O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 48-8-110 (2019)

Definitions

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this part, the term: (1) “Capital outlay project” means major, permanent, or long-lived improvements or betterments, such as land and structures, such as would be properly chargeable to a capital asset account and as distinguished from current expenditures and ordinary maintenance expenses. Such term shall include, but not be limited to, roads, streets, bridges, police cars, fire trucks, ambulances, garbage trucks, and other major equipment. (2) “County-wide project” means a capital outlay project or projects as defined in paragraph (1) of this Code section of the county for the use or benefit of the citizens of the entire county and is further defined as follows: (A) “Level one county-wide project” means a county-wide project or projects of the county to carry out functions on behalf of the state and is limited to a county courthouse; a county administrative building primarily for county constitutional officers or elected officials; a county or regional jail, correctional institution, or other detention facility; a county health department facility; or any combination of such projects; and (B) “Level two county-wide project” means a county-wide project or projects of the county or one or more municipalities, other than a level one county-wide project, which project or projects are to be owned or operated or both either by the county, one or more municipalities, or any combination thereof. (3) “Intergovernmental agreement” means a contract entered into pursuant to Article IX, Section III, Paragraph I of the Constitution between a county and one or more qualified municipalities located within the special district containing a combined total of no less than

50 percent of the aggregate municipal population located within the special district. (4) “Qualified municipality” means only those incorporated municipalities which provide at least three of the following services, either directly or by contract: (A) Law enforcement; (B) Fire protection (which may be furnished by a volunteer fire force) and fire safety; (C) Road and street construction or maintenance; (D) Solid waste management; (E) Water supply or distribution or both; (F) Waste-water treatment; (G) Storm-water collection and disposal; (H) Electric or gas utility services; (I) Enforcement of building, housing, plumbing, and electrical codes and other similar codes; (J) Planning and zoning; (K) Recreational facilities; or (L) Library.

History

Code 1981, § 48-8-110, enacted by Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 8.

Annotations

Code Commission notes. Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 2009, “Article IX” was substituted for “Article XI” in paragraph (3). Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 1, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: “This Act shall be known and may be cited as the ‘State and Local Taxation, Financing, and Service Delivery Revision Act of 2004.’” Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 8, redesignated former Code Section 48-8-110 as present

Code Section 48-8-110.1 concerning authorization for special county 1 percent sales and use tax. Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 23(c), not codified by the General Assembly, provides that this Code section “shall apply with respect to taxes imposed or to be imposed under any resolution or ordinance adopted by a county or municipal governing authority on or after July 1, 2004; and, except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act, Sections 8 (this Code section), 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of this Act shall not apply with respect to taxes imposed or to be imposed under resolutions and ordinances adopted prior to July 1, 2004.”

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Borrowing from tax proceeds. - County may not borrow from Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax

(SPLOST) proceeds to fund expenditures other than voter-approved capital projects

authorized in the SPLOST statutes. 2007 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 2007-5.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1992–2013 · leading case: Johnstone v. Thompson, 631 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Johnstone v. Thompson, 631 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. 2006). · cites it 16× “IV(a) provides that "except as otherwise provided in this Paragraph," the SPLOST in all other respects "shall correspond to and be levied in the same manner as the tax provided for by [OCGA § 48-8-110 et seq.]." See also OCGA § 48-8-141.”
Dickey v. Storey, 423 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. 1992). · cites it 6× “In November 1987, an advisory committee was jointly appointed by the Floyd County Board of Commissioners (Board) and the City of Rome Commissioners to study the needs of the community, and to explore the possibilities of raising capital for these projects by imposition of a…”
Associated Indus. of Mo. v. Lohman, 511 U.S. 641 (1994). “, *654 Ga. Code Ann. §48-8-110 (Supp. 1994) (requiring the enactment of a local use tax to be coupled with the adoption of an equivalent sales tax).”
Turner Cnty. v. City of Ashburn, 749 S.E.2d 685 (Ga. 2013). · cites it 2× “Compare the local negotiation feature of the district-wide tax created by the LOST Act with the population-based formula for distributing the county tax created by the SPLOST Act (OCGA § 48-8-110 et seq.) if an intergovernmental agreement for funding qualified capital outlay…”
Jackson v. Shadix, 533 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2000). · cites it 4× “Of course, it is not entirely clear that OCGA § 48-8-112(2) does apply to this matter, as the 1987 Code does not plainly state that subsection two applies to mixed purpose SPLOSTS such as exists here.”
Collins v. Cw Matthews Contracting Co. Inc., 444 S.E.2d 100 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “The three types of local use taxes at issue are: (1) joint county and municipal sales and use tax (OCGA §§ 48-8-80 — 48-8-95); (2) special county one percent sales and use tax (OCGA §§ 48-8-110 — 48-8-122), and (3) Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) Act of 1965…”
Shadix v. Carroll Cnty., 521 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 8× “See OCGA § 48-8-110 et seq. Subject to the requirement of referendum approval and other requirements, the governing authority of any county may impose such a tax, for limited periods of time, for one or more statutorily authorized purposes.”
C. W. Matthews Contracting Co. v. Collins, 457 S.E.2d 171 (Ga. 1995). “The Court of Appeals encompassed in its decision language in OCGÁ § 48-8-110 (authorizing a special county one percent sales and use tax) and in the MARTA sales and use tax, see MARTA Act of 1965 (as amended in Ga.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.