Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

this Court upheld the constitutionality of section 193.11,[5] the predecessor to section 192.042,[6]

...Any change in the value of lots in a subdivision can be measured by the same criteria used for other lands — the presence of roads, sewers, and telephone connections; im provements; the location; and many other factors, including those listed in Fla. Stat. § 193.011, F.S.A....

...Thus, the answer to Question One should be "no". Article VII, Section 4, and Section 195.062 do relate to each other, but that relationship, as examined by the Courts of this state, is a constitutional one. Thus, the answer to Question Two should be "no". With respect to the third question, Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, 1971, provides a list of factors to be considered in arriving at a just valuation, as required under Article VII, Section 4: "(1) The present cash value of the property....

requiring them to reassess said lands as required by § 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, F.S.A. Certain taxpayers

method of assessment of property and Fla.Stats., § 193.11, F.S.A. requiring the assessor to ascertain the

(Fla. 1963) 156 So.2d 833 upholding the Statute (§ 193.11(3)) requiring lands used for agricultural purposes

value of the land with its completed buildings. Section 193.11, F.S. 1967 provided: "All taxable lands upon

...tutional challenges to the relevant statutes. This appeal followed, properly raising only three issues. [1] 1. The Club asserts that these tax assessments are based on speculative and conjectural considerations, rather than the factors enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1975), to govern ad valorem tax assessments....

...r view of the record evidence of the trial persuades us that the Club wholly failed to prove, as was its burden in order to prevail at trial, [2] that the property appraiser did not take into account all relevant assessment considerations set out in section 193.011....

...Final judgment was entered in their favor, based on a finding that their land was denied agricultural classification pursuant to an unconstitutional statute, Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1973) and was assessed without due regard to the dictates of Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1973). Because the trial court initially and directly ruled on the validity of a state statute we have jurisdiction. Article V, Section 3(b)(1). While we agree with the trial court that appellees' land was not assessed in conformity with Section 193.011, we cannot agree that Section 193.461(3) is unconstitutional, either on its face or as applied to these appellees, and reverse the trial court's judgment to the extent that it so holds....

...Appellees have failed to meet this burden. Appellees' land is in its natural, unimproved state. There is ample evidence upon which the tax assessor could have found that the land was not being used for an agricultural purpose. As to appellees' second point, relative to assessment under Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1973), we must agree that the tax assessor failed to consider all factors enumerated in the statute in arriving at a just valuation of appellees' property. Section 193.011 provides as follows: In arriving at just valuation as required under Sec....

...Walt Disney World, 316 So.2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). More specifically, the tax assessor in this case failed to consider the "present use" of appellees' property, in determining the "highest and best use" to which the property could be expected to be put in the "immediate future." Section 193.011(2)....

Statutes §§ 193.11(3) and 193.021 and 193.11 (1). Section 193.11(3) provides in part as follows: "[T]his subsection

assessor had failed to follow the provision of Section 193.11, Florida Statutes (1961), calling for assessment

of the lower court upholding the validity of Section 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., under the authority

...Section 193.023(6), therefore, is unconstitutional. While the legislature cannot arbitrarily classify property for favored tax treatment, it can establish the just valuation criteria that are to be applied to all property. Id. at 434. To accomplish this, the legislature has enacted section 193.011, which provides: 193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuations....

...or size of said property; (5) The cost of said property and the present replacement value of any improvements thereon; (6) The condition of said property; (7) The income from said property; and (8) The net proceeds of the sale of the property. .. . § 193.011, Fla. Stat. (1987). This Court has found that the just valuation at which property must be assessed under the constitution and section 193.011 is synonymous with fair market value, i.e., the amount a purchaser, willing but not obliged to buy, would pay a seller who is willing but not obliged to sell. Walter v. Schuler, 176 So.2d 81 (Fla. 1965). In arriving at fair market value, the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...Xerox Corp., 447 So.2d 1348 (Fla. 1984). In challenging the assessment, Valencia argues that the property's potential use for thirteen-story buildings should not be considered in valuation because it does not represent the present or immediate future use of the property under section 193.011(2)....

...I believe that this statute simply confines the property appraiser's measurement of highest and best use of property encumbered by a long-term lease to the highest use allowed by the lease. In many ways, section 193.023(6) is simply a refinement of factor two listed in section 193.011, which requires lease-encumbered property to be valued in a manner consistent with the traditional income capitalization method for appraising property....

...various machines adjusted for depreciation. Xerox filed a complaint against the property appraiser and the Dade County Tax Collector claiming that the county appraiser's method of valuation violated article VII, section 4, Florida Constitution, and section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1977)....

...Xerox presented a calculation of value, using the income capitalization method, amounting to $15,338.280. The trial court rendered judgment for Dade County, finding: 1. The Court finds that the Plaintiff failed to sustain its burden of proof that the Property Appraiser did not consider all the relevant factors under F.S. 193.011....

...Kelly, 223 So.2d 305 (Fla. 1969). The trial court, as was indicated above where the findings are set out, found that Xerox Corporation had failed to show that the appraiser departed from the law governing the appraisal of property for ad valorem taxation. Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1977), [1] provides a list of factors which a property appraiser is to consider when determining the "just valuation" of property....

...s to affirm the judgment of the trial court. It is so ordered. ALDERMAN, C.J., and McDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur. OVERTON, Justice, dissenting: I find no conflict jurisdiction and would consequently deny this petition for review. NOTES [1] Section 193.011 provides as follows: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...The statute even "prohibits" such a consideration in the fixing of the amount of assessment, after a favorable zoning to agricultural use is attained, by expressly providing that "no factors other than those relative to such use" shall be considered. (Emphasis added) This is in revealing contrast to Fla. Stat. § 193.011 which provides as the No....

...which to ultimately assess the property was by utilizing the income approach, the claims were singularly identical with respect to the ultimate issue — the just valuation of the property under Article VII, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution and Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1977)....

...ce upon the challenging party, the burden of proof concerning the nonexistence of presumed facts. As applied to ad valorem taxation in Florida, it is doctrinaire that the appraiser, in reaching his assessment, must consider each factor enumerated in Section 193.011, supra, although he may assign to each criterion such weight as he deems appropriate....

...liminary assessment. Where the taxpayer is successful in overcoming this presumption, he must, in order to prevail, additionally present evidence with respect to the just valuation of the property utilizing all the applicable statutory criteria. See § 193.011, supra....

...which we agree. "Cost Approach" Versus "Income Approach" Just valuation, as mandated by Article VII, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution, *1144 is to be arrived at by the application and consideration of all of the statutory factors delineated by Section 193.011, supra....

...3d DCA 1971) for the proposition that the trial court should have utilized the cost approach in determining the assessment of Omni. In Town of Bay Harbor Island, the assessment by the appraiser was premised upon a consideration of all of the factors set forth in Section 193.011, supra ; however, he determined that an insufficient period of time had elapsed to have warranted utilization of the income approach....

...Consequently, upon remand, the trial court will be free to accept any approach which is persuasive and meets the constitutional and statutory criteria. Improper Adjustment for the "Cost of Sales" The trial court specifically found that upon all the statutory factors required by Section 193.011, supra, the income approach was the proper approach and determined that the assessment of the property as of January 1, 1978 should be $45,000,000. Having opted for the income approach, it nonetheless deducted $2,000,000, finding that "the financing of this venture was grossly unconventional and atypical, and under the provisions of section 193.011(8), Florida Statutes, an allowance should be made for this." Section 193.011(8), Florida Statutes (1977) provides: (8) The net proceeds of the sale of the property, as received by the seller, after deduction of all of the usual and reasonable fees and costs of the sale, including the costs and expenses of fina...

...hesis of a legal assessment. We disagree, however, with the legal analysis used in reaching this second conclusion. We would, instead, base the second conclusion solely on the ground that the property appraiser did not follow the applicable statute [§ 193.011, Fla....

...ry reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment, we effectively deter litigation over minor disagreements in valuation and keep the courts out of the business of property valuation where the appraiser has conscientiously done his job as prescribed by Section 193.011....

...While the appraiser, if the initiator of, or counterclaimant in, the Circuit Court proceedings, will have the burden of proof on his claim or counterclaim, that burden is to convince the fact-finder of the correctness of the assessment made by him. [14] If his assessment was not made in substantial compliance with Section 193.011, it is viewed as any other assessment, accorded the weight to which it is entitled, and the property appraiser, thereafter, with this and other evidence, has the burden of proving his claim by the greater weight of the evidence. But if the property appraiser shows that his assessment was made in substantial compliance with Section 193.011, then the burden shifts to the taxpayer, not merely to establish that the taxpayer's evidence as to valuation of the property is more convincing than the property appraiser's, but rather to overcome the property appraiser's assessment by excluding every reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment....

...To accord presumptive correctness to the Board of Adjustment valuation would effectively vitiate the presumptive correctness accorded the property appraiser's assessment. If the presumptive correctness of a property appraiser's assessment made in substantial compliance with Section 193.011 were said to be replaced by a different valuation placed on the property by a Board of Adjustment, then a taxpayer would be relieved of his burden to overcome the appraiser's presumptively correct assessment by using the Board of Adju...

...e eroded so easily. Therefore, we emphasize that the presumption of correctness in favor of the property appraiser's assessment is lost only when, as here, the appraiser disentitles himself to this presumption by failing to substantially comply with Section 193.011....

...Because he did not appeal the denial of relief, we need not consider the mechanism by which the Tax Appraiser may challenge the Board's re-evaluation. [12] This section is reproduced in full in n. 2, supra. [13] The property appraiser must consider each of the factors enumerated in Section 193.011, see n....

...nnot establish criteria that favor certain taxpayers over others. Williams, 326 So.2d at 432; Snyder, 304 So.2d at 435. In furtherance of the mandate of article VII, section 4, that all property be assessed at just value, the Legislature has enacted section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2001), which lists eight factors the property appraiser must consider in determining just valuation. Section 193.011 provides: Factors to consider in deriving just valuation.—In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...of such net proceeds attributable to payments for household furnishings or other items of personal property. Under Florida's Constitution and this Court's case law the particular method of valuation and the weight to be given the factors set out in section 193.011 are left to the discretion of the appraiser....

...Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 831 So.2d 85, 89 (Fla.2002) (quoting Blake v. Xerox Corp., 447 So.2d 1348, 1350 (Fla.1984)). The Department contends that section 193.016 does not violate article VII, section 4's provisions, because the statute merely adds, in essence, a "ninth factor" to section 193.011—the VAB's reduced assessment in the prior year—for the property appraiser to consider along with those other factors set out in section 193.011, when assessing tangible personal property....

...ent just valuation." Id. at 622. We agree. Rather than being unreasonable or arbitrary, it would appear that consideration of such circumstances would be relevant to the property appraiser's current just value determination in much the same way that section 193.011(8) requires consideration of the recent sale of the property....

...may have taken place concerning the assessment of the property in question. See Bystrom, 543 So.2d at 216 (noting that in determining just value, the property appraiser must consider, but not necessarily apply, each of the eight factors set forth in section 193.011); Dist....

...As the First District said: Section 193.016 suffers from the same constitutional infirmity as did the statutes involved in Snyder and Bystrom, because it prescribes a valuation methodology applicable to only a special class of tangible personal property. . . . . As previously indicated, the legislature enacted section 193.011 in compliance with article VII, section 4, which requires the legislature to adopt a uniform methodology for valuation of all types of property for purposes of ad valorem taxation. Section 193.011 specifies a list of eight factors which "the property appraiser shall take into consideration " in arriving at a just valuation for all types of property (emphasis supplied)....

this question turns on the interpretation of Section 193.11, F.S.A. the pertinent part of which is as follows:

secure a just valuation of all property * * *." Section 193.11, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., requires the county

assessing “all property at its full cash value.” Section 193.11(1), Fla.St, F.S.A. It is the well settled rule

...*1030 When the owner elects to follow the procedure of the Pope Law, he then becomes a "willing seller," as the election is purely voluntary. No one is forced to buy, so we have to say that the buyer is a "willing buyer." The eight factors prescribed in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, in determining just value are artificial means which the legislature has designed to measure the price a potential buyer would be willing to pay for the property sought to be valued....

