municipality's provision of two-way telecommunications services to the public is not an exempt use...
...rangements that in fact obtainthe parties' agreements should not render the City's resulting interest taxable, "as long as such [deemed] leaseholds are accessory to the overall public [electric utility] purpose." Walden,
323 So.2d at 61. NOTES [1] Section
166.047, Florida Statutes (2002), provides in part: A telecommunications company that is a municipality or other entity of local government may obtain or hold a certificate required by chapter 364, and the obtaining or holding of said certificate serves a municipal or public purpose under the provision of s....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2003 WL 22797842
...The Department of Revenue (Department) appeals from a final summary judgment entered in a declaratory judgment suit filed by the City of Gainesville (City). The trial court declared facially unconstitutional section 2 of chapter 97-197, Laws of Florida, creating section 166.047, Telecommunications services, Florida Statutes, which imposes ad valorem taxes on property owned and used by a municipality to provide telecommunications services, because the statute contravened Article VII, Section 3(a) of the Florida Constitution....
...s for the services provided. Pursuant to the terms of the challenged statute, property owned by the City and used for providing these telecommunication services is subject to ad valorem taxation. Section 2 of chapter 97-197, Laws of Florida, created section 166.047, which provides in pertinent part, Telecommunications services.A telecommunications company that is a municipality or other entity of local government may obtain or hold a certificate required by chapter 364, and the obtaining or ho...
...l the exemptions granted municipalities by the constitution. Id. at 460. Thus, if municipality-owned property is being used by the municipality for a public purpose, the legislature may not remove the exemption. Yet, that is precisely the purpose of section 166.047....
...operated by the municipality for a public purpose. The decision of the trial court is affirmed. BENTON, J., Concurs; ERVIN, J., Dissents with opinion. ERVIN, J., dissenting. In my judgment, the provisions of chapter 97-197, Laws of Florida, creating section 166.047, Florida Statutes, are a proper exercise of the legislature's discretion to classify real property for ad valorem taxation....
...ly been subject to ad valorem taxation, by requiring the property of municipalities to share also in the tax burden, whether or not leased by them to commercial establishments or operated by the cities themselves. In seeking a declaration below that section
166.047 and the amendment to section
196.012(6) facially conflict with Article VII, section 3(a) of the Florida Constitution, the City took the position that all of its telecommunications property is absolutely exempt from ad valorem taxation...
...nies, or when such property is leased for a proprietary purpose, rather than owned. In our judgment, the statutes do not on their face reasonably imply any permissible circumstances that would allow them to survive a facial constitutional challenge. Section 166.047(3) mandates that each municipality shall pay "on its telecommunications facilities......
