Laserfiche WebLink
The language of Florida Statute 196.196 is as follows: <br />196,196 Determining whether property is entitled to charitable, religious, scientific, or literary <br />exemption.— <br />(1) In the determination of whether an applicant is actually using all or a portion of its property <br />predominantly for a charitable, religious, scientific, or literary purpose, the following criteria shall be <br />applied: <br />(a) The nature and extent of the charitable, religious, scientific, or literary activity of the applicant, a <br />comparison of such activities with all other activities of the organization, and the utilization of the <br />property for charitable, religious, scientific, or literary activities as compared with other uses. <br />(b) The extent to which the property has been made available to groups who perform exempt <br />purposes at a charge that is equal to or less than the cost of providing the facilities for their use. Such <br />rental or service shall be considered as part of the exempt purposes of the applicant. <br />1(2) Only those portions of property used predominantly for charitable, religious, scientific, or literary <br />purposes are exempt. The portions of property which are not predominantly used for charitable, <br />religious, scientific, or literary purposes are not exempt, An exemption for the portions of property used <br />for charitable, religious, scientific, or literary purposes is not affected so long as the predominant use of <br />such property is for charitable, religious, scientific, or literary purposes. In no event shall an incidental <br />use of property either qualify such property for an exemption or impair the exemption of an otherwise <br />exempt property. <br />The issue as to Florida Statue 196.196 is the (b) prong with "The extent to which the property has been <br />made available to groups who perform exempt purposes at a charge that is equal to or less than the cost <br />of providing the facilities for their use" language before this Attorney Special Magistrate is also <br />persuasive in this instant matter. While a preponderance of the evidence shows that the Genesis <br />Ministries, Inc. v, Brown case citing the language from the Ocean Highway & Port Authority v. Page <br />which is "It is not enough that an exempt entity owns the property and that the property is being used <br />for exempt purposes. The exempt entity owner must also be the entity using the property for exempt <br />purposes" language is very persuasive in this instant denial for all three petitions, a preponderance of <br />the evidence shows that the "rent" charged by the Petitioner in all three petitions is not "nominal" or <br />"equal to or less than the cost of providing the facilities for their use" as per Florida Statute 196.196 <br />whether the rent is the $7,625.00 per month or that the fact that the structure built by the lessee which <br />eventually reverts back to the Petitioner via the lease once the lease expires. <br />Thus, by a preponderance of the evidence, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the instant <br />exemption that the Petitioner seeks should be granted. This Special Magistrate recommends this <br />instant petition should not be granted and the relief sought by Petitioner should not be granted. As to <br />PETITION: 91, ##2, and 43 said petitions are recommended to be DENIED, <br />-34- <br />