...It is not clear from this record to what extent the beneficial use of and easements in the common areas available to each of the dwelling unit owners were included in the assessed value of those dwelling units. The trial court awarded Tampa Villas South, Inc., a partial summary judgment, expressly holding that Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, [2] and Article VII, Section 4, *758 Florida Constitution, [3] required the assessor to consider the lot owners' restrictive encumbrances in the common areas when valuing it for ad valorem taxation....

...We affirm the action of the trial judge, and direct that the subject properties be reassessed in accordance with the views expressed in this opinion. It is so ordered. ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND and SUNDBERG, JJ., and FERRIS, Circuit Court Judge, concur. NOTES [1] Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. [2] "193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation....

...84 $14,830,910 1985 $17,683,780 The United States paid under protest the property taxes assessed on the basis of the valuations. The United States maintained that the defendants failed to follow Article VII, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution and Section 193.011 of the Florida Statutes Annotated in valuing the Federal Building, and that if Florida law was properly applied the Federal Building would have been valued at $7,449,000 as of July 1, 1981, and that value, with appropriate adjustments for each year was the correct basis for assessment of property taxes....

...nstant case. The taxpayers concede that data concerning the income a subject property generates would normally be relevant and discoverable. Walter v. Schuler, 176 So.2d 81 (Fla. 1965); Bystrom, 416 So.2d at 1138. Indeed, in light of the language in section 193.011(7), Florida Statutes (1979), which specifically orders the property appraiser to consider the income generated by a given piece of property when arriving at its just valuation, any contention to the contrary would be frivolous. Straughn, 354 So.2d at 371; § 193.011(7), Fla....

...ED STRAUGHN, as Executive Director of the Department of Revenue, State of Florida Defendants. "FINAL JUDGMENT "This is a suit attacking the 1972 ad valorem valuation of Plaintiffs' properties located in Osceola County. It is alleged the Assessor failed to comply with the essential requirements of F.S. 193.011 in arriving at `just value' as provided by Article VII, Section 4, of the Florida Constitution....

...00 1968 1,106,730.00 1969 1,106,730.00 1970 2,280,112.00 1971 2,324,202.00 1972 15,172,850.00 "The art of appraising the fair market value of real estate is not an exact *62 science. For this reason our Legislature has laid down certain factors in F.S. 193.011 for the assessor to follow in arriving at `just value' or `fair market value.' Our Supreme Court and Appellate Courts in their recent pronouncements concerning F.S. 193.011 have clearly indicated that the assessor must consider each of the factors set forth in the law, and if he fails to do so his assessed values must be set aside when proper allegations and proof of such facts are presented to the Court.[1]...

...Route 192 and along the entrance road leading into the theme park. "The Court further finds Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate fundamental error on the part of the assessor in assessing the remaining property on an acreage basis at the rates applied by the assessor.[2] "F.S. 193.011 provides: 193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation....

...d (8) The net proceeds of the sale of the property, as received by the seller, after deduction of all of the usual and reasonable fees and costs of the sale, including the costs and expenses of financing. "In discussing the factors as set forth in F.S. 193.011 the assessor was of the opinion that he was not obliged under the law to give each factor equal weight....

...perty can be expected to be put in the immediate future and the present use of the property. This in turn is directly influenced by the zoning, if any, that affects the property as of January 1st of the taxable year. "The `Use' factor set forth in F.S. 193.011 is entitled to great weight in the assessment process of each parcel of land....

...e necessary. Powell v. Kelly [Fla.], 223 So.2d 305. Folsom v. Bank of Greenwood [97 Fla. 426], 120 So 317. District School Board *64 of Lee County v. Askew [Fla.], 278 So.2d 272. "[3] The statutory guidepost for the `use' factor set forth above in F.S. 193.011 has been construed by the Florida Supreme Court in Lanier v....

...One challenging the assessment of the tax assessor must prove that every reasonable hypothesis has been excluded which would support the tax assessor. Powell v. Kelly, 223 So.2d 305 (Fla.1969), Straughn v. Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla.1978). Pursuant to Florida Statute § 193.011, the tax assessor is required to consider all of the following eight factors in arriving at the valuation of property for tax purposes: *238 (1) The present cash value of the property; (2) The highest and best use to which the property can...

...id not utilize the income approach to valuation, and therefore, there was no need to review the income date from the complex. As previously noted, Florida law requires the assessor to consider but not necessarily use each of the factors set forth in § 193.011....

...eparing the leasehold interest's ad valorem tax assessment, it is apparent that such method of assessment has nothing to do with an income tax, or a tax measured by income, or the volume of transactions as defined in Section 624.520. This is because Section 193.011 specifies that in computing the just valuation of ad valorem property a "property appraiser shall take into consideration the following factors: ......

...3d DCA 1972); see also, Cassaday v. McKinney, 296 So.2d 94, 96 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). The use of the minimum rent by the appellant in computing the assessment on Tele-Trip's leasehold interest is not inconsistent with Section 624.520, and it is entirely consistent with Section 193.011....

...ratio studies, or that real property in the county was assessed at a level higher than the level disclosed by the studies. Instead, respondents opined that sales price is only one of the eight (formerly seven) factors which must be considered under Section 193.011 (formerly 193.021) Fla....

...is utterly impossible for him by any judicial proceeding to secure an increase in the assessment of the great mass of underassessed property in the taxing district.'" The "just valuation" at which property must be assessed under the Constitution and Section 193.011 (formerly 193.021) Fla. Stat. is synonymous with fair market value, i.e., the amount a purchaser willing but not obliged to buy would pay to a seller who is willing but not obliged to sell. Walter v. Schuler, Fla. 1965, 176 So.2d 81. When no actual sale has occurred, Section 193.011 Fla....

...nal property assessments. It used sales ratio statistics of real estate transactions to factually determine there existed discrimination in tangible personal property tax assessments. It is quite apparent the majority predicates its decision on F.S. Section 193.011, F.S.A., which has primary reference to real property assessments under Section 4, Article VII of the State Constitution, F.S.A. Tangible personal property valuation obviously does not include many of the eight factors of F.S. Section 193.011, F.S.A., therefore it follows sales ratio statistics of real estate transactions (market value) are inapplicable as a basis for comparison in order to determine if there was a systematic discrimination....

of the Legislature, including Chap. 70-424. F.S. *193 11.2424, Florida Statutes 1971, specifically provides

...e railroad which is unauthorized by law; (2) that the trial court imposed an improper burden of proof upon FEC because DOR's valuation failed to consider comparable sales, one of the eight criteria for assessment which must be considered pursuant to section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987); and (3) that DOR's valuation was invalid because in utilizing the income approach to valuation, DOR failed to use the actual income of FEC, did not use the income of comparable railroads in computing the capi...

...ng concern" assessments. II. BURDEN OF PROOF — FAILURE TO CONSIDER COMPARABLE SALES In the final judgment finding the tax assessments valid, the trial court undertook an evaluation of DOR's assessment in the light of the eight criteria set forth in section 193.011 and, using a "two prong analysis," first determined that the burden of proof upon FEC was dependent upon whether DOR considered the eight criteria set out in the statute, in which case the presumption of correctness favored DOR's assessment....

...he evidence. The second prong, according to the trial court, would be an analysis of whether FEC negated every reasonable hypothesis supporting DOR's valuations. The trial court found, as to the first prong, that all of the eight criteria set out in section 193.011 were appropriately considered by DOR; and as to the second prong, that FEC had failed to overcome the resulting presumption of correctness in favor of DOR's valuations. More particularly, the court found that section 193.011(1), dealing with the "cash value" of the property, defined as what a willing purchaser would pay a willing seller, incorporates the three standard appraisal approaches to the valuation of property, which are the income, market (stock and debt) and cost approaches....

...1058 generally agree with the trial court's "two-prong" analysis of the controlling law with respect to the burden of proof. FEC sharply disagrees, however, with the trial court's finding that DOR appropriately considered all eight criteria found in section 193.011, urging that Mr. Ziegler, DOR's appraiser, admitted that in preparing his valuation he did not look for comparable sales of railroads. This, FEC maintains, demonstrates his failure to consider the "cash value" criterion of section 193.011(1)....

...We find FEC's arguments unpersuasive when considered in the light of the reasonable requirements of the statutes, as applied to the facts before the trial court. In arriving at "just valuation," as required under section 4, Article VII of the Florida Constitution, the property appraiser (DOR) is required by section 193.011 to take into consideration eight factors, the first being: (1) The present cash value of the property, which is the amount a willing purchaser would pay a willing seller, exclusive of reasonable fees and costs of purchase, in cash or the immediate equivalent thereof in a transaction at arm's length....

...The court in Bystrom v. Valencia Center, Inc . was concerned with the weight and effect to be given to evidence of market value based upon comparable sales, as opposed to evidence indicating a lesser value based upon the "present use" factor stated in section 193.011(2)....

...s for tax assessment purposes. Furthermore, the trial court in the case before us had expert testimony that the stock and debt method was accepted by appraisers of railroad property. We reject FEC's contention that the "market" approach criterion of section 193.011(1) is not satisfied, in an appropriate case, by the use of the stock and debt method....

...value based upon this method was admitted at the trial below without objection. [10] We reject, therefore, FEC's contention that by using stock and debt, rather than comparable sales, DOR failed to consider all the criteria mandated by section *1060 193.011. Although it may not be necessary to our decision, we also note our disagreement with FEC's contention that in the assessment of railroads, compliance with section 193.011(1) can be accomplished solely by consideration of comparable sales....

...In the final judgment, the court found that DOR's use of the investor expected or "normal" earnings of FEC, rather than its actual earnings, was not a departure from the statutory criteria, and that this was also an approved technique used by appraisers in this field. As to the requirement of section 193.011(7), the consideration of the income from the property, the court found that DOR did obtain and did consider the actual earnings of the property, and having done so, the requirements of the statute were satisfied....

...s necessary in arriving at just valuation under the income approach. In the present case it is undisputed that DOR's appraiser received and considered FEC's actual income figures for the years in question. It is equally clear that the requirement of section 193.011(7), that the property appraiser must "take into consideration" the "income from said property," was fully satisfied. As explained by the court in Valencia Center, Inc. v. Bystrom, 543 So.2d 214, 216-7 (Fla. 1989): In arriving at fair market value, the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...*110 Certain facts were not in dispute. Witnesses for both sides agreed that the supermarket and small stores (all one-story) and the parking lot constitute an underutilization and not the highest and best use of the property. The chief disagreement is whether Section 193.011(2), Florida Statutes (1979), requires the Property Appraiser to assess the property on the basis of its current use, even though the current use is not the highest and best use....

...Walter v. Schuler, 176 So.2d 81 (Fla. 1965). Fair market value is also a legal concept related precisely to the appraisal concept of "market value". No one in this case disputes this. One of the problems raised in this case is the meaning and effect of Section 193.011(2), Florida Statutes (1979)....

...What a property is currently used "as" is often not the highest and best use. In the case sub judice, valuing the subject as a shopping center leads to a value less than fair market value, a fact which was agreed to even by Valencia's sole appraiser — witness, Carlton W. Cole. Valencia's argument is that the language of Section 193.011(2), Florida Statute (1979), requires the Appraiser to apply criteria yielding a value less than fair market value. That desired result would interpret the statute as explicitly unconstitutional. Section 193.011(2), Florida Statute, must be read in harmony with Article VII, Section 4, Constitution of the State of Florida (1968)....

...nclusion that the income capitalization method was inappropriate for the subject property. The present highest and best use of the property, as evidenced by vacant land sales was as a site for highrise office development. The guidelines set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statute (1979), are of use especially to Property Appraisers where there is a lack of, or where there is inadequate market evidence....

...(This "market" evidence could be sales or income data.) Where there are sales, however, of comparable properties, the Appraiser must perform a standard appraisal using normal techniques. By doing this, he necessarily considers all, and uses some, of the factors set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, (1979)....

...This increase, if it actually exists, will be reflected by the current sale price of truly comparable properties and can in that manner by brought within the procedural framework of the statue [§ 193.021, Fla. Stat. (1963), the presecessor of the present § 193.011, Fla....

