Martin v. Ellis
Decision Date | 16 October 1978 |
Docket Number | No. 33678,33678 |
Citation | 249 S.E.2d 23,242 Ga. 340 |
Parties | MARTIN et al. v. ELLIS et al. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Nicholas P. Chilivis, Philip J. Marzetti, Atlanta, McCamy, Minor, Phillips & Tuggle, Daniel T. Strain, Jr., John T. Minor, III, Dalton, for appellants.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., James C. Pratt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Mitchell, Mitchell, Coppedge, Boyett, Wester & Bates, Dalton, for appellees.
This appeal considers the constitutionality of the local option sales tax Act (Code Ann. § 92-3447a.1) enacted in 1975. The trial court, in a suit brought by appellees-taxpayers, ruled the Act invalid in part as a violation of the state constitutional requirement that "All taxation shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax." Code Ann. § 2-4603. We agree with the trial court that the differential rollback provision is invalid and that when the invalid part of the Act is stricken, the remainder properly effectuates the intent of the legislature.
1. The scheme of the Act allows a county, by referendum, to impose a one percent sales tax. The tax proceeds are divided among the county and all incorporated municipalities lying wholly or partially therein, on a population basis.
Subsection (i) of the Act reads as follows: "In order to provide governmental services more effectively and economically, in any county where the tax authorized by this section is levied, there is hereby created, pursuant to Article IX, Section III, Paragraph I of the Constitution of Georgia (see Const.1945, § 2-7901a), a special district of taxation for services for the calendar year following the initial year in which such tax is levied, and thereafter as determined by the governing authority of such county as authorized by law, and which shall exist only in those portions of such county which are outside the boundaries of any municipality, as herein defined, within such county, regardless whether such portions lie within or without any other special tax districts created by law."
In the second and subsequent years, the Act provides in subsection (j) for a rollback of ad valorem taxes within the special district only (i. e., the part of the county outside any municipality). Subsection (k) provides for a rollback of municipal ad valorem taxes by any municipality receiving these sales tax proceeds, for the second and subsequent years. Ga.Laws 1978, p. 1696.
The main controversy centers in subsection (j) which is conceded to authorize a county to charge county residents dwelling outside any municipality one rate for services, while charging those dwelling inside municipalities a wholly different rate for identical services.
Whitfield County commenced levy of the one percent local option tax on April 1, 1976. The appellees-taxpayers brought suit as members of the class of taxpayers of Whitfield County residing inside the City of Dalton, alleging that as a result of implementation of the "differential rollback" provision of subsection (j), the tangible property outside Dalton is not being taxed for county operations, while such property inside Dalton is taxed at 12 mills. They asserted a violation of uniformity and prayed for an injunction against further nonuniform collection of taxes. The motion of W. E. Strickland, as State Revenue Commissioner of Georgia, to intervene as a party, was granted without objection.
The Superior Court of Whitfield County decided the case upon arguments of counsel for all parties. No evidence, either oral or documentary, was introduced.
The well-reasoned order of the Whitfield Superior Court (Judge Sam P. Burtz) reads in part as follows: ". . . Defendants' motion to dismiss upon various preliminary procedural grounds, including failure to verify the complaint, estoppel, and mootness, is denied, it appearing that these grounds either do not go to the action as a whole, or are without merit.
We agree with the foregoing reasoning and conclusions of the trial court. The constitutional authorization of Code § 2-6102 contemplated the creation of special districts for providing services, not special districts for taxing the same services at different rates.
Appellants argue in support of the Act that Art. IX, Sec. V Par. I of the Georgia Constitution of 1966 (Code Ann. § 2-6201) allowing the county to tax for any public "purpose" necessarily means that the trial court may not hold that the power to tax within a specified district must be tied to a specified service. This argument confuses "purposes" with "areas" a distinction which we have previously drawn in Richmond County Business...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City Council of Augusta v. Mangelly
...... This is the second major lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of various portions of the Act. In 1978, we decided Martin v. Ellis, 242 Ga. 340, 249 S.E.2d 23 (1978), which ruled unconstitutional the "differential rollback" portion of the Act, which allowed a rollback of ......
-
Shadix v. Carroll County, A99A0576.
......See Camp v. MARTA, 229 Ga. 35, 36, 189 S.E.2d 56 (1972) ; Martin v. Ellis, 242 Ga. 340, 342, 249 S.E.2d 23 (1978) . Since the trial court entered a final declaratory judgment on the merits adverse to the ......
-
Turner Cnty. v. City of Ashburn
...... 2 In Martin v. Ellis, 242 Ga. 340, 249 S.E.2d 23 (1978), this Court ruled that the provision of the LOST statute that authorized a differential rollback of ......
-
Strickland v. Newton County
......984 et seq. (Code Ann. § [244 Ga. 55] 92-3447a.1). Martin v. Ellis, 242 Ga. 340, 249 S.E.2d 23 (1978); City Council of Augusta v. Mangelly, 243 Ga. 358, 254 S.E.2d 315 (1979). In Mangelly, we held that this ......