160 So. 3d 160
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2015Background
- Appellee (a nonprofit limited partnership) operated a 92‑unit affordable housing project in Bay County and received a full property tax exemption for 2012 under § 196.1978, Fla. Stat.
- Appellee timely filed to renew the exemption for the 2013 tax year by the March 1 deadline.
- The 2013 Legislature amended § 196.1978 to eliminate the exemption for affordable housing owned by limited partnerships and expressly stated the change applied “retroactively to the 2013 tax roll.”
- The Bay County Property Appraiser first denied the 2013 exemption based on the legislative repeal and later issued a second denial claiming appellee did not qualify under the 2012 statute.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to appellee, holding (1) appellee’s right to the 2013 exemption vested as of January 1, 2013, and (2) the retroactive repeal unconstitutionally impaired that vested right; this appeal challenges the constitutional holding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Legislature’s retroactive repeal of the 2013 tax exemption violated due process by impairing a vested right | Appellee: Right to exemption vested on Jan 1, 2013 (tax status determined Jan 1); retroactive repeal imposed a new tax obligation and thus impaired a vested right | Appellants: No vested right existed before the appraiser granted the exemption; exemptions require timely application and administrative action, so repeal applying to 2013 was permissible | Court: Affirmed — repeal was substantive/retroactive, impaired a vested right, and was unconstitutional as applied to appellee |
| Whether appellee satisfied statutory conditions for the exemption (timely filing, qualification) | Appellee: Timely filed renewal and met the statutory requirements under the controlling (2012) statute | Appellants: Even under 2012 statute appellee did not qualify; the appraiser’s later denial was proper under the law in effect when he acted | Court: Agreed with trial court that appellee satisfied statutory requirements under the 2012 statute (court limited discussion to constitutional issue but affirmed final judgment) |
Key Cases Cited
- Maronda Homes, Inc. of Fla. v. Lakeview Reserve Homeowners Ass’n, Inc., 127 So.3d 1258 (Fla. 2013) (retroactive substantive laws that impair vested rights violate due process; retroactivity permissible only for procedural/remedial laws where legislature clearly intends)
- Dade Cnty. Taxing Auths. v. Cedars of Lebanon Hosp. Corp., 355 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 1978) (January 1 is the determinative assessment date for actual use of property)
- Page v. City of Fernandina Beach, 714 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (actual physical use on January 1 controls exemption status)
- Zingale v. Powell, 885 So.2d 277 (Fla. 2004) (exemption claims are subject to statutory conditions like timely filing)
- Horne v. Markham, 288 So.2d 196 (Fla. 1973) (similar principles regarding statutory conditions for exemptions)
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Chase Fed. Hous. Corp., 737 So.2d 494 (Fla. 1999) (retrospective legislative provisions not necessarily invalid; constitutional analysis focuses on whether vested rights are impaired)
- Straughn v. Camp, 293 So.2d 689 (Fla. 1974) (Legislature may repeal tax exemptions; exemptions are legislative favors to be strictly construed)