...The able and experienced trial judge based his determination principally upon the assessor's failure to apply all of the criteria in accordance with this Court's opinions in Walter v. Shuler, supra , and City of Tampa v. Colgan, 121 Fla. 218, 163 So. 577 (1935). Fla. Stat. § 193.011, F.S.A., (brought forward from § 193.021) sets forth the required criteria to be considered by a tax assessor in determining a property assessment....

...his income figures for computation. This may be desirable, if both parties agree, in arriving at a fair assessment but there is no requirement for the property owner to make such revelation as a predicate to its consideration in line with Fla. Stat. § 193.011, F.S.A....

...This was the gist of the District Court decision — not that the factor of the property's income was never taken into consideration by the Tax Assessor, which incongruously is the basis for the majority's finding of conflict. It is true that Section 193.021(7), F.S. 1967, (brought forward in § 193.011, F.S....

...f one year" because the taxpayer could not have anticipated such an increase. The trial court's reduced assessment was affirmed on appeal. The district court rejected the property appraiser's contention that the assessment must be upheld because: 1) section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1985), [1] merely requires a property appraiser to consider the various factors affecting the value of property; and 2) the evidence established that the appraiser considered each of those factors, including the "submarket" [2] rental income under the long-term lease....

...Reasoning that the property appraiser's failure to accord any weight to the actual submarket rental income from the property resulted in an assessment that exceeded the fair market value of the property, the district court concluded that the appraiser did not give "proper consideration to the income factor specified in section 193.011, as did in effect the trial court in arriving at its reduced assessment." 553 So.2d at 1205....

...nium Association v. Nolte, 524 So.2d 415 (Fla. 1988). See Schultz, 553 So.2d at 1225 (Parker, J., dissenting). As we noted in Valencia Center, This Court has found that the just valuation at which property must be assessed under the constitution and section 193.011 is synonymous with fair market value... . In arriving at fair market value, *575 the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...In accord with our opinion in Valencia Center, we answer the certified question as follows: When determining the fair market value of income-producing property which is encumbered by a long-term submarket lease, the assessor must consider but not necessarily use each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...As noted above, the trial court specifically found that the methodology by which the property was appraised was not "erroneous or improper." This finding is supported by the record. It is clear from the extensive testimony of the property appraiser's expert that each of the eight criteria outlined in section 193.011 was considered in reaching the final valuation....

...e appraisals, the decision below is quashed and the cause is remanded for reinstatement of the assessment of the property appraiser. It is so ordered. SHAW, C.J., and McDONALD, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. OVERTON, J., dissents. NOTES [1] Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1985), provides in pertinent part: Factors to consider in deriving just valuation....

complete', within the meaning of Florida Statutes, Section 193.11 (4) [F.S.A.], on January 1, 1968, and that

...The trial judge required counsel for both parties to submit proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law. The judge then entered his final judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. That judgment included a ten-page analysis of the application of the facts to each of the criteria set forth in section 193.011....

...r any reasonable hypothesis of legal assessment. We affirm. KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Of course, we would hasten to add that the trial court's findings of fact as to any issue make the reviewing court's task much less difficult. [2] § 193.011(8), Fla....

...cation. We disagree. Section 196.015 does not contain an exhaustive list of relevant factors. Rather, it identifies those factors that the property appraiser "may" consider in determining permanent residency for homestead exemption purposes. Compare § 193.011 et seq., Fla....

...Schuler, 176 So.2d 81, 85-86 (Fla.1965). Therefore, any deductions from "fair market value" mean that the property is not being valued at "just value." In light of this constitutional mandate and its interpretation by the supreme court, we must consider the application and effect of section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997), which states: 193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation.—In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...Broward County, 665 So.2d 272, 275 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). The question in this case is whether the property appraiser is required to make such a deduction. The plain language of the statute clearly indicates that no such deduction is required. From its title, it is clear that section 193.011 requires only that the property appraiser consider the listed factors—not that he necessarily apply them....

...numerated factors, not their application. Further, in considering the application of this statute, the supreme court stated that "[i]n arriving at fair market value, the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...r two different values. Subsection (1) requires the property appraiser to consider "[t]he present cash value of the property, which is the amount a willing purchaser would pay a willing seller, exclusive of reasonable fees and costs of purchase...." § 193.011(1), Fla....

...Subsection (8), on the other hand, requires the property appraiser to consider "[t]he net proceeds of the sale of the property, as received by the seller, after deduction of all of the usual and reasonable fees and costs of the sale, including the costs and expenses of financing...." § 193.011(8), Fla....

...We reject Tokai's position that the statute requires the property appraiser to select the value generated by the application of subsection (8) and apply it in a blanket fashion to all assessments of tangible personal property. Third, the purpose of section 193.011 is to assist property appraisers in discharging their constitutional obligation to tax property based on its just value....

...The question, then, becomes what costs of sale, if any, must be deducted from the amount the willing purchaser paid the willing seller in order to reach "fair market value." In attempting to define what costs should be deducted pursuant to the "costs *499 of sale" language in section 193.011(8), the Fourth District stated: "Such usual and reasonable fees and costs typically include reasonable attorney's fees, broker's commissions, documentary stamp costs, survey costs, appraisal fees, and title insurance costs....

...an an external cost of sale. In addition, Tokai's proposed deductions for advertising, warranties and product demonstration appear to be marketing costs which, as specifically noted in Spanish River, are generally not included as costs of sale under section 193.011(8)....

...he second, because the seller of the former parcel chose to expend an inflated percentage sum to market his property in order to obtain a purchaser. Spanish River, 497 So.2d at 1304. For all of the above reasons, both the language and the purpose of section 193.011 are thwarted by the trial court's order requiring Turner to deduct costs of sale from the fair market value of Tokai's equipment....

...is triggered. Thus, the property appraiser must consider the costs of sale when determining fair market value regardless of whether an actual sale has occurred. See Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Dade County, 275 So.2d 4, 8 (Fla.1973) (noting that section 193.011 requires the property appraiser to put himself in the position of the parties to a hypothetical sale when considering the statutory factors if no actual sale has occurred)....

...not raised by the parties, this issue was not properly before this court. See Acton v. Fort Lauderdale Hosp., 418 So.2d 1099, 1101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). [2] We note that Turner made this concession in the context of deductions for costs of sale under section 193.011(8) when the market value approach is being used....

...The appellant's development of the land as a subdivision was delayed from 1971 through 1977 by difficulties with local, state and federal agencies. The appellant argues that these development problems were not given sufficient consideration by the county tax appraiser in arriving at a "just valuation" under Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1979)....

...iff's and the defendants' valuation experts, must be resolved in favor of the defendants. The trial court also found: ... that the assessments of the subject property complied with applicable legal requirements, including those specified in Sections 193.011 and 194.011, Florida Statutes. The Property Appraiser properly considered the various valuation factors enumerated and specified in Section 193.011 Florida Statutes, and he gave due consideration to the permitting restrictions and problems which plaintiff has experienced with respect to the subject property....

...3d DCA 1974); Dade County v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 285 So.2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Alter v. Finesmith, 214 So.2d 732 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). Reversal may also be necessary if the property assessor failed to consider one of the elements required by Section 193.011. Straughn v. Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla. 1977). Section 193.011 sets forth a number of factors for the property appraiser's consideration in arriving at "just valuation": (1) The present cash value of the property, which is the amount a willing purchaser would pay a willing seller, exclusive of re...

...roblems in developing the property. In appellant's view, the delays constituted a "moratorium", which prevented development and rendered the property useless and of nominal value only. But the existence of a "moratorium" is only one factor listed in Section 193.011. It should not be the sole consideration, absent any showing that the moratorium or delayed development is permanent. The weight to be given all of the factors set forth in Section 193.011 is left to the discretion of the property appraiser....

...evidence provided, was $3,790,227 as of January 1, 1992). See generally art. VII, § 4, Fla. Const. (providing *463 that "[b]y general law regulations shall be prescribed which shall secure a just valuation of all property for ad valorem taxation"); § 193.011, Fla....

..." In arriving at the just valuation assessment mandated by the constitution, property appraisers are required to take into consideration numerous factors, as a result of which the appraiser must obtain various facts relating to the subject property. § 193.011, Fla....

...2 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). The time-share unit owners insist that the subject assessments are both unjust and not representative of fair market value. As they see it, the property appraiser has failed to properly consider the eight criteria set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), necessary to arrive at a "just" valuation....

...sent value." Vero Beach Shores, Inc. v. Nolte, 467 So.2d 1041, 1042 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). As it was said in Bystrom v. Valencia Center, Inc., 432 So.2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), pet. for rev. den., 444 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1985): The guidelines set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statute (1979), are of use especially to Property Appraisers where there is a lack of, or where there is inadequate market evidence....

...(This "market" evidence could be sales or income data.) Where there are sales, however, of comparable properties, the Appraiser must perform a standard appraisal using normal techniques. By doing this, he necessarily considers all, and uses some, of the factors set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, (1979)....

...Nolte , at 1042. Moreover, as succinctly stated in a recent excellent law review article on the subject: Florida's time-share assessment statute does not specifically recognize the marketing costs associated with selling time-share properties. Florida Statute section 193.011(8), however, does specify that the property appraiser must consider the net proceeds derived from the real property sale after "deduction of all of the usual and reasonable fees and costs of the sale." Such usual and reasonable fees a...

...uld allow the buyer of the first parcel to insist on a value 55% less than the second, because the seller of the former parcel chose to expend an inflated percentage sum to market his property in order to obtain a purchaser. This eighth criterion in section 193.011 must be read in pari materia with the first which limits the consideration of sales costs to " reasonable fees and costs of purchase." (Emphasis supplied.) Regarding the constitutional issues presented, we choose not to discuss these at length....

...18.020, *1305 Florida Statutes, dealing with the assessment of separate ownership of condominium parcels. The contention of the Plaintiffs that the development and marketing costs should be deducted from the market value pursuant to criterion (8) of Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, (Factors to consider in deriving just valuation....

...Upon application by appellant the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board reduced the appraised value to $12,610. The reasons for the reduction were said to be that the property appraiser failed to consider one or more of the statutory criteria set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), and that the comparable sales used to determine value were not in fact comparable....

...other parcel under the provisions of this section, the property appraiser, for the purposes of such determination, shall exclude any portion of such net proceeds attributable to payments for household furnishings or other items of personal property. § 193.011, Fla....

...*1043 denied, 444 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1984), the Dade County Property Appraisal Adjustment Board lowered the property appraiser's valuation. The property appraiser brought suit, and the trial court reinstated the appraiser's determination. The court said that the guidelines in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), are of particular use when there are no comparable sales....

...property useless. The property appraiser argued that he had considered the owner's delays, and had therefore lowered his appraisal from $1,500 to $700 per acre. The court said that the existence of a "moratorium" is only one of the factors listed in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...uation has been overturned by an administrative board and subsequently reinstated upon appeal to the circuit court. Such an analysis begins with *1044 the premise that, if the property appraiser's valuation was lawfully formulated in compliance with section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), that valuation enjoys a presumption of correctness which accompanies it to the trial court and upon subsequent appeal....

...Under the circumstances present in this case we hold that the presumption survives intact in spite of the Board's action. In our view the presumption of correctness dissolves only when the appraiser is disentitled to the presumption by failing to substantially comply with section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...tangible personal property. Prior to trial, the real property issue was settled. In a nonjury trial conducted before Circuit Judge John W. Springstead, Wal-Mart attempted to demonstrate that Mazourek failed to properly consider the factors listed in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997), and that Mazourek's assessments exceeded just valuation....

...mine the assessment amount. The supervisor testified that he did not deduct sales tax paid by Wal-Mart on the assessed property when he determined the assessments. The trial court concluded that Mazourek properly considered all factors enumerated in section 193.011 and that the mass appraisal cost approach method was appropriate in this case....

...les tax paid by Wal-Mart on the items of tangible personal property must be excluded from consideration in establishing just value and that Mazourek's assessments lost their presumption of correctness because Mazourek failed to properly consider the section 193.011 factors....

...Schuler, 176 So.2d 81, 85-86 (Fla.1965) ("fair market value" legally synonymous with "just valuation")). The Legislature has enacted eight factors which a property appraiser must consider to assist the property appraiser in determining just valuation. See § 193.011(1)-(8), Fla....

