Latest Headlines
- Escambia BOCC To Install Four Commissioners, New Chair And Vice-Chair
- Week Begins Sunny, Then Rain Before A Big Cool Down
- Homeowner Reportedly Opens Fire On Known Attackers In Bratt Assault
- FPL Seeks To Raise Bills For All Of 2025 To Cover Hurricane Costs; Here’s How Much
- Capt. Chandra Newman Assumes Command Of NAS Pensacola
- Tate Falls To Nease In Playoff Opener (With Photo Gallery)
- Byrneville Elementary School Names Students Of The Month
- High School Football Playoffs Scoreboard
- Cat Country 98.7 Is The 2024 CMA Radio Station Of The Year (With Gallery)
- Gonzalez Man Gets Two Life Sentences For Abusing Children
Court Rules Pensacola Beach Residents Must Pay Escambia Property Taxes
July 19, 2011
Residents of Pensacola Beach must pay property taxes like everyone else, the 1st District Court of Appeal affirmed Monday in a case that addresses an issue that has persisted on Santa Rosa Island since shortly after World War II.
In an opinion affirming a lower court ruling and setting the stage for possible Florida Supreme Court review, the First DCA ruled that Escambia County can collect property taxes from residents even though the residents don’t own the land on which their residences sit. All of the homes on the island are built on land that is leased by Escambia County to the homeowners.
“We’re satisfied with the outcome,” said Escambia County Property Appraiser Chris Jones of Monday’s ruling. “It vindicates what we have been saying for some time.”
Monday’s ruling affects about 2,400 properties that have been assessed $39 million in property taxes since the case was brought forward in 2004, said Escambia County Tax Collector Janet Holley. Of that, residents have paid $26 million in anticipation that the ruling might go Escambia’s way.
The case is only the most recent to challenge the county’s taxing authority. Since 2004 there have been lawsuits challenging about $90 million in property assessments.
Monday’s ruling is the latest in what 1st DCA Judge Van Nortwick called a “long and rather tortured history” of tax battles on the island over how local governments should tax residents who lease the property on which their homes are built.
Santa Rosa Island is home to Pensacola Beach in Escambia County and Navarre, which is governed by Santa Rosa County. What was once a rather desolate and isolated stretch of sugar-sand beach owned by the federal government was donated to Escambia County in 1947 with the restriction that it could not sell parcels. Escambia officials, in turn, leased the eastern portion of the island to Santa Rosa County.
Both counties entered into long-term lease arrangements with leaseholders who were allowed to build, take out mortgages, sublet and transfer title to residences built on parcels that were protected by 99-year lease agreements. Originally, leaseholders did not pay local property taxes but were assessed intangible taxes.
Over the years as parcels began filling up with permanent residents, Santa Rosa and Escambia officials began looking at ways to shift to property tax collections. Numerous lawsuits followed. Santa Rosa County now levies property taxes on the land and the improvements. That levy, upheld by the 1st DCA in April, is also likely to be challenged in the state’s highest court.
In Monday’s ruling, the appeals court sided with Escambia County officials who, unlike those in Santa Rosa, are only trying to tax the improvements and not the land upon which they stand.
“There is nothing inherently unlawful in subjecting the appellants to ad valorem taxes, as leaseholders on Santa Rosa Island were subject to,” Nortwick wrote. “Looking at the benefits and burdens of ownership, these Escambia County leaseholders are no different than the Santa Rosa County leaseholders.”
Talbot “Sandy” D’Alemberte, a Tallahassee attorney representing property owners in both Santa Rosa and Escambia counties, says the ruling leaves the island with three distinct taxing structures, a discrepancy that could lead to the high court taking an interest in answering the question once and for all.
“Right now it’s a mess,” D’Alemberte said Monday.
By Michael Peltier
The News Service of Florida
Comments
10 Responses to “Court Rules Pensacola Beach Residents Must Pay Escambia Property Taxes”
Makes perfect sense to me… if you can afford to improve, you can afford the taxes.
