Speer v. Olson
367 So.2d 207 (1978)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Florida's home rule powers, non-charter counties, utilizing Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, may establish municipal service taxing units and issue general obligation bonds for essential services like water and sewer systems, provided such bonds are approved by electors, and a county's declaration of an emergency for ordinance enactment is largely discretionary and will not be disturbed absent a showing of sham or fraud.
Facts:
- The Board of County Commissioners of Pasco County enacted an ordinance creating the West Pasco Water and Sewer Unit, encompassing the entire unincorporated area of the county.
- The Unit was established to acquire sewer and water systems for the unincorporated area of Pasco County.
- The commissioners called a special election for residents of the West Pasco Water and Sewer Unit to approve the issuance of $41.5 million in general obligation bonds.
- The proposed bond issue was approved by a 79 percent majority of the voters.
- Prior to the ordinance's enactment on November 1, 1977, there existed a serious condition regarding water service in west Pasco County.
Procedural Posture:
- Roy M. Speer and other taxpayers initiated a suit in the Circuit Court of Pasco County to contest the legality of the election.
- Immediately thereafter, Pasco County filed a separate complaint in the Circuit Court of Pasco County seeking validation of the general obligation bonds.
- The taxpayers intervened in Pasco County's bond validation suit, seeking dismissal and reiterating their challenge to the emergency powers used to establish the Unit and the bond issuance.
- The two actions were consolidated in the Circuit Court of Pasco County.
- The Circuit Court of Pasco County held the election valid and validated the bonds.
- The taxpayers (appellants) appealed the Circuit Court's final judgment to the Supreme Court of Florida.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, grant Pasco County, a non-charter county, the home rule authority to establish a municipal service taxing unit and issue general obligation bonds for water and sewer systems, and is a county's declaration of an emergency for the enactment of such an ordinance entitled to judicial deference?
Opinions:
Majority - Adkins, J.
Yes, Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, grants Pasco County the home rule authority to establish a municipal service taxing unit and issue general obligation bonds for water and sewer systems, and a county's declaration of an emergency for ordinance enactment is entitled to judicial deference. The court found that Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, especially Section 125.01(1), grants non-charter counties broad home rule powers to carry on county government, including providing water and sewer services and issuing bonds for capital projects. The court reasoned that unless general or special law explicitly restricts a county's power, it has full authority to act through home rule. Since no statute specifically prohibited or authorized Pasco County's issuance of general obligation bonds for sewage and water systems, the county was empowered to proceed under its home rule authority, as established in precedents like State v. Orange County. The court also affirmed that the requirement for elector approval of bonds payable from ad valorem taxation, as per Article VII, Section 12(a) of the Florida Constitution, was met through the special election. Furthermore, the court held that the Board of County Commissioners' declaration of an emergency for the ordinance's enactment, under Section 125.66(3), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1976), should not be disturbed unless there is evidence of a 'sham or fraud.' Citing State ex rel. Swift v. Dillon and subsequent cases, the court noted that the question of an emergency's existence rests in the judgment and discretion of the governmental body, and the trial court's finding of competent, substantial evidence supporting the emergency was sufficient.
Concurring in result - Alderman, J.
Justice Alderman concurred in the result of the majority opinion.
Dissenting - England, C.J.
Chief Justice England dissented from the majority opinion.
Analysis:
This case significantly reinforces the broad home rule powers granted to non-charter counties in Florida under Chapter 125, allowing them considerable autonomy in providing essential municipal services and financing capital projects through general obligation bonds. It clarifies that specific statutory authorization is not always required when no general or special law prohibits the action. Furthermore, the decision strengthens the principle of judicial deference to local government's declaration of an emergency for ordinance enactment, making it difficult to overturn such declarations without clear evidence of bad faith. This fosters efficient local governance but also places a high burden on those challenging county actions taken under declared emergencies.