...operty; (7) The income from said property; (8) The net proceeds of the sale of the property, as received by the seller, after deduction of all of the usual and reasonable fees and costs of the sale, including the costs and expenses of financing .... § 193.011, Fla. Stat. (1997). The property appraiser's assessment is presumed correct, but such presumption is lost where the taxpayer demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that the property appraiser "has failed to consider properly" the section 193.011 factors....

...onsider sales tax paid when using the cost approach. See Todora, 791 So.2d at 31. We approve the Second District Court of Appeal's opinion as follows: In arriving at just valuation, the property appraiser must consider the eight factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997)....

...[3] Thus, we conclude *92 that the Fifth District Court of Appeal erred in finding that Mazourek's assessment of Wal-Mart's personalty lost its presumption of correctness on account of Mazourek's inclusion of sales tax paid. We next consider whether Mazourek properly considered the section 193.011 factors. See § 194.301, Fla.Stat. (1997). On the basis of this record, we find that competent, substantial evidence supported the trial court's finding that Mazourek properly considered the section 193.011 factors. Morever, we find no error with the trial court's ratification of Mazourek's assessment of Wal-Mart's tangible personal property. See § 194.301, Fla. Stat.(1997)(where property appraiser properly considers the section 193.011 factors, "the taxpayer shall have the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the appraiser's assessment is in excess of just value")....

...Under the Florida Constitution, property subject to ad valorem taxation must be assessed at just value. 3 Fla. Const. art. VII, Sec. 4 (1970, amended 1980). To arrive at just value, state law directs property appraisers to consider eight factors. Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 193.011....

...ction 11503 violation. The parties differ, however, as to the degree of discrimination and thus the measure of relief. The railroads argue that the just value calculation is itself inherently discriminatory due to the operation of Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 193.011(8)....

...st value shall constitute the tax base. That figure then must be multiplied by the tax rate to determine the amount of tax owing. In Florida, ad valorem tax is assessed on real property and tangible personal property. Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 193.114(1) 4 Section 193.011 provides in pertinent part: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...The trial judge acknowledged that this last limitation was produced by federal income tax laws, which would penalize the Trust if it engaged in the business of selling individual parcels. Thus, in the view of the trial judge, the Trust was limited to a sale in bulk. [1] Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), lists the factors which a property appraiser is to take into consideration in arriving at just valuation for ad valorem tax purposes....

...tees had made any serious effort in that regard, possibly because of their desire to sell the property in bulk if possible. The burden was on the appellees to establish by competent and substantial evidence that the property appraiser did not follow section 193.011 in determining the assessed valuation of the appellees' property....

...assessment has been made and granted pursuant to this section". Further, in subsection (6)(b) the statute stated: "In years in which proper application for agricultural assessment has not been made the land shall be assessed under the provisions of § 193.011, Florida Statutes" [nonagricultural]....

...not require the assessor to so inform the applicant. The statute provides that the assessor "shall have available at his office a list by ownership of all applications received [for agricultural assessment], showing the acreage, full valuation under § 193.011, the valuation of the land under the provisions of this section, and whether or not the classification requested was granted"....

treatment accorded agricultural lands by F.S. § 193.11(3), F.S.A. We approve and adopt the decision below

...il the duties and procedures of the property appraiser and mandate an assessment by the property appraiser of the particular property pursuant to uniform standards for all similarly situated property consistent with the express criteria set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes. See in particular Sections 192.011, 192.032, 192.042 and 193.011, Florida Statutes....

...However, he could not thereupon adopt the information supplied by the Department of Revenue as establishing either the quantity and type of tangible personal property in his county or its assessed value. He must proceed with an assessment of the property consistent with the mandated criteria of Section 193.011, Florida Statutes and consistent with accepted general standards applicable to all similar property or property owners within his county....

* * * nor does it (subsection *231 (11) of Section 193.11, Florida Statutes) per se contravene the uniform

not been afforded the statutory protection of § 193.11(3), Fla. Stat., F.S.A., which provides: "All lands

...levied." Fla.Stat. § 192.001(3) (1977). "Property appraisers may appoint deputies to act in their behalf in carrying out the duties prescribed by law." Fla.Stat. § 193.024 (1980). Property appraisals are carried out pursuant to state statute, see § 193.011 et seq. Florida Statutes, as well as professional appraisal standards established by the International Association of Assessing Officers and the Appraisal Institute. "policymakers" and that, as such, Nikolits did not violate their constitutional rights even if he had fired them for political reasons....

...The Property Appraiser determined the fair market value of the subject property by performing a standard appraisal using the comparable sales approach to valuation. In so doing, the Property Appraiser considered and gave adequate weight to all the factors set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes....

...By considering sales of neighboring parcels subject to the same jurisdiction as the subject property, appropriate weight was given by the Property Appraiser to the land use restrictions applicable to the subject property, as well as to all other criteria set out in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes....

...perty not on a public road. "The court concluded that the best indicators of value of the property were the comparable sales in proximity to the subject. The comparable sales were properly considered by the Polk County Property Appraiser in light of Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, and the assessment was upheld. This Court is likewise persuaded that the Dade County Property Appraiser in the instant case proceeded properly in accordance with Section 193.011 and that the assessment of the subject property should be upheld for the reasons set forth in this judgment. "10. Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, prescribes eight criteria which the Property Appraiser must consider in arriving at fair market value....

...The Court finds and concludes that by considering and giving adequate weight to all eight criteria, the Dade County Property Appraiser complied with the constitutional and statutory mandates of his office in assessing the subject property, including Section 193.011(2), regarding highest and best use and present use. `The guidelines set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, are of use especially to Property Appraisers where there is a lack of, or where there is inadequate market evidence....

...(This market evidence could be sales or income data.) *446 Where there are sales, however, of comparable properties, the Appraiser must perform a standard appraisal using normal techniques. By doing this, he necessarily considers all, and uses some, of the factors set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes.' Bystrom v....

...The Court reserves jurisdiction to tax costs against the Plaintiff upon due notice." The appellant contends that the Property Appraiser's assessment of value was purely speculative as to future value, even though based on comparable sales and therefore was contrary to the provisions of Section 193.011, Fla....

...among other things, on comparable value as fixed in the market place by comparable sales. If, as the appellant contends, the legislature meant to modify the terms of the constitution by its statutory enactment with reference to speculative value of Section 193.011(2), Fla....

...t weeks as partial interests and because Hausman did not appraise the actual condominium parcels, the assessments were void. The court also concluded that Hausman failed to adequately consider the criteria for determining just valuation set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...Second, we conclude that the court below was also correct in finding the assessment unlawful since it exceeded the just value of the real property. The legislature has provided property assessors with statutory criteria to be considered when determining the just valuation or fair market value of real property § 193.011, Fla....

...cent to the cost of the time share units. The court determined that, as a matter of law, the method used by Hausman failed to consider these costs which resulted in an assessment substantially in excess of just value. This conclusion is supported by section 193.011(8), Florida Statutes (1983), which states in relevant part: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...reasonable fees and costs of the sale, including the costs and expenses of financing, and allowance for unconventional or atypical terms of financing arrangements... . An assessor's discretionary judgment as to the weight given to the criteria under section 193.011 will not be disturbed by a reviewing court provided each factor is first carefully considered....

...Scripps Howard appealed the final judgment and the Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed. The district court held that Havill's assessments were not entitled to the presumption of validity usually afforded such assessments because Havill failed to consider each factor under section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1993), for deriving the just value of the property....

...Xerox Corp., 447 So.2d 1348 (Fla.1984). A presumption of validity attaches to the property appraiser's assessment of property for ad valorem taxation purposes. Bystrom v. Whitman, 488 So.2d 520, 521 (Fla. 1986). Property appraisers are required under section 193.011 to take the following factors into consideration in determining just valuation: (1) the present cash value of the property; (2) the highest and best use to which the property can be expected to be put in the immediate future and the p...

...the price he would be willing to pay for the balance of the project owned by Deltona. *173 The trial court rejected the appellants' appraisal because it found that their appraisal method failed to take into consideration all the factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1981). [4] Subsections 193.011(1), (5) and (6) require consideration of the present cash value of the land, the cost and value of improvements on it, and its actual condition....

...luding cost of the property, present replacement value of any improvements, or condition of the property. [Cites omitted]. Most importantly, the defendants' experts did not attempt to determine `the present cash value of the property,' as defined by § 193.011(1), Fla....

...The trial court's findings and conclusions come to us with a presumption of correctness, and we see no reason to overturn them. Atlantic Internal Investment Corporation v. Turner, 383 So.2d 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Failure to consider one or more of the factors set forth in section 193.011 is sufficient to invalidate an appraisal done by a tax assessor even when it is entitled to the presumption of correctness....

...Xerox Corp., 447 So.2d 1348 (Fla. 1984). The burden is on the taxpayer to show the property appraiser departed from the essential requirements of the law and the appraisal is not supported by any reasonable hypothesis of legality. 447 So.2d at 1350. Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), [*] sets forth the eight criteria a property *418 appraiser must consider when determining the fair market value of real property for tax assessment purposes. When sales of comparable properties are used to determine fair market value, as was done here, the property appraiser performs a standard appraisal. In so doing, he considers all and uses some of the factors set forth in section 193.011....

...Valencia Center, Inc., 432 So.2d 108 (Fla.3d DCA 1983), pet. for review denied, 444 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1984). Petitioners claim the determination of the fair market value of the time-share units is invalid because the property appraiser failed to properly consider section 193.011(8), which directs the property appraiser to take into account the "usual and reasonable fees and costs" associated with the sale of the property....

...or tax assessment purposes. Petitioners urge the excessive marketing costs, the atypical financing costs, and the other extraordinary costs associated with fee time-share estates are part of the "reasonable fees and costs of sale" contemplated under section 193.011(8)....

...f the sale, the figure upon which the tax assessment is calculated under the market value approach. The excessive costs of sale cited by petitioners comprise approximately 75-80% of the purchase price of the fee time-share units. However, as we read section 193.011(8), these costs are not among the "reasonable fees and costs of sale" contemplated by the legislature to be excluded from the ad valorem appraisal process....

...al fees, documentary stamp costs, survey costs and title insurance costs. See Note, Ad Valorem Taxation of Time-Share Properties: Should Time-Share Estates Be Separately Assessed and Taxed?, 37 U.Fla.L.Rev. 421 (1985). Until the legislature modifies section 193.011(8), the costs cited by the petitioners cannot be deducted from the purchase price of the time-share units as "reasonable fees and costs of sale." Thus, the property appraiser correctly applied the eighth criterion of section 193.011 by not deducting from the sales price of the time-share units the marketing costs and other costs cited by the petitioners....

...For the reasons expressed in this opinion, we approve the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal holding section 192.037, Florida Statutes (1983), constitutional. We also hold the property appraiser correctly applied the eighth criterion of section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), and properly assessed the time-share units under section 192.037 by assessing each individual time-share week using the market approach to value. It is so ordered. McDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur. NOTES [*] Section 193.011 provides as follows: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

042(1) was to rectify inequities in former Section 193.11(4).[3] The former statute mandated an all-or-nothing

lands upon an acreage basis as provided for in Section 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and his failure

...As to count II of the complaint, the appellant argued that if it were judicially determined that the property should be valued as substantially completed units, the assessment was still excessive and arbitrary because it failed to properly consider the statutory factors required by section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1985)....

are agricultural lands within the meaning of Section 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, 1965, F.S.A. Said lands

...The Florida Constitution, Article VII, Section 4 (1968) provides that "by general law regulations shall be prescribed which shall secure a just valuation of all property for ad valorem taxation... ." To effectuate this constitutional provision, the Legislature passed section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1979) which provides eight factors to be considered in deriving just valuation of property: 193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation....

...assessment, and the trial court erred in rejecting it on this ground. Blake v. Xerox Corp . The trial court made no determination that the property appraiser's valuation was arbitrary or that the appraisal failed to consider the factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987)....

...Blake v. Xerox Corp .; Vero Beach Shores, Inc. v. Nolte, 467 So.2d at 1044. On the other hand, if this difference is a dispute over the weight to be given the various factors, namely the quantity or size of the property, its cost, and its condition, section 193.011(4), (5), (6), Florida Statutes (1987) then it is within the property appraiser's discretion to determine how much weight is to be accorded to each of those factors....

