On Tuesday, the Hernando County Board of Commissioners voted on an issue of Waiver of Conflict for their bond council Nabor, Giblin and Nickerson of Tallahassee. This law firm represents the county government and the school board on issues relating to certain outstanding bonds. This firm requested Hernando County waive any potential conflict that might occur with their firm (Nabor, Giblin and Nickerson) representing the Hernando County School Board against HMA concerning a tax liability. Hernando County government is currently in a long-term lease agreement with HMA for their Brooksville Regional Hospital facility. The county commissioners approved this waiver for Nabor, Giblin and Nickerson after being assured that the county would not become a party to any future, potential litigation between the school board and HMA Hernando, Inc. / Brooksville Regional Hospital.
According their correspondence with the Hernando County Legal Department, Nabors, Giblin and Nickerson are questioning the property interests of Hernando HMA, Inc. under its lease agreement with Hernando County and whether HMA is subject to Ad Valorem taxation under applicable provisions of the Florida Constitution. They (Nabor, Giblin and Nickerson) anticipate the Hernando County School Board will be retaining their firm to seek a judicial declaration as to the taxability of HMA, as lessee under lease agreements with the county. Also in their letter to the county attorney, it was Nabors, Giblin and Nickerson's opinion that the leasehold improvements of HMA are subject to Ad Valorem taxation since they are used for a proprietary function.
4 comments:
Couple of things I would like clarified about this item. First, the Nabors letter opinion was requested by the School Board attorney and was not addressed to the County Attorney. The School Board attorney supplied it to the Property Appraiser, who is charged by law with making the administrative determination of which property is taxable and which is exempt or, in this case, constitutionally immune from taxation. The Property Appraiser asked their own counsel for an opinion, and he replied that he believed much of the Nabors opinion was contrary to case law. The Property Appraiser then sent both letters to the County Attorney's Office, which replied that the Property Appraiser's counsel appeared to be right on the law, subject only to certain factual determinations regarding leasehold improvements. Most of the Nabors cases related to municipal tax exemptions, not constitutional tax immunity such as applies to county property. The waiver of counsel is in case the School Board elects to sue the Property Appraiser and/or HMA for a determination of what if any tax is owned on those leasehold improvements.
My information came from the BCC agenda on Tuesday. Two pieces of information in public records were the basis for this post, as listed below:
(1) Letter addressed to Garth C. Coller, County Attorney from Nabors, Gibin & Nickerson which was dated stamped as received by the Hernando County Legal Office on December 10, 2008 at 10:05 a.m.
(2) Hernando County agenda item titled "Waiver Of Conflict" Agenda packet, page 519.
I wasn't "correcting" you, rather trying to clarify the impression left by what you wrote that Nabors was trying to get the County Attorney's Office to take some action regarding the tax determination. That's for the Property Appraiser initially, and ultimately for a court to consider the law and the facts if the School District chooses to file suit. The HMA lease (actually, the ten-page amendment to the 50-page original lease, as it pertains to the new site) provides for PILOT only with regard to taxes paid to Hernando County. It does not purport to address taxes otherwise payable to the Tax Collector for distribution to other taxing entities.
Thanks for the clarification.
Post a Comment