State v. City of Pensacola

• Decision Date: 29 November 1938
• Citation: 135 Fla. 239,184 So. 768
• Parties: STATE v. CITY OF PENSACOLA.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

184 So. 768

135 Fla. 239

STATE v. CITY OF PENSACOLA.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

November 29, 1938

Proceeding by the City of Pensacola to validate certain water revenue certificates, opposed by the State. From an order validating the certificates, the State appeals.

Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Escambia County; L L. Fabisinski, judge.

COUNSEL

E Dixie Beggs, of Fort Myers, for the State.

Ernest E. Mason, of Pensacola, for appellee.

OPINION

TERRELL Chief Justice.

Pursuant to provisions of its Charter, particularly Section 1 of Chapter 15425, Sp.Acts 1931, the City Council of the City of Pensacola adopted a resolution authorizing the issue of $59,000 of water revenue certificates to be dated November 1 1938, and bearing interest not to exceed four per cent and to be used for the purpose of constructing certain improvements and extensions to the water supply and distribution system of the City.

The resolution further requires the City Council to fix and impose charges for the services afforded by said water supply and distribution system sufficient to provide revenue to pay the cost of operation, maintenance, and repair in addition to maintaining a special fund designated '1938 Water Revenue Certificates Sinking Fund', for the payment of principal and interest on said certificates as they mature. The said water revenue certificates are made payable solely from charges made for water service thus afforded and under no circumstances can taxes be imposed on the taxable property of the City to pay them or the interest thereon nor can they be paid from any other revenues now or hereafter in the hands of the City. The necessity for the improvement in its water supply and distribution system and the fact that the City owned said system was also shown. It is also shown that said Water Revenue Certificates were a second series and were subordinate to the first series.

A petition was filed in the Circuit Court of Escambia County as provided by statute to validate said certificates, an order to show cause was issued, and served, and notice to taxpayers was given and published. The State Attorney filed an answer denying all the material allegations of the petition. On the issue thus made, evidence was taken after which the Chancellor entered his final decree validating the certificates. The instant appeal is from the validating decree.

The first question with which we are confronted is whether or not the City of Pensacola is authorized to issue water revenue certificates for the purpose of extending and improving its water supply and distribution system, payable solely from the net revenues of said system without an approving vote of a majority of the freeholders as contemplated by Section 6 of Article 9 of the Constitution of Florida.

Section 1 of Chapter 15425, Sp.Acts 1931, being the applicable portion of the City Charter, fully empowers the City to issue such certificates and this Court has repeatedly approved similar issues. State v. City of Miami, 113 Fla 280, 152 So. 6; State v. City of Fort Pierce, Fla., 182 So. 774; Williams v. Town of Dunnellon, 125 Fla. 114, 169 So. 631; State ex rel. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell, 125 Fla. 130, 169 So. 628. The following cases also support this view: Patton v. Panama City et al., 125 Fla. 140, 169 So. 638; Teachy v. City of Wauchula, 125 Fla. 150, 169 So. 640; Vorhees v. City of Moore Haven, 125 Fla. 149, 169 So. 641; May Land Co. v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, 125 Fla. 146, 169 So. 642; State ex rel. City of Sarasota v. Richards, 125 Fla. 145, 169 So. 643; Taylor v. City of Miami, 125 Fla. 144, 169 So. 644; Boynton v. City of Safety Harbor, 125 Fla. 143, 169 So. 644; Pentecost v. City of Ft. Myers, 125 Fla. 152, 169 So. 645; Airth v. City of Live Oak, 125 Fla. 155, 169 So. 464; City of Clearwater v. Green, 125 Fla. 157, 169 So. 647; State v. City of St. Augustine, 125 Fla. 173, 169 So. 648; State v. City of Ft. Pierce, 126 Fla. 184, 170 So. 742; Brooks v. City of Jacksonville, 127 Fla. 564, 173 So. 365; State v. City of Hollywodd, 131 Fla. 584, 179 So....