...r ad valorem tax assessments, it is bound to *16 follow the same statutory criteria as are the Property Appraiser and the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board. See Art. VII, § 4, Fla. Const. The statutory criteria for the obtainment of just value is section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987). In the well-reasoned opinion in Bystrom v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, 416 So.2d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 429 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1983), the third district held that the constitutional mandate to follow section 193.011 applied to the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board in the administrative review process....

...It logically follows that the circuit court has that same mandate in the judicial review process. Therefore, when the taxpayer has met his burden of overcoming the presumption of correctness of either the Property Appraiser's valuation or the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board's valuation, the court must then apply section 193.011 standards in determining a just value....

...See Bystrom, 416 So.2d at 1133. Notwithstanding the trial court's ruling that Countryside must overcome every reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment, Countryside was also required to show the court that the values it wanted the court to adopt met the standards of section 193.011....

...and presented no convincing evidence *17 of value based on either the market approach or the cost approach. The court also found that Smith both considered and used all three approaches in determining just value and that his valuations complied with section 193.011....

...Although we disagree with the trial court's finding that the reassessments which replaced the void assessments were entitled to the same dignity as any other assessment, that disagreement does not change the result reached. Countryside had the burden of supporting its good faith estimates of just value with analysis meeting section 193.011 criteria and failed....

(Ch. 57-195, Acts of 1957, carried forward as Section 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and transferred

...an amount considered adequate. Such a taxable property interest, like other taxable property should be assessed at its just valuation, according to the method required, upon consideration of the listed elements relating to value, as provided for in § 193.011 Fla....

...On the contrary, the DOR's authority is limited in many ways. For example, as recognized by the state itself, the DOR must promulgate regulations that are consistent with the valuation standards expressly contained in the Florida statutes. Op.Atty.Gen., 071-235, Aug. 10, 1971. Specifically, section 193.011 already sets forth the factors to be considered by county property appraisers in deriving just valuations of the taxpayers' properties. Fla.Stat. § 193.011....

under the statute which provides: F.S. 1967, Section 193.11(4), F.S.A. "All taxable lands upon which active

...On February 7, 1984, appellants filed suit to cancel the tax assessment and sought an injunction and other relief from the assessment. Appellants alleged that the assessment was discrimatory and a denial of equal protection and that the county failed to utilize the factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983) when it assessed the subject property. The trial court entered a final judgment on January 18, 1985, finding that appellants had failed to prove their allegations of discrimination and denial of equal protection, and also had failed to prove that appellees violated section 193.011 in assessing the subject property....

...independent MAI appraisers employed by the State of Florida had appraised the lands for $11,092,000 and $12,325,000 just two months prior to January 1, 1983. Secondly, they contend that appellees failed to properly consider the criteria contained in section 193.011(2), Florida Statutes (1983) when they assessed the subject property....

...Additionally, appellants argue that on January 1, 1983, they did not have a permit from the state allowing construction along the coastal construction control line, and that in determining assessed value, the county appraiser simply assumed that a waiver permitting the construction could be obtained. Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983) provides in pertinent part: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...Improvements or portions not substantially completed on January 1 shall have no value placed thereon. "Substantially completed" shall mean that the improvement or some self-sufficient unit within it can be used for the purpose for which it was constructed. *963 Section 193.011 thus requires consideration of the present use of the property and its highest and best use in the immediate future....

...1977), rehearing denied (1978), the supreme court pointed out: More specifically, the tax assessor in this case failed to consider the "present use" of appellees' property, in determining the "highest and best use" to which the property could be expected to be put in the "immediate future." Section 193.011(2)....

...1972, 261 So.2d 822; St. Joe Paper Co. v. Brown, Fla. 1969, 223 So.2d 311; Escambia Chemical Corp. v. Fisher, Fla.App.1st, 1973, 277 So.2d 307; Exchange Realty Corp. v. Hillsborough Co., Fla.App.2d, 1972, 272 So.2d 534. While these decisions were based on § 193.011 (formerly § 193.021), dealing with non-agricultural realty, we find no significant differences in the statutory language of § 193.461 which would require a different rule....

...al tax assessment of the building ("subject property"). [1] A general master was appointed to hear the matter pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490. At trial, the Appraiser established that he conformed to the eight factors enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1991)....

...This brought the Appraiser within the contemplated exception. Second, as observed by the panel opinion, although the constitutional argument was pled in the complaint, the Appraiser began his presentation at trial by establishing nothing more than his compliance with the eight factors set out in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1991), in making his assessment....

...certain part of the company's facilities are bought with these deferred taxes. In Valencia Center, Inc. v. Bystrom, 543 So.2d 214 (Fla. 1989), the court stated that: [T]he just valuation at which property must be assessed under the constitution and section 193.011 is synonymous with fair market value... . In arriving at fair market value, the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...The appraiser's valuation, on the other hand, was properly based upon the fair market value of the unencumbered fee. Id. at 1069. In the instant case, there is no evidence that the property appraiser failed to consider all of the statutory factors enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes....

...ears of an asset's life. Thus, the company pays less taxes, increases its cash flow and can utilize the funds to purchase tangible personal property. Of course, the company may eventually have to pay the balance of these taxes to the government. [2] 193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation....

*366for 1960 was made contrary to the provisions of § 193.11(3) F.S.A. The prayer for relief sought to enjoin

...At the trial, extensive testimony as to the value of the property, which ranged from $0.00 to $4,467,450, was offered by plaintiff taxpayers and the taxing authorities. The trial judge determined that the 1973 assessment was made arbitrarily and without consideration of the enumerated factors as set forth in § 193.011, Fla....

...The tax assessor appeals this reduced assessment. We affirm. On appeal, defendant-appellants did not contest the finding of the trial judge that the subject assessment was arbitrary and made without consideration of the enumerated factors as set forth in § 193.011, Fla....

...Equitable Life , the Property Appraiser's assessment enjoys presumptive validity so long as the appraisal was accomplished in substantial compliance with the applicable assessment statute. Id. at 1145. [I]f the property appraiser shows that his assessment was made in substantial compliance with Section 193.011, [Florida Statutes,] then the burden shifts to the taxpayer, not merely to establish that the taxpayer's evidence as to valuation of the property is more convincing than the property appraiser's, but rather to overcome the property ap...

...Equitable Life, 416 So.2d at 1146-47. Turning next to the merits, in approving the Adjustment Board's reduced assessment, the trial court reasoned that the Property Appraiser had not properly considered one of the eight criteria for determining just value found in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987)....

...That contention has in the meantime been answered adversely to the taxpayer's position in Robbins v. Summit Apartments, Ltd., 586 So.2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). In sum, we conclude that the Property Appraiser showed that his assessment was made in substantial compliance with section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987), and that the taxpayer's evidence did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of legal assessment....

...The discount sellout method is inappropriate for use in valuing the property in this case. 7. The assessor had sufficient evidence of comparable sales from which to make appraisals of each section of the subdivision. 8. The assessor considered all of the criteria provided in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1979)....

...GAC Liquidating Trust, 462 So.2d 92 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Atlantic International Investment Corp. v. Turner, 383 So.2d 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Perhaps the most serious contention the owners make is that the assessor did not consider all of the criteria mandated by the legislature in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1979), and failure to do so invalidates the entire appraisal process utilized by her. The owners argue that the platting requirement constitutes a "land use" regulation under section 193.011(2), which has a direct effect on the valuation of the property....

...Thus, they submit that failure to consider it fatally flaws the assessor's valuation process. We do not disagree with the thrust of the owners' contention that all of the criteria must be considered, but reject it because it is not applicable in this case. It is true that the assessor must consider the statutory factors in section 193.011 and failure to do so is a critical defect in the methodology utilized....

...eme, they may be variously weighted by the appraiser or discarded entirely where they are not, under the circumstances, probative of present value. There is substantial competent evidence in this record that all of the statutory factors contained in section 193.011 were considered by the assessor, but that the weight allocated to the various factors differed. This, we suggest, is entirely proper. As the court pointed out in Atlantic International Investment Corp. v. Turner : The weight to be given all of the factors set forth in Section 193.011 is left to the discretion of the property appraiser....

...t in the immediate future and the present use, taking into consideration any applicable local or state land use regulations and considering any moratorium imposed when the moratorium prohibits or restricts the development or improvement of property. § 193.011(2)....

...rs. The Property Appraiser, as the initiator of the de novo proceeding in the Circuit Court, see Section 194.032(6)(a)2, Florida Statutes (1977), satisfied his burden of showing that his preliminary assessment was made in substantial compliance with Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1977); the taxpayers failed to satisfy their burden to overcome the presumptive correctness of the Property Appraiser's assessment by showing that there was no reasonable hypothesis to support the Property Appraiser...

...positive showing of arbitrary action or intentional discrimination on the part of the tax assessor which resulted in such a manifest and gross inequality as to amount to a fraud upon the appellants. As to appellants' contention (3), Florida Statute, § 193.011, F.S.A., sets forth income from the property as one of the required criteria to be considered by a tax assessor in determining a property assessment....

...It is clear, however, that Section 193.461(3)(b), which provides that "[i]n determining whether the use of the land for agricultural purposes is bona fide, the following factors may be taken into consideration ..." (emphasis supplied), does not mandate that the Property Appraiser consider all or any of the factors. Unlike Section 193.011 concerning valuation of regular property and Section 193.461(6)(a) concerning valuation of lands classified as agricultural, both of which provide that the Property Appraiser "shall" consider the listed factors, [7] no such mandatory requirement is imposed by Section 193.461(3)(b)....

...Meffert II, General Counsel, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Tallahassee, for Amicus Curiae Florida Housing Finance Corporation. EVANDER, J. The issue in this case is whether Putnam County's property appraiser complied with the requirements of sections 193.011 and 420.5099, Florida Statutes, in assessing the value of Holly Ridge L.P.'s (Holly Ridge) property for the years 2002 and 2003....

...Schuler, 176 So.2d 81 (Fla.1965). *697 The framers of the Constitution delegated to the Legislature the responsibility for deciding the specifics of how "just valuation" would be secured. Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass'n v. Robbins, 914 So.2d 925, 932 (Fla.2005). Section 193.011 sets forth various factors which a property appraiser is required to take into consideration in determining just valuation....

...Section 420.5099 sets forth additional directives which the property appraiser is required to follow in determining just valuation for LIHTC apartments. In 2002, the applicable statute provided: For purposes of implementing this program in Florida and in assessing the property for ad valorem taxation under s. 193.011, neither the tax credits, nor financing generated by tax credits, shall be considered as income to the property, and the rental income from rent restricted units in a low-income tax credit development shall be recognized by the property appraiser....

...Section 420.5099 was amended, effective January 1, 2003. The amendment changed the language of subsection (5) and added a new subsection (6). These subsections provided: (5) For purposes of implementing this program in Florida and in assessing the property for ad valorem taxation under s. 193.011, neither the tax credits, nor financing generated by tax credits, shall be considered as income to the property, and the actual rental income from rent restricted units in a low-income tax credit development shall be recognized by the property appraiser. In considering or using the market or cost approaches under s. 193.011, neither the costs paid for by tax credits nor the costs paid for by additional financing proceeds received because the property is in the program shall be included in evaluation. (6) For the further purpose of implementing this program in Florida and in assessing the property for ad valorem taxation under s. 193.011, any extended low income housing agreement and all amendments and supplements thereto which are recorded and filed in the official public records of the county where the property is located shall be deemed a land use regulation during the term of any such agreement, amendment, or supplement....

...e subject property from the plaintiff taxpayer [Hotelerama Associates, Ltd.] when utilizing the income approach to valuation herein [and did not by alternative methods make up for said deficiency]; and (b) thereby failed to substantially comply with Section 193.011(7), Florida Statutes (1981), in assessing the subject property in this case....

...sessment of the realty itself including all of the outstanding legal interests in the property, such as leaseholds and easements. Century responds that the appraiser's approach results in an appraisal that is not fair market value or just valuation. Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1981), sets forth the factors that the appraiser is to consider in arriving at the just value of property under Article VII, Section 4, of the Florida Constitution....

...The taxpayer challenged that assessment in circuit court, and the property appraiser filed a counterclaim alleging that the assessed valuation was below just value. At trial, the assistant property appraiser testified that in arriving at his assessment he considered the eight criteria for determining just value found in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1989), including the highest and best use for the property, and utilized the cost approach, the market approach, and the income approach [1] in valuing the property at $7,200,000....

