07/01/2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5. Speaks to "Agricultural use is now and has always been the test" but "Commercial agricultural use" adds another factor which is "profit or profit motive" which may be considered by the property appraiser in determining whether or not a claimed agricultural use is bona fide. 6. It does not limit agricultural classification to commercially profitable agricultural operations. 7. Statutory listed factors are to be considered in making the determination of "good faith agricultural use" but are not determinative. 51a Fla. Jur 2d Taxation Section 847 also cites the following case law for referencefor the publication and also for reference for the Special Magistrate: Walden v. Tuten, 347 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Straughn v. Tuck, 354 So. 2d 368 (FIa.1977); Roden v..K & K Land Management, Inc. 368 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1978); Fisher v. Schooley, 371 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); The Glades, Inc. v. Colding, 422 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Gianolio v. Markham, 564 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Tilton v. Gardner, 52 So. 3d 771 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). 51a Fla. Jur 2d Taxation Section 848: This evidence speaks to Florida Statutes 193.461 and the assessment and the classification of agricultural lands and was admitted into evidence by the Petitioners without the objection of the Property Appraiser and in particular speaks to the issue of "good faith agricultural use/ necessity of commercial profitability": 1. Does not necessitate a profit by the landowner. While profit is a factor for consideration in determining whether land should be classified as agricultural, profit is not, by itself, a determining or controlling factor; 2. "Greenbelt Law" and or the "Greenbelt Agricultural Classification" is not limited to commercially profitable agricultural operations; 3. The property may be entitled to agricultural classification not withstanding minimal profit; 4. The Florida Supreme Court has, in the past, expressly disapproved requiring even a reasonable expectation of meeting investment costs and making a profit in order to obtain agricultural classification; 5. Statute 193.461does not require that the land be "put to its best or highest economic use" or even its "best agricultural use"; 6. There is nothing in Florida Statute 193.461 "that requires a landowner to be a good businessperson" or to "make a profit" and uses the following as an example "that a bona 8 -47-