State v. City of Tampa
| Decision Date | 22 May 1957 |
| Citation | 95 So.2d 409 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. CITY OF TAMPA, a municipal corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
James M. McEwen, Tampa, for appellant.
Ralph A. Marsicano, Tampa, and Mitchell, Pershing, Shetterly & Mitchell, New York City, for appellee.
This appeal is from a final decree validating Special Obligation Capital Improvement Bonds of the City of Tampa which will hereinafter be referred to as improvement bonds. It is first contended that the City is devoid of power to issue the proposed improvement bonds payable from the proceeds of its utilities service tax and second that even though the City had such power, it does not appear that the requirements of Chapter 75, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., the validating law, have been complied with.
The first contention is negatived by Sections 159.02, 159.03, 167.01, 167.21, 169.02, 169.04, 170.01, 180.06, 183.03 and 184.03 Florida Statutes, F.S.A. See also Chapter 21593, Special Acts of 1941; Chapter 23564, Special Acts of 1945, and Chapter 24931, Special Acts of 1947. These provisions of the law were construed in State v. Miami Shores Village, Fla., 60 So.2d 541; State v. City of Miami, Fla., 76 So.2d 294; Welker v. State, Fla., 93 So.2d 591, and Panama City v. State, Fla., 93 So.2d 608, 609, wherein the contention of appellant was refuted and under similar charter provisions as those involved here, the court found that ample power existed to issue the bonds involved.
In this connection, it is not amiss to point out that Section 208, Ordinance 2166-A of the City of Tampa, provides that improvement bonds may be issued payable solely from the utilities service tax imposed by the City as authorized by said section from time to time to provide funds for paying all or any part of the cost of capital improvements which are defined by Section 101 of Ordinance 2166-A as 'any facility or facilities, structure or structures, lands interests in land, rights, rights-of-way, property or equipment, or any combination thereof, for which the City may raise or appropriate money.' A list of 'capital improvements' contemplated by said ordinance is listed in Section 208 thereof and is contained in Sections 1 and 2, Chapter 9095, Special Acts of 1921, now Sections 74 and 75, Revised Charter of the City adopted by the qualified electors of the City December 6, 1927, and it is not suggested that any of the improvements proposed are not embraced within those named in the City Charter. It is accordingly our view that the City had ample power to issue the improvement bonds.
Under the authority of Chapter 22829, Acts 1945, Section 167.431, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., the City of Tampa by its Board of Representatives adopted Ordinance No. 1017-A imposing a utilities service tax on every purchase of electricity, metered or bottled gas (natural, liquefied petroleum gas or manufactured), water service and local telephone service within the corporate limits of the City, which as amended and supplemented (Sections 35-11 to 35-20.1, inclusive, of the City of Tampa Code), is in force and effect and is the law imposing the tax on which the improvement bonds will be serviced. They cannot be serviced from any other source as by their face and the resolution authorizing them provide.
In answer to the second question, it is sufficient to say that in Sections 75.03 and 75.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., the requirements a validation petition must contain to equip it as such, are detailed. Florida's validating statute was first embraced in Chapter 6237, Acts of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Suwannee County Development Authority of Suwannee County
...is primarily to test the power of the issuing agency to issue the bonds or certificates or to incur the proposed debt. State v. City of Tampa, Fla., 1957, 95 So.2d 409. When the object or purpose for which the proceeds of bonds are to be used is valid, validation proceedings may not be used......
-
State v. City of Tampa, 32047
...of the type and for purpose of those involved in this case for the construction of improvements and public buildings. State v. City of Tampa, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 409, supports this In this case, however, says the appellant, the City of Tampa proposes to use a portion of the proceeds of the b......
-
Owen v. Cheney
...'competitive' with one taxed.10 The first series of bonds was issued and validated in 1957, and affirmed on appeal, in State v. City of Tampa (Fla.1957), 95 So.2d 409. Another series of bonds was validated in 1962, and again affirmed on appeal, in State v. City of Tampa (Fla.1962), 146 So.2......