...The taxpayer's expert, using only the income approach, stated that the proper assessment was $5,562,900. The trial court ruled in favor of the taxpayer. The corrected final judgment provided that the assessor had considered all of the factors enumerated in section 193.011 but that the taxpayer had refuted the presumption of correctness....

...Additionally, the trial court noted that this case involved *1069 "unique and special properties" because of the HUD regulations. The trial court erred in adopting the taxpayer's valuation and in setting aside the property appraiser's assessment which was based upon all of the criteria found in section 193.011 [2] and upon the value of all of the interests in the property. "[T]he just valuation at which property must be assessed under the constitution and section 193.011 is synonymous with fair market value... . In arriving at fair market value, the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...1991), the Florida Supreme Court, in accord with its decision in Valencia, held that: When determining the fair market value of income-producing property which is encumbered by a long-term submarket lease, the assessor must consider... each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...the "fair cash value" of federally restricted housing projects. Id.; Board of Assessors v. Tammy Brook Co., 368 Mass. 810, 331 N.E.2d 531 (1975). However, the legislature in our state requires utilization of all of the statutory criteria outlined in section 193.011 [3] to determine the just valuation of *1070 income-producing property....

...jor approaches used for determining the tax assessment for income-producing properties. [2] Even assuming that there was no formal inspection of the property within three years prior to assessment, this omission does not amount to noncompliance with section 193.011 on these facts. [3] Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1989), states that in arriving at just valuation the property appraiser shall take into consideration the following factors: (1) The present cash value of the property ...; (2) The highest and best use to which the...

opinion on value based upon the factors of section 193.011, Florida Statutes. It amounted to either a

...nd best use," and that fair market value was a more appropriate basis for ascertaining a just value. Bystrom v. Valencia Center, Inc., 432 So.2d 108, 110 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 444 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1984). We further held that to interpret section 193.011(2) in the method advanced by Valencia would be contrary to article VII, section 4, Florida Constitution (1968), which provides: "By general law regulations shall be prescribed which shall secure a just valuation of all property for ad valorem taxation......

...between the parties in June of 1977. The question presented is whether the tax assessor, in determining the assessment for the year 1976 properly considered the moratorium on development or improvement of the property as required by Florida Statute § 193.011, which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...Governor when the moratorium prohibits or restricts the development or improvement of property as otherwise authorized by applicable law." (e.s.) Specifically, the question presented is whether the tax assessor properly interpreted subsection (2) of § 193.011....

...n Control. The sole existing canal on the land was unconnected to a drainage area and survey and survey markers on the land were directly related to the development which was still awaiting government approval. Concerning appellee's consideration of § 193.011(2), the testimony of the Volusia County property evaluator supervisor, Frank DeBartolo, is, in pertinent part, as follows: *722 "Q [B]ut assume that on January 1, 1976 through the refusal of the State to issue necessary permits, a prospect...

...The use of private property is increasingly subject to government regulation in the public interest to protect the environment and guard against thoughtless development. In 1974, the Legislature, in recognition of this increased regulation and its burden, amended § 193.011(2) to specifically require that property appraisers consider government moratoriums affecting development in arriving at a just valuation for tax purposes....

...date were required to be considered in determining the highest and best use of the property. Straughn v. Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla. 1977). *723 The Florida Supreme Court, in Straughn v. Tuck, supra, held the tax assessor must consider each factor in § 193.011, holding: "[T]he tax assessor in this case failed to consider the `present use' of appellees' property, in determining the `highest and best use' to which the property could be expected to be put in the `immediate future.' Section 193.011(2)....

...oratorium factor can be given effect in making the assessment. This defeats the legislative intent to require consideration in each taxable year of governmental delays enjoined on the development and improvements of private property. Florida Statute 193.011 does not require that there be an abandonment of development or improvement of the property, but rather that there be a delay due to the causes specified....

...sently be used for that purpose. There was no evidence that would lead a reasonable person to believe that use of this A-1 residential land as a hunting preserve is the use to which the property could "be expected to be put in the immediate future", Section 193.011(2), Florida Statutes....

...eckerboard" fashion, has rendered the land unsuitable for economical agriculture use, cattle grazing or any other economic use. Secondly, the appellant's appraiser admitted that he completely failed to consider the eight criteria for valuation under Section 193.011, Florida Statutes....

...On December 2, 1981, within sixty days of the PAAB written and filed decision as to all three properties, *1055 Florida Rock filed suit in the circuit court against the Property Appraiser complaining that the Property Appraiser "failed to consider all of the factors contained ... in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, and as a consequence, assessed the subject property in amounts in excess of the fair market value thereof." The taxpayer's lawsuit was filed in Judge Mario Goderich's division....

their own, at full cash value as required by Section 193.11, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. They asserted that

...he amounts subsequently reported by other unidentified taxpayers as part of the purchase price of an entire business which included tangible personal property. The court concluded that the Property Appraiser properly considered all of the factors in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997)....

...Wal-Mart then was ordered to cooperate with the Property Appraiser and furnish sufficient information so the Appraiser could assess the remaining unreported property. The Florida Constitution, Article VII, Section 4 (1968) provides that all property must be assessed at "just value" for ad valorem taxation. Under section 193.011 and Florida case law, eight statutory factors must be considered to arrive at a just valuation....

...a court can evaluate whether rejection was legally proper. The Sales Tax Issue Wal-Mart contends that the Property Appraiser's inclusion of some 2 million dollars of sales taxes paid by it on its property in the assessment valuation was violative of section 193.011(1) and (8)....

...he actual value of property. See Hausman v. VTSI, Inc., 482 So.2d 428, 431 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 492 So.2d 1332 (Fla.1986). The Fourth District discussed what "costs" in a real property context should be deducted as "costs of sale" under section 193.011(8) and concluded: "Such usual and reasonable fees and costs typically include reasonable attorney's fees, broker's commissions, documentary stamp taxes, appraisal fees and title insurance costs....

...tire businesses. His opinion was that these comparisons validated his assessments and demonstrated that he considered "market data." Wal-Mart argues that the Property Appraiser's use of other taxpayer returns is not market data within the meaning of section 193.011(1) and (8) for two reasons....

...Therefore, a greater reliance on one may result in a different valuation. It is for this very reason that the property appraiser is given "great leeway" as long as he follows the requirements of the law. [citations omitted]. Id., 729 So.2d at 471. Section 193.011 requires "only that the property appraiser consider the listed factors —not that he necessarily apply them." Turner, 767 So.2d at 497. The Property Appraiser's admitted failure to investigate the availability of market data indicates he failed to properly consider the factors set forth in section 193.011(1) and (8)....

...itional assessments or retroactively taxing any property through a counterclaim. [4] We remand the cause for a new trial on the appropriate amount of the assessments consistent with this opinion. REMANDED. PETERSON and SAWAYA, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997) provides: 193.011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation.—In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...anagement. Unless and until the Florida Legislature changes section 199.185 to permit the taxation of franchises and other intangibles, Havill's approach is unsustainable. FAILURE TO CONSIDER EACH OF THE STATUTORY FACTORS REQUIRED FOR JUST VALUATION Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1991), "Factors to consider in deriving just valuation," provides: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...While the particular method by which an appraiser arrives at fair market value is left to the appraiser's discretion, Valencia Center, Inc. v. Bystrom, 543 So.2d 214, 216 (Fla. 1989), the appraiser must at least consider, but not necessarily use, each of the statutory factors. § 193.011, Fla....

...rposes. The Value Adjustment Board denied the petition challenging the assessment and Barnett Banks, Inc. paid the taxes under protest. Barnett then filed a complaint alleging that the property appraiser had failed to consider each of the factors in section 193.011 and seeking a determination of the just value of the property and an order for refund of the difference in the tax paid and the tax due....

...rnett Center on January 1, 1992, was 38-40%. For 1993, he assumed a vacancy and collection percentage of 20%, although the actual vacancy at the Barnett Center on January 1, 1993, was 30%. In considering the factors for deriving just valuation under section 193.011, he concluded that the property was being put to its highest and best use as an office building....

...o the present value that it is now worth... . He testified that each of his appraisals ($55 million on January 1, 1992, and $60 million on January 1, 1993) contained an analysis of all three approaches, took into account each of the eight factors in section 193.011, and was based upon data that is customarily relied upon by professional fee appraisers in the area....

...In the final judgment, the trial court ruled that the December 1992 sale of the property was an "arm's length" transaction and that the property appraiser's assessments did not enjoy a presumption of correctness because he "did not legally consider the present cash value factor" in section 193.011....

...evenue in making the appraisal. The trial court determined that the presumption of correctness accorded the property appraiser's assessment did not apply in these cases because the appraiser did not "legally consider" three of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...- 11 - respective structure differs. The use of the property appraiser’s structure value is reasonable because the property appraiser is statutorily required to use a replacement cost to determine this value. See § 193.011(5), Fla....

...r valuation purposes. The former requires a showing that the realty was "actually used for a bona fide agricultural purpose," section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), while the latter involves a consideration of the eight factors listed under section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1991)....

...if the property were determined not to be used for a bona fide agricultural purpose, I would be inclined to reverse the valuation placed upon the property. I consider that in arriving at his appraisal the tax assessor misconstrued the provisions of section 193.011(2), requiring him to consider, among other factors, "[t]he highest and best use to which the property can be expected to be put in the immediate future and the present use of the property, taking into consideration any applicable judi...

...Thus, it appears that while section 193.461(3)(b) requires that actual, current use be agricultural to classify land for agriculture assessment purposes and does not require the assessor to take into consideration any applicable local or state land use regulation, the assessor is required by section 193.011(2) to consider the same in arriving at a just valuation of such property....

...nd I am constrained to concur. NOTES [1] § 193.461(3)(b)5., Fla. Stat. [2] § 193.461(3)(b)7., Fla. Stat. [3] The highest permissible use of the property pursuant to zoning restrictions may be more crucial in a determination of just valuation under Section 193.011, Florida Statutes....

...ort Square, a total life care and residential facility for retired persons, or continuing care retirement community. Lake Port alleged in its complaint below that in assessing the property, the Property Appraiser failed to follow the requirements of section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1995) [1] , and thereby its 63.18 acre property *469 was assessed in excess of "just value" as defined under the Florida Constitution, Article VII, Section 4 (1968)....

...the independent living facility. This was the subject of a non-jury trial. After trial, the court ruled that the preponderance of the evidence showed that the Property Appraiser did not "adequately" consider the fifth, seventh, and eighth factors of section 193.011....

...The Property Appraiser's arguments have merit and dictate reversal. The Florida Constitution, Article VII, section 4 (1968), provides that "by general law regulations shall be prescribed which shall secure a just valuation of all property for ad valorem taxation ..." Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1995), effectuates this provision by specifying eight factors to be considered in deriving just valuation of property....

...A strong presumption of validity attaches to the property appraiser's assessment of property for ad valorem taxation purposes. Bystrom v. Whitman, 488 So.2d 520, 521 (Fla. 1986). If, however, the appraiser does not consider each of the statutory factors articulated in section 193.011, the presumption of validity is lost....

...supported by any reasonable hypothesis of legality. Id. No sufficient reason why the cost approach would not and did not yield a fair appraisal for this property has been established. REVERSED and REMANDED. DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 193.011 reads as follows: In arriving at just valuation as required under s....

...Department of Revenue, 620 So.2d 1051, 1055 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 629 So.2d 132 (Fla.1993). [3] In its Answer Brief, Lake Port argues that "where the property is income producing property, the income approach (that is, the seventh criteria of Section 193.011) cannot be rejected and must be given due consideration by the property appraiser." Lake Port cites Palm Corp....

...ies related to the property. Following the 1999 and 2000 tax assessments, VGA filed suit against the Appraiser alleging that in assessing the property the Appraiser failed to properly consider the factors for determining just valuation enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1999) and (2000)....

...dgment reducing the property appraiser's assessment of the value of property leased for a shopping center. [1] The basic argument for reversal of the final judgment appears to be that a property appraiser's assessment is presumed to be correct, that section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1985) requires only a property appraiser's consideration of various specified factors affecting the value of property, including its income which in this case is rental income at a level below that obtainable on the...

