The powers conferred by this article shall be in addition and supplemental to, and not in substitution for, the powers conferred by any other general, special, or local law. The limitations imposed by this article shall not affect the powers conferred by any other general, special, or local law. Bonds may be issued under this article without regard to any other general, special, or local law. The General Assembly declares its intention that the limitations of the amount or percentage of, and the restrictions relating to, indebtedness of a governmental body and the incurring thereof contained in the Constitution of this state and in any general, special, or local law shall not apply to bonds and the issuance thereof under this article.
(Ga. L. 1937, p. 761, § 19.)
Law reviews.- For article, "Selected Oddities in Georgia Municipal Law," see 9 Ga. L. Rev. 783 (1975).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Constitutionality and exhaustiveness of law.
- Revenue Bond Law (O.C.G.A. Art. 3, Ch. 82, T. 36) does not purport to be a general law exhaustive of the purposes for which revenue bonds or certificates may be issued and this is not violative of a constitutional provision that laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation throughout the state, and no special law shall be enacted in any case for which provisions have been made by an existing general law (Ga. Const. 1945, Art. I, Sec. IV, Para. I (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. IV)). Sigman v. Brunswick Port Auth., 214 Ga. 332, 104 S.E.2d 467 (1958).
Municipal Electric Authority Act not contrary.
- Provisions of the Municipal Electric Authority Act (O.C.G.A Art. 3, Ch. 3, T. 46) are not unlawful as being contrary to provisions of the Revenue Bond Law (O.C.G.A Art. 3, Ch. 82, T. 36). Thompson v. Municipal Elec. Auth., 238 Ga. 19, 231 S.E.2d 720 (1976).
Bonds not debt within meaning of debt clause.
- Bonds issued for financing certain income producing projects and payable solely from income produced thereby shall not be considered as debts within the meaning of the debt clause, Ga. Const. 1877, Art. VII, Sec. VII, Para. I (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. IX, Sec. V, Para. I). City of Valdosta v. Singleton, 197 Ga. 194, 28 S.E.2d 759 (1944).
Cited in Sherman v. City of Atlanta, 317 Ga. 345, 730 S.E.2d 113 (2013).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
C.J.S.
- 82 C.J.S., Statutes, § 395.
ARTICLE 4 BONDS
Editor's notes.
- Ga. L. 2000, p. 498, § 4, effective April 20, 2000, repealed and reserved the former article. The former article, relating to bonds for public contractors, consisted of Code Sections36-82-100 through36-82-105 and was based on Ga. L. 1910, p. 86, § 1, 2; Ga. L. 1916, p. 94, §§ 1, 3-5; Code 1933, §§ 23-1705-23-1709; Ga. L. 1956, p. 340, §§ 1-6; Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 36; Ga. L. 1987, p. 3, § 36; Ga. L. 1988, p. 348, §§ 2, 3; Ga. L. 1989, p. 14, § 36; Ga. L. 1989, p. 461, §§ 2-4; Ga. L. 1993, p. 91, § 36; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1003, § 1.
Code Section 36-82-104 was amended by Ga. L. 2000, p. 1589, § 3. However, this amendment was not given effect due to the repeal of the former article by Ga. L. 2000, p. 498, § 4.