State v. Brevard County

Decision Date01 February 1930
Citation99 Fla. 226,126 So. 353
PartiesSTATE v. BREVARD COUNTY.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

En Banc.

Proceeding by Brevard County, by and through George G. Brockett Chairman, and others, as members of the Board of County Commissioners of said county, against the State, for validation of bonds. From a decree validating the bonds, the State appeals.

Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Where affidavit of publication of local bill introduced in House immediately follows journal entry showing introduction affidavit need not be entered in Senate journal (Const. art 3, § 21, as amended in 1928). When a local bill is introduced in the House of Representatives, and the journal entry of the 'affidavit constituting proof of publication' does 'immediately follow the journal entry showing the introduction of the bill,' it is not necessary, under section 21, art. III, Constitution, as amended in 1928, to make an entry of such affidavit in the journal of the Senate when the bill is transmitted to it by the House of Representatives after its passage by the House.

Though Constitution forbids state bonds for roads, it does not forbid or regulate county or district road bonds (Const. art 9, §§ 2, 6). While the Constitution in effect forbids the issue of state bonds for road purposes, it does not forbid or regulate the issue of county or district bonds for road purposes.

Constitution does not regulate construction or maintenance of roads, or forbid or regulate issuance of road bonds by counties and districts to provide funds for construction (Const. art. 8, and art. 9, § 10). The Constitution does not regulate the construction or maintenance of public roads, and does not forbid or regulate the issue of bonds by counties and 'incorporated districts' to provide funds for the construction of public roads in the counties and districts respectively; nor does the Constitution regulate the means for paying such county or district road bonds.

Absent constitutional limitations, statute may authorize counties or districts to construct public roads, and provide for bonds and payment thereof. In the absence of organic limitations, statutes may authorize counties or districts to construct public roads, and may provide for issuing county and district road construction bonds, and provide for the payment of such bonds by any means not forbidden by the Constitution.

What is county purpose, within constitutional provision authorizing taxes therefor, may be determined by express or implied provisions of statute; courts will not interfere with legislative determination of what constitutes county purpose, unless it has no legal or practical relation to county purpose (Const. art. 9, § 5). What is a county purpose may be determined by the express or implied provisions of a statute; and the courts will not interfere with such determination unless it has no legal or practical relation to a valid county purpose.

Construction or maintenance of roads may be county purpose so as to authorize county taxation therefor; even though, by statute, construction or maintenance of road in district may be district purpose, it may by statute be made county purpose (Const. art. 9, § 5). The construction or maintenance of public roads in a county may be a county purpose; and, even though by statute the construction or maintenance of a public road in a district in a county may be a district purpose, such construction or maintenance may by statute be made a county purpose.

Where county is authorized to issue bonds for county purpose, statute may require county to levy taxes to pay bonds (Const. art. 9, § 5). Where a county is duly authorized to issue bonds for a proper county purpose, a statute may require the county to levy taxes to pay such bonds that are duly issued and sold under the authority so conferred by statute.

Roads constructed by road districts may be made a county purpose for taxation, and county bonds may be authorized to pay therefor (Const. art. 9,§ 5). Public roads constucted in a county by road districts under legislative authority may be made a county purpose, and county bonds may be authorized by statute to pay for such public road construction as a proper county purpose, the Constitution not forbidding.

Special statute making roads constructed by road district a county purpose, and authorizing issuance of county bonds and requiring county ad valorem taxation held valid (Sp. Acts 1929, c. 13937; Const. art. 9, § 5). In the absence of contrary organic regulations, the provisions of chapter 13937, Sp. Acts of 1929, making public roads constructed by road districts in Brevard county a county purpose, and authorizing the issuance of county bonds to liquidate bonds heretofore issued by road districts in the county for such public road construction in the county, and requiring county ad valorem taxation to pay the county bonds, with appropriate incidental regulations, are valid; and bonds to be duly issued under the statute are properly validated.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Brevard County; W. W. Wright, judge.

COUNSEL

C. A. Boyer, Sp. State Atty., of Orlando, for the State.

Smith, Crofton & Wilson, of Titusville, for appellee.

OPINION

WHITFIELD, J.