...There was substantial competent evidence that the property appraiser, by not actually using the rental income *1205 as a factor weighed in arriving at his assessment, assessed the property at a figure in excess of its fair market value. He therefore did not give proper consideration to the income factor specified in section 193.011, as did in effect the trial court in arriving at its reduced assessment....

...ubtless explains the trial court in this case not having put its finger precisely upon the right reason for its right result. Cases in this area should receive analyses centered upon factors governing the "just" valuation of property, as required by section 193.011 and article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution which call for fairness to taxpayers, as well as, and not only, addressing how increases in tax assessments may be justified under general legal principles....

...ase the amount of the reduced increase only upon the income approach to property assessment through using the income factor but, as further explained in section (2) below, used a combination of factors, including primarily income, provided for under section 193.011....

...r assessment."). Palm Corp. v. Homer is also specific authority for our foregoing conclusion that the failure of the property appraiser to use in any way the income factor in this context was a failure to properly consider that factor as required by section 193.011. The opinion in that case notes that a tax assessor's failure to "apply" and to "use[]" the income factor was contrary to the requirement of section 193.011 that that factor be "considered." 261 So.2d at 823. See also Walter v. Schuler, 176 So.2d at 85 ("Sec. 193.021 [the predecessor to section 193.011] was not intended to give assessors an almost unbridled discretion in the performance of their duty to establish just valuation....

...Schuler , as discussed in section (1) above. The basis from the evidence was the below-described expert testimony on appellee's behalf to which brief reference has been made in section (1). Appellee's expert testimony specifically dealt with each of the factors to be considered under section 193.011....

...entury. The dissenting opinion of Judge Beranek in Century Village, citing Morganwoods Greentree, did not agree with Valencia Center I that even the lease in that case could be ignored in valuing the property. 449 So.2d at 382. [10] The provision in section 193.011(2) requiring the consideration of "[t]he highest and best use to which the property can be expected to be put in the immediate future" further indicates the material difference between a case involving a long-term lease like that here and cases involving short-term leases....

...But to value the property in this case as though it were not encumbered by a long-term lease would seem to contravene that statutory provision by basing the property's value upon its potential use at a time in the future which could not even arguably be "immediate." That the requirement of section 193.011(2) was totally discounted in Valencia Center I with respect to the effect of the lease on the property, 432 So.2d at 110-11, may be taken to support this point and to further illustrate the material distinction between Valencia Center I and this case. Our conclusion that the property appraiser's failure to use the income approach was not consistent with section 193.011 is borne out by the legislative intent evidenced in *1217 the 1986 enactment of a much more specific provision in section 193.023(6)....

...n 193.023(6), arrive at an adjusted valuation of the property only based upon the income approach. As pointed out above, the income approach which took into account in this case submarket rent was not the only approach used by appellee's expert. All section 193.011 factors were considered, and the income approach was among several approaches used in the valuation adopted by the trial court....

...In fact, appellee's expert, as we have said, testified that the $2,950,000 adjusted valuation figure was the property's fair market value. Third, as pointed out above — and as Valencia Center II pointed out — the legislature evidenced its intent in enacting section 193.011 to have been contrary to the result in Valencia Center I....

...Valencia Center III implicitly recognizes that the lease in that case was not for a long term by stating that the "present" market value of the property properly reflected the potential higher and more valuable use of the property for purposes other than its use under the lease, 543 So.2d at 27 (especially since section 193.011(2) provides that only the "immediate" future use of property may be considered)....

...As explained in section (1) of this opinion, the supreme court's opinion in Valencia Center III calls for our affirmance in this case by stressing, and citing Walter v. Schuler for the proposition, that "the just valuation at which property must be assessed under the constitution and section 193.011 is synonymous with fair market value, i.e., the amount a purchaser, willing but not obliged to buy, would pay a seller who is willing but not obliged to sell." 543 So.2d at 216....

...rket value by wholly ignoring the aspect of the submarket rent under the long-term lease. Furthermore, while the dissenting opinion quotes Valencia Center III (which relies upon Xerox ) for the proposition that the weight to be given to a particular section 193.011 factor is "left to the discretion of the assessor, and his determination will not be disturbed on review," that proposition is then qualified by the words: "as long as ......

...urt," the property appraiser's assessment here was clearly shown by competent evidence to be not "within the range of reasonable appraisals." Also, that, as Valencia Center III states, a property appraiser need not necessarily "use" in all cases all section 193.011 factors in arriving at his assessment, id., does not derogate from our affirmance for the reasons explained above....

...enalize the entrepreneur whose efforts have created the business environment from which communities derive greater property tax revenues."). There is a strong presumption of the validity of an ad valorem tax assessment, Lurie, 512 So.2d at 1004, but section 193.011 and article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution require that there be a "just" valuation....

...Our limited function is to evaluate whether competent substantial evidence supports the trial court's conclusion. See Blake v. Xerox Corporation, 447 So.2d 1348 (Fla. 1984). From my review of the record, I am persuaded that the property appraiser failed to accord meaningful consideration to each of the criteria enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987)....

...PARKER, Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. I commend the majority for attempting to harmonize these cases involving disputes between a taxpayer and property appraiser. However, the previous holdings of our courts do not permit me to join with the majority. Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1985), sets forth eight factors that a property appraiser must consider in arriving at a just valuation of property....

...th determinations of just valuation of property. See Valencia Center, Inc. v. Bystrom, 543 So.2d 214 (Fla. 1989). The court stated: In arriving at fair market value, the assessor must consider, but not necessarily use, each of the factors set out in section 193.011....

...Schultz's office also established point structures to update cost numbers, property depreciation, special building features, and the income and expense figures from all commercial properties. Schultz's expert testified that he considered [2] all of the eight criteria outlined in section 193.011 and discussed each criteria as it related to the subject property....

...1972), another case upon which Judge Lehan relies, our supreme court reinstated a trial judge's order lowering a property assessment where the tax assessor failed to utilize the income criterion, one of the statutorily mandated criteria required by section 193.011, solely because the taxpayer refused to furnish its income figures....

...r's assessment of the property, which was as though it were unencumbered, was, therefore, at a figure substantially greater than the property's fair market value. The term "fair market value," which is synonymous with "just valuation" as required by section 193.011 and the Florida Constitution, is essentially the price for which property could be marketed....

...Thus, in light of the below-described testimony of appellee's expert, there was evidence before the trial court that the property appraiser had not given weight to two of the three main approaches generally used in combination in real property appraisals (the income, cost, and market, or comparable sales, approaches). [3] Section 193.011 does not literally require that an assessment not exceed fair market value....

...ell as the other factors required by that section to be considered, a property appraiser could then, contrary to legislative intent, freely assess property at any level he pleases. Thus, there has been in effect superimposed upon the requirements of section 193.011 the requirement that no assessment exceed fair market value....

...ssment method is erroneous if it fails to make any use of the actual income approach to the valuation of property which is subject to a long-term lease calling for submarket rent, as the property appraiser's assessment in this case failed to do. [1] Section 193.011 provides: In arriving at just valuation ..., the property appraiser shall take into consideration the following factors: (1) The present cash value of the property ...; (2) The highest and best use to which the property can be expecte...

...or size of said property; (5) The cost of said property and the present replacement value of any improvements thereon; (6) The condition of said property; (7) The income from said property; and (8) The net proceeds of the sale of the property. .. . § 193.011, Fla....

...tness. The lack of a record precludes our review of the remaining issues on appeal. In a taxpayer challenge to an assessment made by a property appraiser, the assessment is accorded a presumption *257 of correctness if it was made in accordance with section 193.011, Florida Statutes. The presumption is lost only if the taxpayer demonstrates that the property appraiser failed to consider properly the criteria of section 193.011, or if the assessment is arbitrarily based on appraisal practices that differ from practices generally applied to comparable property in the same county....

...Under the circumstances present in this case we hold that the presumption survives intact in spite of the Board's action. In our view the presumption of correctness dissolves only when the appraiser is disentitled to the presumption by failing to substantially comply with section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...value, the property appraiser's assessment shall be presumed correct. This presumption of correctness is lost if the taxpayer shows by a preponderance of the evidence that either the property appraiser has failed to consider properly the criteria in s. 193.011 or if the property appraiser's assessment is arbitrarily based on appraisal practices which are different from the appraisal practices generally applied by the property appraiser to comparable property within the same class and within the same county....

...If the property appraiser's assessment is determined to *258 be erroneous, the Value Adjustment Board or the court can establish the assessment if there exists competent, substantial evidence in the record, which cumulatively meets the requirements of s. 193.011. If the record lacks competent, substantial evidence meeting the just value criteria of s. 193.011, the matter shall be remanded to the property appraiser with appropriate directions from the Value Adjustment Board or the court....

...s which attaches to the appraiser's assessment. The law continues to be that the appraiser loses the presumption only if the taxpayer shows by a preponderance of the evidence either that the appraiser has failed to consider the criteria set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes, or that "the property appraiser's assessment is arbitrarily based on appraisal practices which are different from the appraisal practices generally applied by the property appraiser to comparable property within the...

...y appraisal practices then the taxpayer will be required to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the assessment exceeds the just value. Here the trial court made no findings that appellant property appraiser failed to consider the criteria in section 193.011, Florida Statutes, or applied arbitrary appraisal practices....

in said F.S. § 193.021, F.S.A., as well as F.S. § 193.11(3), F.S.A., which adds to the formula the factor

...19,923,238, was purchased by the plaintiff in 1969 for $3,468,055. This is not, of course, a controlling factor in this litigation. Pursuant to the constitutional mandate to provide equal taxation and secure a just valuation, the Legislature enacted Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., providing *309 that, in arriving at such just valuation, the county tax assessors "shall take into consideration" eight factors, the seventh of which is the "income from said property......

...The tax assessor appraised the same property at approximately $17,790,000.00. [There is no dispute in regard to the real property, including the buildings, with the exception of the special purpose buildings.] The lower court found that the tax assessor applied the criteria specified in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and arrived at a fair evaluation based on the cost approach....

...the original purchase price of the property, as reported on the tax return, is a "cost of sale" that must be deducted when determining just valuation. In arriving at just valuation, the property appraiser must consider the eight factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997)....

...he cost approach was the most feasible and appropriate method of valuation for the subject property. We also find no error in the assessment itself. Wal-Mart has not established that the property appraiser failed to consider properly the criteria of section 193.011; therefore, the assessment was entitled to a presumption of correctness....

statewide application.” 417 So.2d at 1116. Section 193.011 sets forth eight factors and directs property

In discussing the factors as set forth in F. S. 193.011 the assessor was of the opinion that he was

those 4 lots should be valued according to section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2013). Their inclusion

“consider properly” the criteria set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2005),2 or (2) arbitrarily

court has made its own interpretation of F.S. § 193.11(3), F.S.A. and F.S. § 193.021, F.S.A. based on

operation, as contemplated by Subsection 3 of Section 193.11 Florida Statutes, and not their value for col*354lateral

on the basis of agricultural use as required by § 193.11(3) Fla.Stat., F.S.A., •as made applicable by the

(Emphasis added). . Art. VII, § 4, Fla.Const; § 193.011, Fla.Stat. (1979). . Because the interim roll

just valuations for all types of property. See § 193.011, Fla. Stat. When the legislature has departed

the assessment was derived by complying with section 193.011, Florida Statutes, any other applicable statutory

by approximately 50 per cent. The Statute, F.S. § 193.11(1) F.S.A. provides that the Assessor of Taxes

same full effect to the express language of section 193.011(8) Florida Statutes (1983), as he did to section

engage in a bona fide forestry operation under Section 193.11(3). If that had been the legislative intent

Florida, c. 69-101, § 20, as repetitive of present § 193.011, Fla. Stat.1969, F.S.A.) The circuit court denied

consider all of the criteria set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1977), although, most certainly

appraiser must consider the factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes, which include, among other

appraiser disregarded the requirements of section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), because he failed

Section 4 of the Florida Constitution and Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1977).3 In a non-jury trial

57-195, General Acts of 1957 (carried forward as § 193.11(3), F.S. and later transferred to § 193.071(3)

