State ex rel. Bd. of Sup'rs of South Fla. Conservancy Dist. v. Warren

• Decision Date: 19 June 1951
• Citation: 57 So.2d 337
• Parties: STATE et rel. BOARD OF SUP'PS OF SOUTH FLORIDA CONSERVANCY DIST. v. WARREN, Governor et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

Page 337

57 So.2d 337

STATE et rel. BOARD OF SUP'PS OF SOUTH FLORIDA CONSERVANCY DIST. v. WARREN, Governor et al.

Supreme Court of Florida, en Banc.

June 19, 1951.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 21, 1951.

Raymond R. Richardson, West Palm Beach, for relator.

Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., Rufus M. Yent and Fred M. Burns, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.

Keen, O'Kelley & Spitz, J. Velma Keen and Chas. H. Spitz, Tallahassee, amici curiae.

LUCKIE, Associate Justice.

This is an original proceedings in mandamus to compel payment of 1949 bond and maintenance taxes and we have before us the alternative writ, amended motion to quash the alternative writ and dismiss the cause, and also amened return to the alternative writ.

The case, as presented by the relator and as made by the alternative writ, is as follows:

South Florida Conservancy District was created by Chapter 7975, Sp.Acts of 1919, to drain and reclaim lands within its boundaries. Subsequent to the creation of the District by the Act of the Legislature bonds were issued in excess of $1,000,000 which bonds, through refunding operations, have now been reduced to $480,000. By the Act creating the District and by subsequent amendatory Acts the Legislature levied a yearly bond tax and maintenance tax. The last Act, Chapter 25434, Acts of 1949, levied a yearly bond tax of $1,25 per acre and a maintenance tax not to exceed $4 per acre for the years 1949 and 1950. Pursuant to the said Legislative Act the Board of Supervisors of the District levied and assessed against all the lands in the District for the year 1949 a bond tax of $1.25 per acre and a maintenance tax of $4 per acre.

The Legislature in 1921 provided for and created an Agricultural Experiment Station on such lands of the State of Florida in the Everglades as the trustees of the Interanl Improvement Fund might select, and required the trustees to set apart lands for the Station and to 'provide and construct all canals, drains and other reclamation works that may be required to completely protect and secure the said lands from overflow.' Laws of 1921, Chapter 8442, F.S.A. § 241.28 et seq. Pursuant to the said Act the trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund directed that the Experiment Station be established upon Section 3 which section was then owned by the trustees and was located within the boundary of the South Florida Conservacy District. The Acts of the Legislature then relating to the South Florida Conservancy District provided, and have ever since provided, that the lands within the District held by the said trustees, or the State Board of Education or any other State agency, should be subject to such District taxes, and authorized and directed the trustees to pay such taxes out of any monies in their possession. Section 5(b), Chapter 20477, Acts of 1941, provides as follows: 'Section 5 * * * (b). That the lands in said District used or held by, for or in connection with the agricultural experiment station in the Everglades or any branch thereof shall be subject to the taxes levied by or pursuant to the provisions of this Act, notwithstanding whether the title to or ownership of such lands shall be vested in said Trustees, the State Board of Education or any other State Agency, and the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund are authorized and directed to pay out of any monies in their hands derived from the sale of lands, or otherwise, all South Florida Conservancy District taxes heretofore levied and assessed, or which may hereafter be levied and assessed, upon such lands.'

In the year 1931 the trustees of the Interal Improvement Fund conveyed said Section 3 to the State Board of Education. Shortly after such conveyance the lands comprising the Station were added to by conveyance direct to the State Board of Education from one Nellie D. Cannon of Section 10, immediately south of said Section 3. Said Section 10 being also within the South Florida Conservancy District.

By an earlier mandamus proceedings the respondents were required to pay the District taxes for the years 1935 though 1946. The taxes were voluntarily paid for the years 1947 and 1948. But in 1949, the Legislature enacted Chapter 25186, F.S.A. § 229.241, Section 4 of which is as follows: 'Section 4. In pursuance of the provisions of the Constitution of this state that 'The principal of the state school fund shall remain sacred and inviolate', the land comprising part of said fund shall not be subject to taxes of any kind whatsoever, but shall enjoy constitutional immunity therefrom, nor shall taxes of any kind be imposed thereon; nor, since not subject to tax, shall the state or any state agency be liable for taxes or the equivalent thereof sought to be imposed upon said land. All outstanding tax sale certificates against land of the state school fund are hereby cancelled.' Upon the enactment of the foregoing Section the Respondents refused to pay the District taxes due for the year 1949.

