Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth.
Decision Date | 16 October 2017 |
Docket Number | S17G0091 |
Citation | 302 Ga. 358,806 S.E.2d 525 |
Parties | COLUMBUS BOARD OF TAX ASSESSORS et al v. The MEDICAL CENTER HOSPITAL AUTHORITY. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Dentons US, J. Randolph Evans, Keshia W. Lipscomb ; Rothschild & Rothschild, Jerome M. Rothschild, Andrew A. Rothschild ; Scott C. Crowley ; Brown & Adams, Jeffrey A. Brown, for appellee.
In May 2007, The Medical Center Hospital Authority ("Hospital Authority") filed an action against the Columbus Board of Tax Assessors and related parties (together, "the Tax Board") in which it sought a declaration that its leasehold interest in a building located on real property owned by a private entity constituted public property exempt from ad valorem taxation under OCGA § 48-5-41 (a) (1). The superior court granted summary judgment to the Hospital Authority, finding that the Hospital Authority's leasehold interest qualified as "public property," and was thus exempt from ad valorem property taxation. The Tax Board appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment.1 See Columbus, Georgia Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth., 338 Ga.App. 302, 788 S.E.2d 879 (2016).
We granted certiorari to decide whether the Court of Appeals erred in determining that two prior bond validation orders conclusively determined, for purposes of OCGA § 48-5-41 (a) (1) (A), that the property at issue is "public property" exempt from ad valorem taxation. For the reasons which follow, we hold that these orders did not conclusively establish that the Hospital Authority's leasehold interest was "public property" exempt from ad valorem taxes and therefore reverse the Court of Appeals and remand this case for further proceedings.
This is a decade old case that has a rich and detailed factual background and procedural history. We address the pertinent parts of that history below, including the lease agreement, the bond validations, the superior court's grant of summary judgment regarding ad valorem taxes, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals affirming that judgment.
On June 1, 2004, Columbus Regional Healthcare System, Inc. ("Columbus Regional"), 2 as the lessor, and the Hospital Authority, as the lessee, entered into a long-term lease agreement. Specifically, the lease stated that the Hospital Authority wanted "to construct, own, and operate" on land owned by Columbus Regional a facility known as Spring Harbor at Green Island, a continuing care retirement center. At the conclusion of the lease term, all improvements would become the absolute property of Columbus Regional, including the Spring Harbor facility. To further the goals of the lease, the Hospital Authority subsequently issued revenue bonds to finance construction of Spring Harbor. At the same time, the Hospital Authority entered into a management agreement with another private entity, a subsidiary of Columbus Regional, to develop, market, and manage the operation of Spring Harbor on behalf of the Hospital Authority. See Columbus, 338 Ga.App. at 302-304, 788 S.E.2d 879.
Later in 2004, the superior court validated the financing of the Hospital Authority's bonds, finding, in pertinent part, "that the purposes for which the Bonds are being issued, as described in the petition and complaint, are in furtherance of the public purposes for which Defendant Authority was established." Following a 2007 bond refinancing, the superior court again was tasked with considering the validity of the revenue bonds, and was specifically "requested to rule on which entity did in fact build, manage and own[ ] Spring Harbor at Green Island." In its detailed, 27-page order, the superior court both validated the refinancing of the bonds, and also concluded, in relevant part, that clear and convincing evidence "demonstrate[d] that the [Hospital] Authority ha[d] transferred and delegated [its] rights and duties to a private company." Specifically, the court noted that, though the bond documents stated that Columbus Regional would "have little participation in the Project," the court found it "apparent [that] Columbus Regional ha[d] acquired the site, built Spring Harbor, prepared all legal documents and financial transfers, and [would] own, manage and control Spring Harbor." Indeed, the court found that the Hospital Authority "ha[d] transferred all the bond proceeds, acquisition, construction, management, and total control of this Project to a private company, Columbus Regional Healthcare System Inc., and/or ‘affiliates.’ "
The court reiterated that "the entire project is owned, managed, and controlled by [a private entity], and once the bonds are paid, the [Hospital] Authority has agreed that [Columbus Regional] will take possession and will own everything on site ... all property of every kind, real or personal." Nevertheless, as referenced above, the court validated the 2007 bond refinancing, finding that the project itself served a public purpose as contemplated under the Hospital Authorities Law.3
Between the validation of the 2004 and 2007 bonds, the Tax Board sent the Hospital Authority a bill for its Spring Harbor property tax obligation, which included taxes for all improvements made to the facility. The Hospital Authority refused to pay, contending that its property interest in Spring Harbor was exempt from ad valorem property taxation and subsequently filed for declaratory and injunctive relief in Muscogee County Superior Court.
(Emphasis supplied.) The Tax Board appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals.
Relying on the 2004 and 2007 bond validation orders, which the Court of Appeals determined were conclusive on the question of ownership and taxation, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment. Specifically, relying upon the bond validation's "conclusive findings," the court concluded that the Hospital Authority's leasehold interest was public property because, in part, " ‘the purposes for which the [b]onds [were] being issued, as described in the petition and complaint, [were] in furtherance of the public purposes for which [the Hospital] Authority was established.’ " Columbus, 338 Ga.App. at 305, 788 S.E.2d 879. We granted the petition for certiorari to review that holding and now reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.
Bond validation decisions are "incontestable and conclusive." Ga. Const. of 1983 Art. IX, Sec. VI, Par. IV. See also OCGA §...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Jacksonville v. Mun. Elec. Auth. of Ga.
...only attaches to those matters that are referenced and adjudicated in the bond proceedings." Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth., 302 Ga. 358, 362, 806 S.E.2d 525 (2017) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Here, the bond validation proceedings referenced and......
-
GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. v. Atlanta Botanical Garden, Inc.
...nature of an entity that holds a leasehold interest in it. Id. at 162-163, 812 S.E.2d 527 (citing Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth ., 302 Ga. 358, 806 S.E.2d 525 (2017) and Douglas County v. Anneewakee, Inc. , 179 Ga. App. 270, 346 S.E.2d 368 (1986) ).As this Court disc......
-
Georgiacarry.org, Inc. v. Atlanta Botanical Garden, Inc.
...status of the holder of the leasehold ..." Id. at 274 (3), 346 S.E.2d 368.And most recently, in Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth. , 302 Ga. 358, 806 S.E.2d 525 (2017), the Supreme Court again reiterated that, under Georgia law, we look to the lessee, not the lessor, to ......
-
Columbus v. Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth., A16A0638
...Court granted certiorari to review our decision in Case No. A16A0638, and in Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Med. Center Hosp. Auth. , 302 Ga. 358, 806 S.E.2d 525 (2017), our Supreme Court reversed, holding that the earlier bond validation proceedings did not conclusively determine for pur......