Tuf said…”Oh, LOL. “Not Again’s” comment about “limosine liberals” on Pensacola Beach is hilarious.”
Oh, c’mon, Tuf. At least he got the slob part right.(chuckle)
Oh, LOL. “Not Again’s” comment about “limosine liberals” on Pensacola Beach is hilarious.
Liberals living at Pensacola Beach? You need to do some serious research. Check out the election history of Precinct 94 through the Escambia Supervisor of Elections website. You will see that Pensacola Beach (Pct 94) votes SOLIDLY GOP for senators, state reps, governors, local elected officials, etc.
The political reality of the residents at Pensacola Beach is that they are wealthy
REPUBLICANS hiding from taxation (and thus causing mainland Escambia’s to carry the county’s bills). They are limosine conservatives, not liberals.
The same Republican Party does not want to raise taxes on these very wealthy individuals that you feel should carry more of the burden of public budgets and services.
Let’s get the labels correct, and let’s examine who pays what, and not just fling out FoxNews philosophy that all people trying to milk public services and budgets are liberal.
Linda L. said…”Title to ALL improvements passes to the county the moment they are built! So for those who say we shouldn’t pay taxes on leased land, the same should hold true as to leased improvements.”
I said…Well, right or wrong, you will find it difficult to find much sympathy for people who have built on the beach over the past 30 years or so. They block the view and in some cases access to the beach areas (or try to). And then rebuild every 10-20 years keeping insurance rates high.
For my part, I would like to see everything down there razed to the ground except for a 7-11 and Ft Pickens. It just ain’t a good idea to build on a barrier island anyway. Of course I admit that that’s a different issue. So let me ask this….
Can you build a structure and sell it for a profit (or loss)? If what you mean is that the county takes over your house if you decide to move, then I see your point. But if you can buy and seel then pay your taxes or do without the police and other county services.
The term “lease” for the beach property is the same as “ownership” because the lease holder is allowed to improve the property and then “sell” the improvements for a profit (i e; beach houses and businesses) just as any other property owner does. So having those beach folks pay property taxes on the improvements is fair.
Besides, you never actually own the land any way because we are in effect renting it from the government which taxes us. Don’t pay your property taxes and see what happens – the government will take it.
What most county folks don’t understand is that, as to the vast majority of leases on Pensacola Beach, unlike some other places in the U.S., not only don’t we own the land, but we don’t own the buildings, either. Title to ALL improvements passes to the county the moment they are built! So for those who say we shouldn’t pay taxes on leased land, the same should hold true as to leased improvements. Look, the only sane and fair answer to all this is to get out of the dark ages and offer the option of fee simple title to leaseholders, so they can be on the same footing as all other county residents in paying taxes, not lease fees. Protections are in place to insure all existing public beach lands and access will remain unrestricted. Unfortunately, the Escambia County Commission has slowed down the process of getting this done (read the PNJ’s PBeach community forum for a lot more info on this issue. Get the facts!).
If the people at the beach can afford to build homes worth a million dollars or more then they should pay property tax on the building…everyone else pays property tax on their homes and so should they…if they don’t want to pay then move from beach. It is again the haves trying to find all tax loopholes possible while the rest of us pay. The home is in their name and not the county.
Joe,
The tax is only on ‘improvements’ ie… structures built on the leased land.
It does not seem unreasonable to me that folks pay property taxes on their property… (I agree they should not pay on the leased land).
The home owner is receiving services I am paying for… why should they not also be taxed on it? It seems to me to be fair for all to pay their share….
… I AM glad for the trend to decrease that share we pay though.
It’s about time those limousine liberals and Yankee carpetbaggers out on the beach started paying taxes like the rest of us slobs.
case law will prevail! In this case the high court has no choice but to look at the past precedance established by 50 years of case law on the matter.
taxiation on lease property should be standardized across the board! A lease is not ownership!
By definition a lease : is a rental contract: a legal contract allowing somebody exclusive possession of another’s property for a specific time in return for a payment
the lease should cover it all as these people do not own the land they rent it!
if the county wants property tax for the land they should get it from the land owner……..The county!