...heir income tax returns for that year. The form notice explained that income data submitted after April 30 would not be considered for the current tax year and would be objected to if offered in a subsequent administrative or judicial proceeding. As section 193.011(7), Florida Statutes (2000) requires the Appraiser to take into consideration the income from the property, the Appraiser by seeking this data was rightfully carrying out a responsibility placed on him....

entitled to be assessed as agricultural land, under § 193.11(3) Fla.Stat, F.S.A., for the tax year 1967. On

Appraiser failed to follow the requirements of section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997). The property at issue

residential units, and the criteria found in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983), the trial court itself

assess the marina using the income approach of section 193.011(7) of the Florida Statutes. Miramar’s marina

of January 1, 1967, under the provisions of F.S. 193.11(4).” The tax assessor had determined the improvements

Appraiser considered the criteria set forth in section 193.011. The statutes cited in this opinion were

Appraiser considered the criteria set forth in section 193.011. The statutes cited in this opinion were

property appraiser considered the factors in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1989) in the appraisal.

by law as necessary to achieve just valuation. § 193.011, Fla.Stat. (1975).4 His review of the income factor

considering all of the statutory criteria set out in § 193.011, F.S.1969, F.S.A. He used the cost approach, the

aged >) > . The pertinent statute, Section 193.11(4), IT.S.1967, provided: “All taxable lands

the statutory authority therefor as outlined in § 193.011 applied in connection with § 366.06, Fla.Stat

various criteria of valuation set forth in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.5 The opinion of Petitioner’s

the term ‘substantially completed’ as used in § 193.11 (4) Fla.Stat. [F.S.A.] and therefore affects the

to properly apply the factors set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1983). The property owners

...Appellant was the plaintiff below and is a water and sewer corporation. Plaintiff sued the County Property Appraiser challenging the assessments for the years 1974, 1975, and 1976, on its tangible personal property. The complaint alleged that the property appraiser had not considered the factors contained in Section 193.011 Florida Statutes (1971) or followed the dictates of the Florida Administrative Code, Rule 12B-1.103(2)(E)....

considered each of the eight criteria found in section 193.011, Florida Statutes, in arriving at the just

considered each of the eight criteria listed in Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1979) in assessing the subject

motion. This interlocutory appeal follows. Section 193.11, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., directs that the County

by the Property Appraiser was excessive. See § 193.011, Fla. Stat. (1999). In order to challenge the

contended his assessments were improper under section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1979), which required consideration

appraisers to consider eight factors. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 193.011. An appraiser need accord a given factor only

considered in deriving a “just valuation”, in § 193.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., (1969)3 providing: “Assessment

ROBERTS, C.J., BENTON and LEWIS, JJ., concur. . Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2012), lists the eight factors

all of the statutory criteria established by Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1987). The property owner’s

...nt. The ad valorem tax assessment on the Property, as of January 1, 1995, was made based on a just value of $4,836,928. It is the Plaintiffs' contention that this assessment exceeds the just value of the property, and was not made in compliance with section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2005). The Plaintiffs contend that the Property Appraiser failed to consider properly the criteria set forth in section 193.011....

...It is now without dispute that the correct size of the improvements is 28,363 square feet, which includes both the main house and the guesthouse. Second, the Plaintiffs contend that the Property Appraiser failed to consider the conditions of the improvements required by section 193.011(6)....

...Walker, 497 So.2d 1299, 1303 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986) (citing Powell v. Kelly, 223 So.2d 305, 307-308 (Fla.1969)). However, the discretion of the office and the presumption of correctness are not unassailable; their discretion is limited by statute. See § 193.011, Fla....

...reon; (6) The condition of said property; *866 (7) The income from said property; and (8) The net proceeds of the sale of the property, as received by the seller, after deduction of all of the usual and reasonable fees and costs of the sale. . . . " § 193.011, Fla. Stat. FAILURE TO CONSIDER CRITERIA The Plaintiffs contend that the Property Appraiser failed to consider properly the criteria in section 193.011....

...The Plaintiffs contend that the Property Card contains erroneous information, demonstrating a failure to properly consider several of the required factors in arriving at just value. First, the Plaintiffs contend that the Property Appraiser failed to properly consider the size of the improvements of the Property. § 193.011(4), Fla....

...Markham, 516 So.2d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (assessment exceeds just valuation when based on a 1,500 unit density, not 236 unit density). Second, the Plaintiffs contend that the Property Appraiser failed to properly consider the condition of the improvements. § 193.011(6), Fla....

...ts that amounted to approximately 57% of gross sales price). However, there is no legal requirement that the net sale proceeds of a sale constitutes the deciding factor. The statute requires that the property appraiser consider the factors listed in section 193.011, not necessarily that the property appraiser apply them....

...Both parties agree on the burden of presumption and the standards governing the burden in this case. The assessment made by the property appraiser is presumed correct, unless the taxpayer shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the appraiser: (1) failed to consider properly the criteria in section 193.011; or, (2) the assessment is arbitrarily based on appraisal practices which are different from the appraisal practices generally applied by the appraiser to comparable property within the same class and within the same county....

properly considered all the factors required in section 193.011, Florida Statutes. The supreme court reversed

...To his credit, counsel for appellee/cross-appellant acknowledged at oral argument the fatal flaw in their "Catch 22" argument against the constitutional validity of the exemptory statutes. In reversing the trial court's amended final judgment on appellant's appeal therefrom, we are required to construe section 193.011, Florida Statute (1979), to determine whether appellant acted in compliance with the statute in assessing appellee's property. The trial court concluded he did not, however, we respectfully find otherwise. Our examination of section 193.011, and our determination of appellant's compliance is controlled by the holding in Blake v....

...cost approach for assessment purposes would be more realistic and accurate than an income approach. The trial court concluded that appellant's assessments were invalid for his failure to properly consider and utilize the income approach. Pursuant to section 193.011, Florida Statutes, there are certain "factors" which a property appraiser must take into consideration in arriving at an evaluation for ad valorem tax purposes....

...at specific factor, from a consideration of all of the factors, has been determined to be inappropriate to the instant case. In the case at bar, there is ample evidence that the property appraiser did, in fact, consider all the factors enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...346, 14 So.2d 703 (1943); Calder Race Course, Inc. v. Overstreet, 363 So.2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Dade County v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 285 So.2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). While a property appraiser must consider each of the factors set out in section 193.011, he is free to assign to each factor such weight as he deems proper....

required to consider all the criteria set forth in § 193.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. (formerly § 193.021, Fla.Stat

failed to properly consider the criteria under section 193.011, Florida Statutes; and (III) whether the trial

by the statute (Chap. 20722, Acts 1941, F.S.A. § 193.11) would necessarily result in favoring the homesteads

therefore be assessed as “agricultural lands” under Section 193.11(3), Fla.St., F.S.A. As agricultural lands the

would limit the land to a four-story building. Section 193.-011, Florida Statutes (1987), requires an appraiser

consider all of the required factors under section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1985). The appellees presented

statutory factors to arrive at “just value.” Section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2004). The property appraiser

future and the present use of the property.” § 193.011(2), Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The courts have held that

and these values must stand as correct. Florida Statute 193.011 governs the appraisal of real property

classification as forestry lands within the meaning of Section 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, F. S.A., and, if so,

Section 193.071(4), Fla.Stat., F.S.A. (formerly § 193.11(4), Fla.Stat., F.S.A.) provides: “All taxable

...It argues, first, that the property appraiser's valuation method improperly included the value of intangible assets, which are not taxable by local governments. GTE also contends that in two respects the property appraiser failed to properly consider the valuation criteria set forth in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1997), as required by that statute....

...Section 194.301, Florida Statutes (1999), provides that if in a judicial proceeding the property appraiser's assessment "is determined to be erroneous," the court can establish the assessment if the record contains competent, substantial evidence that cumulatively meets the valuation criteria set forth in section 193.011....

...e assessment based on the record or remand the matter to the property appraiser. We reverse and remand for that purpose. With that in mind, we consider GTE's assertion that the property appraiser failed to properly consider the criteria set forth in section 193.011. Under section 194.301, the property appraiser's assessment must be accorded a presumption of correctness unless the taxpayer proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the property appraiser did not consider properly the criteria in section 193.011....

...upport its valuation of GTE's tangible personal property in Sarasota County, we need not address GTE's evidentiary objection. Reversed and remanded with instructions. SILBERMAN and KELLY, JJ., Concur. NOTES [1] A property appraiser is required under section 193.011 to consider the following factors when determining just valuation: (1) the present cash value of the property; (2) the highest and best use to which the property can be expected to be put in the immediate future and the present use of...

testimony that utilizing the criteria set forth in section 193.011(1)-(8), Florida Statutes (1981), the land and

appraiser’s method of appraisal was contrary to section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1980), nor to section 192

by the statute (Chap. 20722, Acts 1941, F.S.A. § 193.-11) would necessarily result in favoring the homesteads

CARROLL, DONALD K., and JOHNSON, JJ., concur. . Section 193.11(2), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides: “All

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 193.011, Fla. Stat. (1993); Valencia Ctr., Inc. v. Bystrom, 543 So.2d 214

Statutes, relating to the method of assessment and section 193.11, Florida Statutes, requiring the county tax

as of the 1st day of January of each year. Section 193.11(1), Fla.Stat., F.S. A. The character of a particular

agricultural use of the land in accordance with Florida Statute 193.11(3); however, the same County Tax Assessor

on the first day of Jan'uary of each year. F.S. § 193.11, F.S.A. provides inter alia that the county tax

capitalized income. If the appraiser complies with Section 193.011, prescribing generally the factors to be considered

real and personal property in said counties * * § 193.11 “(1) Between January 1 and July 1 in each year

...In this case, a taxpayer that owns a golf course challenges rulings made in two cases consolidated for trial, involving the assessments for tax years 2005 and 2006. The trial court concluded that the taxpayer met its burden to prove that the property appraiser improperly applied the criteria set out in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2005), and on that basis remanded to the property appraiser for reconsideration of the assessment for 2005, and reassessment. We affirm this ruling. The trial court also ruled, however, that the property appraiser properly considered all of the criteria set out in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (2006), and upheld the 2006 assessment. The taxpayer argues that this ruling was erroneous on various grounds. We agree only that the property appraiser failed to apply section 193.011(2), Florida Statutes (2006), properly, in that the property appraiser failed adequately to take into account "local or state land use regulation[s]" when using sale prices of "comparable" parcels that lacked the land use restrictions...

...of the original purchase price; provided, however, such presumption shall be rebuttable. § 192.037(10)-(11), Fla. Stat. (2002). We conclude that the Legislature has clearly expressed its intent that timeshare property be assessed in accordance with section 193.011....

...Once the POS is approved and the contract is no longer voidable at the will of the purchaser, the contract becomes binding and a sale may be closed by releasing the title documents and deposit money. This establishes a valid basis for assessing timeshare property under section 193.011....

...VII, § 4, Fla. Const. The term "just valuation" means "fair market value." Mazourek, 831 So.2d at 88. All real property shall be assessed according to its just value on January 1 of each year. § 192.042, Fla. Stat. (2002). The Legislature enacted section 193.011, Florida Statutes, which lists eight factors that a property appraiser must consider in determining just valuation. Gilreath argues that the condominiums were properly assessed as timeshare property pursuant to section 193.011(2), Florida Statutes, which provides in pertinent part that in arriving at just valuation, the property appraiser shall consider: The highest and best use to which the property can be expected to be put in the immediate future and the...

...egulation, resolution, or proclamation adopted by any governmental body or agency or the Governor when the moratorium or judicial limitation prohibits or restricts the development or improvement of property as otherwise authorized by applicable law. § 193.011(2), Fla. Stat. (2002). We conclude that when Gilreath assessed the condominium units as timeshares because he determined that was the highest and best use under section 193.011(2), he misapplied this statute. In Straughn v. Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla. 1977), the court held that when determining the highest and best use of property under section 193.011(2), "[t]he uses under the statute must be immediate, not speculative, and not predicated on conversion to higher or better uses." Id....

...n and does violence to the constitutional and statutory objective of just valuation. The assessor, like the courts, should operate within the record and not de hors it." Lanier, 175 So.2d at 524. Here, the use of the condominiums as timeshares under section 193.011(2) is totally dependent on conversion of the units to timeshares....