City of Sarasota v. Mikos

Majority - Justice Overton

Yes, vacant real property owned by a municipality, and held as open space or in reserve for future public needs, is exempt from county ad valorem taxation because such holding constitutes use 'exclusively for municipal or public purposes' under Article VII, Section 3(a) of the Florida Constitution. The court held that Article VII, Section 3(a) is a self-executing constitutional provision that exempts "all property owned by a municipality and used exclusively by it for municipal or public purposes." While acknowledging that actual use rather than intended future use controls, the court clarified that 'use' does not require active physical activity or construction on the land. Instead, holding vacant land for future public needs or to preserve natural open spaces is inherently a public purpose, not a private use. The court established a presumption that vacant land held by a municipality is in use for a public purpose if it is not actually in use for a private purpose on tax assessment day. This interpretation eliminates the need for cities to actively designate a specific use or prove a public purpose for all vacant land each year. The court also noted that legislative changes to Chapter 196, Florida Statutes, were irrelevant because a statute cannot repeal a constitutional exemption. Adopting the property appraiser's narrow interpretation would unfairly shift the tax burden from county residents to city taxpayers, a result contrary to the constitutional philosophy of ensuring a fair tax structure and preventing one local governmental entity from benefiting unjustly at the expense of another, as evidenced by Article VII, Section 9(b), Article VIII, Section 1(h), and Article VII, Section 3(a).