Resolutions and Referendums Required Prior to Issuance of Bonded Indebtedness for New Projects; Exclusions

1. Law
2. Georgia Code
3. Local Government
4. War on Terrorism Local Assistance
5. Resolutions and Referendums Required Prior to Issuance of Bonded Indebtedness for New Projects; Exclusions

1. On and after May 24, 2007, no public safety and judicial facilities authority created and activated by a single county pursuant to this chapter shall be authorized to issue bonds for new projects unless a resolution approving such projects passed by a majority vote of the governing authority of the county that created and activated such authority was ratified by the electors of the county in a referendum.
2. The proceeds of bonds issued by a public safety and judicial facilities authority created and activated by a single county pursuant to this chapter and any interest on such proceeds shall be used only for the projects set forth in the resolution approving the issuance of such bonds or for debt service on such bonds.
3. Any authority other than the type of authority defined in paragraph (1) of Code Section 36-75-3:
   1. Which is authorized by general or local Act to operate and issue bonds in a single county that has activated or that activates a public safety and judicial facilities authority pursuant to this chapter; and
   2. Which constructs or operates buildings or facilities for use by any department, agency, division, or commission of any county that has activated or that activates a public safety and judicial facilities authority pursuant to this chapter

      shall obtain approval by resolution and referendum as provided in this Code section prior to issuing bonds for any new buildings, facilities, or real property or improvements to existing buildings, facilities, or real property and shall be bound to such resolution as provided in subsection (b) of this Code section.

4. Subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this Code section shall apply only to the issuance of bonds the principal and interest of which will be repaid, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, through funds of the county by agreement between the county and:
   1. A public safety and judicial facilities authority created and activated pursuant to this chapter; or
   2. Any authority other than the type of authority defined in paragraph (1) of Code Section 36-75-3 that meets the conditions set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (c) of this Code section.
5. The provisions of this Code section shall not apply under any circumstances to the issuance of "recovery zone economic development bonds" and "recovery zone facility bonds" as such terms are defined in Section 1401 of the federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

(Code 1981, §36-75-11, enacted by Ga. L. 2007, p. 421, § 1/HB 181; Ga. L. 2010, p. 4, § 2/HB 203.)

Code Commission notes.

- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 2007, "May 24, 2007" was substituted for "the effective date of this Code section" in subsection (a).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Constitutionality.

- War on Terrorism Local Assistance Act, O.C.G.A. § 36-75-1 et seq., is not unconstitutional because the Act does not violate the uniform terms and conditions provision for development authorities in Ga. Const. 1983, Art. IX, Sec. VI, Para. III; the uniformity required by Ga. Const. 1983, Art. IX, Sec. VI, Para. III in the laws creating development authorities is the same uniformity required by Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. IV(a) in laws of a general nature. Dev. Auth. v. State, 286 Ga. 36, 684 S.E.2d 856 (2009).

Classification is not unreasonable or arbitrary and is therefore constitutional.

- War on Terrorism Local Assistance Act, specifically O.C.G.A. § 36-75-11(c), is not unconstitutional because the classification in § 36-75-11 is not unreasonable and arbitrary since the classification applies in precisely the same way and without exception to every county development authority throughout the state that currently meets or may, in the future, meet the criteria set forth in § 36-75-11(c); the purpose of § 36-75-11 is to protect against the accumulation of excessive bonded indebtedness, and the legislature had a reasonable basis to first address this critical financial situation in counties. Dev. Auth. v. State, 286 Ga. 36, 684 S.E.2d 856 (2009).

Legislation enacting the War on Terrorism Local Assistance Act, Ga. L. 2003, p. 862, does not violate Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. IV because the legislation and O.C.G.A. § 36-75-11(c) are logically related and do not embrace discordant subjects when the legislation generally pertains to public safety and judicial facilities authorities, and § 36-75-11(c) applies to authorities in counties that have activated public safety and judicial facilities authorities; it was the legislature's decision to enact a statute imposing a referendum requirement on any authority that has been authorized to incur bonded indebtedness in a county with an activated public safety and judicial facilities authority when that authority has constructed or operates buildings or facilities for use by a department, agency, division, or commission of such county. Dev. Auth. v. State, 286 Ga. 36, 684 S.E.2d 856 (2009).

Download our app to see the most-to-date content.