This appeal is from a decree validating bonds to be issued by Brevard county under chapter 13937, Sp. Acts of 1929, which is as follows:

'An Act to Provide a Unified System of County Hard-surfaced Highways and Bridges in Brevard County, Florida; to Declare Certain Roads and Bridges a County Purpose; to authorize the Board of County Commissioners of Said County to Issue Five Per Cent. (5%) Bonds of Said County for the Purpose of Refunding, Retiring and Paying All Outstanding Bonds, Time Warrants and Other Indebtedness Against any and All Special Road and Bridge Districts of Said County, or to Exchange Such County Bonds for said District Bonds, or to Retire Said District Bonds with County Taxes and to Abolish such Districts and to Deliver the Assets of Said District to Said County.
'Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
'Section 1. All roads and bridges heretofore opened, built or constructed, in whole or in part, by any and all special road and bridge districts of Brevard County, Florida, are hereby declared and determined to have been a county purpose under the Constitution and Laws of Florida at the time said roads and bridges were opened, built or constructed and that the paying therefor is a county purpose.
'Section 2. The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, are hereby authorized to issued bonds of said county in the aggregate sum of not exceeding $1,200,000.00 to be designated county road and bridge bonds, such bonds to draw interest at the rate of 5% per annum payable semi-annually and maturing serially, one-twentieth thereof to mature 5 years after date thereof and an additional one-twentieth to mature each year thereafter to and including the twenty-fifth year after the date thereof, said bonds to be for the purpose hereinafter designated.
'Section 3. That said bonds provided for in Section 2 of this Act, or the proceeds thereof, shall be used for the purpose of redeeming, paying, settling and cancelling and all bonds and time warrants of all special road and bridge districts of Brevard County, Florida, being bonds and time warrants now issued and outstanding.

'Section 4. That the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, be and they are hereby authorized, upon the issuance of such county road and bridge bonds, as provided for in Sections 2 and 3 of this Act, to exchange in equal amounts such county road and bridge bonds for outstanding bonds and/or time warrants of the special road and bridge districts of said county mentioned in Section 3 of this Act, in all cases where the holders thereof are agreeable thereto, such exchange to be on the basis of par and accrued interest of new bonds for par and accrued interest of old bonds and time warrants, and in all cases where such exchange is effected the old bonds or time warrants so redeemed shall thereupon be cancelled by said Board. Any difference in amount of accrued interest may be settled by payment of cash, in the discretion of said Board.

'Section 5. If the holders of outstanding special road and bridge district bonds and time warrants mentioned in Section 3 of this Act, are unwilling to exchange bonds for bonds or time warrants for bonds as provided for in Section 4 of this Act, but are willing to accept the reasonable market value of such outstanding special road and bridge district bonds and time warrants not exceeding 95% of par, then said Board is hereby authorized to sell so much of said road and bridge bonds provided for in Section 2 of this Act, at not less than 5% below par, as a means of making cash redemption of such bonds and time warrants of such special road and bridge districts, rather than by exchange as provided in Section 4 of this Act.

'Section 6. That upon the redemption or paying off of existing bonds and time warrants of any special road and bridge district in said county, now outstanding, either by exchange of bonds, as provided for in Section 4 of this Act, or by cash redemption, as provided for in Section 5 of this Act, then and in either such case, each special road and bridge district whose bonds or time warrants shall have been so redeemed shall thereupon be disorganized and be without power to do any further act as a special road and bridge district and all assets of such district or districts shall be turned over to said county and shall be assets of said County.

'Section 7. That upon the disorganization of any special road and bridge district, as provided for in Section 6 of this Act all interest and sinking fund...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Carlton v. Mathews
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • October 28, 1931
    ... ... Suit by ... John E. Mathews against Doyle E. Carlton, as Governor of the ... State of Florida; and others. From several adverse orders, ... the defendants appeal ... areas, and consequently more road mileage, and less financial ... resources. County and district boundary lines have no ... controlling relation to the state system of roads, and the ... dominant authority in the premises. See State v. Brevard ... County, 99 Fla. 226, 126 So. 353; Geo. Lewis v. Leon ... County, 91 Fla. 118, 107 So. 146; ... ...
  • Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Peters
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 23, 1949
    ...and the levy of an ad valorem tax with which to pay the certificates of indebtedness as issued. In the case of State v. Brevard County, 99 Fla. 226, 126 So. 353, we held that the Legislature had the power to declare what was a county purpose and the courts would not interfere with the findi......
  • Dade County v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., 41536
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • February 7, 1973
    ...Florida counties in the category of Dade County to operate such airports and other facilities as 'county purposes'. State v. Brevard County, 99 Fla. 226, 126 So. 353 (1930), confirmed the Legislature's power to declare county purposes with which the courts would not In our language in that ......
  • State ex rel. Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n v. Florida State Racing Com'n
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • November 17, 1953
    ...Overman v. State Board of Control, Fla., 62 So.2d 696. See also Carlton v. Mathews, 103 Fla. 301, 137 So. 815 and State v. Brevard County, 99 Fla. 226, 126 So. 353, where the provision of the constitution in question was discussed and we there held that the command of Section 2, Article IX ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT