O.C.G.A.
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.
the county-wide project or projects, the remaining proceeds shall be distributed in the following manner: (i) As specified in an intergovernmental agreement other than the agreement specified in paragraph (1) of this subsection. The intergovernmental agreement shall include, at a minimum, the information required in paragraph (1) of this subsection; or (ii) To the qualified municipalities within the special district based upon the ratio that the population of each qualified municipality bears to the total population of the county within the special district. If any qualified municipality is located in more than one county, only that portion of its population that is within the special district shall be counted. The remainder of such proceeds shall be distributed to the governing authority of the county within the special district. Capital outlay projects included in the referendum ballot by the county or any qualified municipalities within the special district shall be based upon the anticipated proceeds and distribution of the tax. The governing authority of the county within the special district shall distribute all proceeds received by the county for the tax levied pursuant to this part to the qualified municipalities within the special district on a monthly basis where proceeds are distributed in accordance with this division.
History
Code 1981, § 48-8-115, enacted by Ga. L. 1985, p. 232, § 1; Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 13; Ga. L. 2005, p. 60, § 48/HB 95.
Annotations
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, § 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, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 (the amendment to this Code section), 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 Proceeds not payable directly to cities. - Special county one percent sales and use tax is a county tax, and the State Revenue Commissioner is authorized to disburse the proceeds of this tax only to the county so that a portion of this tax
cannot be paid directly to a city by the State Revenue Commissioner for the city’s use in making capital improvements to the city’s water system. 1989 Op. Att’y Gen. U89-15.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases, 1992–2013 · leading case:
Jackson v. Shadix, 533 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2000).
Jackson v. Shadix, 533 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2000).
· cites it 22× “See generally OCGA § 48-8-110, et seq. [3] Ga. L.1987, p.”
Johnstone v. Thompson, 631 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. 2006).
· cites it 8× “” See also OCGA § 48-8-111 (a) (l). 4 In this case, the resolution for the reimposition of the SPLOST provided that the funds generated by the SPLOST would be used, in part, on certain designated capital outlay projects, including [mjaking system-wide technology improvements,…”
City of Atlanta v. City of Coll. Park, 741 S.E.2d 147 (Ga. 2013).
· cites it 4× “”) (emphasis supplied); OCGA § 48-8-111 (a) (1) (D) (With respect to a special purpose local option sales tax, “the governing authorities of the county and of each qualified municipality” may apply the tax proceeds toward “[a] capital outlay project or projects, to be owned or…”
Shadix v. Carroll Cnty., 521 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 34× “2998, 3005; OCGA § 48-8-111. The specified purposes for which the proceeds were to be used included funding road, street, and bridge projects, as well as funding fire protection, recreation, water, sewer, and jail projects.”
Riggins v. City of St. Marys, 589 S.E.2d 691 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “The governing statute, OCGA § 48-8-111, requires identification of the projects for which the tax revenue will be spent, and the first project listed by the city was installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Kings Bay and Colerain Roads.”
Gwinnett Cnty. v. Bolin, 414 S.E.2d 225 (Ga. 1992).
· cites it 4× “OCGA § 48-8-111 (b) provides, in part: Upon receipt of the resolution or ordinance, the election superintendent shall issue the call for an election for the purpose of submitting the question of the imposition of the tax to the voters of the county. The election superintendent…”
DeKalb Cnty. v. Perdue, 692 S.E.2d 331 (Ga. 2010).
· cites it 2× “See OCGA § 48-8-111 (a) (1); Johnstone v. Thompson, 280 Ga.”
Mattox v. Franklin Cnty., 728 S.E.2d 813 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “OCGA § 48-8-111 (a) requires only that the resolution “specify eligible expenditures identified by the county and any qualified municipality for use of [the] proceeds” as well as “[t]he purpose or purposes for which the proceeds of the tax are to be used and may be expended.”
Jerry Mattox v. Franklin Cnty. (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “OCGA § 48-8-111 (a) requires only that the resolution “specify eligible expenditures identified by the county and any qualified municipality for use of the proceeds” as well as “[t]he purpose or purposes for which the proceeds of the tax are to be used and may be expended.”
— 48-8-111(a)(1) — 1 case
Johnstone v. Thompson, 631 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. 2006).
“” See also OCGA § 48-8-111 (a) (l). 4 In this case, the resolution for the reimposition of the SPLOST provided that the funds generated by the SPLOST would be used, in part, on certain designated capital outlay projects, including [mjaking system-wide technology improvements,…”
— 48-8-111(a)(1)(D) — 1 case
Shadix v. Carroll Cnty., 521 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
“2998, 3005; OCGA § 48-8-111. The specified purposes for which the proceeds were to be used included funding road, street, and bridge projects, as well as funding fire protection, recreation, water, sewer, and jail projects.”
— 48-8-111(a)(2) — 1 case
Shadix v. Carroll Cnty., 521 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
“2998, 3005; OCGA § 48-8-111. The specified purposes for which the proceeds were to be used included funding road, street, and bridge projects, as well as funding fire protection, recreation, water, sewer, and jail projects.”
— 48-8-111(a)(3) — 2 cases
Jackson v. Shadix, 533 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2000).
“See generally OCGA § 48-8-110, et seq. [3] Ga. L.1987, p.”
Shadix v. Carroll Cnty., 521 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
“2998, 3005; OCGA § 48-8-111. The specified purposes for which the proceeds were to be used included funding road, street, and bridge projects, as well as funding fire protection, recreation, water, sewer, and jail projects.”
— 48-8-111(b)(3) — 1 case
Jackson v. Shadix, 533 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2000).
“See generally OCGA § 48-8-110, et seq. [3] Ga. L.1987, p.”
— 48-8-111(c) — 1 case
Jackson v. Shadix, 533 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 2000).
“See generally OCGA § 48-8-110, et seq. [3] Ga. L.1987, p.”
— 48-8-111(d)(3) — 1 case
Shadix v. Carroll Cnty., 521 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 1999).
“2998, 3005; OCGA § 48-8-111. The specified purposes for which the proceeds were to be used included funding road, street, and bridge projects, as well as funding fire protection, recreation, water, sewer, and jail projects.”
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.