It is worthy of note that the last quoted section concerns itself with 'land' comprising the State School Fund and with 'taxes' imposed thereon. Section 4, Article XII, of the State Constitution, F.S.A, fully sets forth a description of what shall constitute The State School Fund. The section reads: 'Section 4. The State School Fund, the interest of which shall be exclusively applied to the support and maintenance of public free schools, shall be derived from the following sources. The proceeds of all lands that have been or may hereafter be granted to the State by the United States for public school purposes. Donations to the State when the purpose is not specified. Appropriations by the State. The proceeds of escheated property or forfeitures. Twenty five per cent. of the sales of public lands which are now or may hereafter be owned by the State.'

It seems clear that the quoted section of the Consitution refers not to land but the proceeds thereof and while the land may be property of the State Board of Education it is not a part of the State School Fund and, therefore, not covered by the Constitutional provision that 'the principal of the State School Fund shall remain sacred and inviolate.' Section 5, Article XII, State Constitution. Furthermore, while the word 'Fund' may, in some instances, be construed to include real estate, the inclusion of land will not ordinarily be inferred, for it is a word usually thought of as meanin gpersonalty, something to be invested and reinvested. The Constitution itself speaks of 'the interest' from the Fund.

We next come to the contention of the respondents that an attempt to impose these District taxes against lands used by the Experiment Station violates the provision of the State Constitution exempting educational property from taxation. Section 16, Article XVI. At the same time, by their answer (paragraph 9) the respondents say they 'admit that the special assessments were and are not taxes for the general upkeep of government but are in the nature of special assessments for benefits to the lands on which levied.' This Court has on a number of occasions distinguished between taxes for the general use of government and special assessments for benefits. The most recent case is that of State ex rel. Board of Supervisors of South Florida Conservancy District v. Caldwell, Governor, 160 Fla. 355, 35 So.2d 642, 644, wherein we quoted the following applicable statute: 'That all taxes levied hereunder are hereby declared, and shall be considered and construed, to be special drainage assessments for benefits to said lands, and are to be used for the purposes herein specified and authorized, * * *.' Section 9, c. 17258, page 1102, Acts of 1935. We then said: 'It is important to keep in mind the distinction between special assessments and taxes for the upkeep of government. 'Such assessment or charges, are, as stated in the acts, to provided means to accomplish the purposes set out in these acts, and is a peculiar species of taxation distinct from the general burden imposed for state, county, and municipal purposes, in that it is a local or special charge placed upon the land, situated in the drainage district to pay for public improvements proposed to be made therein, on the theory that such property thereby derives a special benefit, and therefore such charges constitute a special assessment.' Lainhart v. Catts, 73 Fla. 735, 75 So. 47, 52. * * * 'The fact that state lands may be assessed for drainage and that the lien for drainage taxes may be made of equal dignity with the lien for State and County taxes is too well settled to require discussion,' and 'The lands of the State were included in the tax program on the theory that they should bear their just portion of the burden of reclamation.' State v. Everglades Drainage District, 155 Fla. 403, 20 So.2d 397, 398; State v. Napoleon B. Broward Drainage District, 155 Fla. 407, 20 So.2d 399; State v. Lake Worth Drainage District, 155 Fla. 408, 20 So.2d 399.'

We there held, and now reaffirm, that 'A state clearly has the right, by positive legislative enactment, to declare that its property may be assessed for local improvements, and a constitutional exemption of the property of the state from 'taxation' does not prevent such a grant.' As pointed out, supra, the Legislature gave specific authority to the District to levy the bond and maintenance tax and directed that the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund pay such tax. The subsequent 1949 Act, Chapter 25186, providing that no 'taxes' shall be levied on any 'land' comprising part of the State School Fund is ineffectual to overcome the previous grant of authority to levy the special assessments for improvements.

The respondents further question the right of the Legislature to direct that the trustees pay taxes on lands owned by the State Board of Education. We held in the case of State, etc., v. Caldwell, Governor, supra, that the disposition of the Internal Improvement Fund is entirely within the...