07/01/2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Taxation Section 847, and Section 848 respectively submitted by Petitioner says that the land requires "good faith agricultural use" and "use of the land is still the guidepost" in classifying the land as per the Florida Supreme Court, and that "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. In the instant matter, by a preponderance of the evidence, it appears that other than the land that the bee pallets themselves occupy, the rest of the land encompassed on the parcels at issue are not being used for the purposes as set forth by the statute. Petitioner's documentary evidence 51,a Fla. Jur 2d Taxation Section 848 speaks to the issue of "good faith agricultural use/ necessity of commercial profitability." However, as per the substance of that evidence, profit is not, by itself, a determining or controlling factor and the issue of "profit" was not an issue for the undersigned Special Magistrate in this recommendation. Nor was the issue of commercially profitable agricultural operations. Indeed, as per Statute 193.461, said statute does not require that the land be "put to its best or highest economic use" or even its "best agricultural use." However, the statute and the Florida Supreme Court states that "use of the land is still the guidepost" in classifying the land according to the evidence submitted by the Petitioner. The Petitioner has the burden of proof in establishing an entitlement to an exemption. The Petitioner failed to present sufficient evidence to fully overcome the Property Appraiser's evidence submitted and to fully overcome the denial of the Property Appraiser's Office. In the instant matter, however, the Petitioner has met the burden of proof in establishing a partial and limited entitlement to an agricultural as per Florida Statute 193.461 also commonly known as the "Greenbelt Law" and or the "Greenbelt Agricultural Classification." Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Special Magistrate that the determination of the Property Appraiser should be upheld in part and that the Petitioner should be granted a partial exemption on the parcels at issue as set forth below: .Petitioner has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the parcels with the corresponding petitions (2013-169, 2013-170, 2013-171, 2013-172, 2013-173, 2013-174, 2013- 175, 2013-176) at issue that have the bee hive pallets on the land, in the specific area of the land that have the bee hive pallets on them, and only those areas that have the bee hive pallets on them, along with the ingress and egress on the parcels to get to the bee hives, are the areas of land that are used primarily for bona fide agricultural purposes and it is the recommendation of this undersigned Special Magistrate that those areas only should get the benefit of the agricultural "Greenbelt" classification only. It is the opinion of the undersigned Special Magistrate based upon the preponderance of the evidence that the areas of the land of the parcels at issue, the specific area of the land that have the bee hive pallets on them, and only those areas that have the bee hive pallets on them, along with the ingress and egress on the parcels to get to 15 - 54 -