Opinion
August 1, 1950.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Gulf County, E.C. Welch, J.
Mercer P. Spear, Panama City, for appellant.
R.S. Pierce, Jr., Marianna, and Cecil G. Costin, Jr., Port St. Joe, for appellee.
The City of Port St. Joe executed notes to its contractors to pay for the construction of water works, a sewerage system and for widening, grading, draining, improving and paving certain streets, all located within the city limits. The said notes were validated and declared to be outstanding and funded debts of the City by Chapter 24837, Special Acts of 1947, and Chapter 26174, Special Acts of 1949, neither of which was advertised prior to introduction in the legislature. Section 3 of each act was as follows: "Section 3. The provisions of this act shall become effective and the same shall be in force and effect upon and after the approval and ratification of the same by a majority of the freeholders who are qualified electors residing in the City of Port St. Joe, Florida, participating in an election, to be expressed at the next regular city election or at a special election to be called for this purpose within one year from the effective date of this Act, to be held in said City of Port St. Joe, and if such election is specially called the time and place thereof shall be set by resolution of the City Commission and due notice thereof given in accordance with law."
This appeal is from a final decree validating bonds to refund the balance due on said indebtedness. The petition to validate shows (1) that the notes were given and the indebtedness incurred by the City in due course, (2) that elections were called and held for approval of each of said special acts, (3) that the results of each election were in favor of approval, (4) that each act was approved by a majority of the votes cast in an election in which a majority of the freeholders residing in the city participated, (5) that ordinances were duly adopted by the city Commission to issue the bonds to refund the funded debt described in said special Acts and notes.
It is first contended that Chapter 24837, Special Acts of 1947, is invalid, in that it was not passed in compliance with Section 21, Article III of the Constitution, F.S.A.
If not otherwise controlled there might have been some basis for this contention prior to the adoption of the 1938 amendment to Section 21 of Article III of the Constitution. This amendment eliminated the requirement that referendums be submitted to "qualified electors" and clothed the legislature with power to regulate them as it saw fit. The Special Act in this case (Chapter 24837, Acts of 1947) relates solely to a bond election and is governed by Section 6, Article IX of the Constitution. Pitt v. Belote, 108 Fla. 292, 146 So. 380. Chapter 24837 contained all the requirements of Section 6, Article IX of the Constitution and was approved in the manner required by it.
It is next contended that since the approving election was held at the next regular city election, the act and the City Charter being silent as to time of notice, such election should have been held and notice given as required by Section 103.02, Florida Statutes 1949, F.S.A.
This contention is also without merit. Chapter 24837 authorizes the approving election to be held at the next city election. It was held at that time but was separately held as a bond election. The notice was published one time fifteen days before the election. Notice of opening of the registration booths and a list of qualified freeholders was furnished the clerk and inspectors and separate ballots were used as required by the City Charter. It is shown that 367 freeholders resided in the city at the time of the election, that 305 of them registered and qualified to vote and that 187 of them voted to approve the act. This was a majority of those residing in the city as shown by the registered list.
At the election to ratify Chapter 26174, Special Acts of 1949, it was found that there were 463 freeholders in the city, that 291 of them actually participated in the election, that 239 of them voted to approve the said act. The election was in all respects regular and held in compliance with the constitution. No objection is raised to this election not covered herein.
Under this state of facts, there is certainly no basis to complain about the notice or conditions under which the approving elections were held. There is no suggestion of fraud, neither is there an attempt to show that any one qualified to vote was deceived or was prevented from doing so. No one affected by the litigation is here complaining. Town of Baldwin v. State, Fla., 40 So.2d 348.
Other questions argued have been considered but we find no reversible error so the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
ADAMS, C.J., and CHAPMAN, THOMAS, SEBRING, HOBSON and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.