First on Decatur Metro: The Georgia Supreme Court just overturned the GA Appeals Court’s decision that ruled in favor of DeKalb County and its greedy withholding of the 1-cent sales tax money that rightfully belongs to DeKalb’s cities (over $8 mil due to Decatur at last count).

The reason?  The Supreme Court thought the Appellate Court overstepped its authority in deeming the original contract between the county and the cities as “unconstitutional”, since the term “services” had never been defined by the Supreme Court (which is its job).  Or at least that’s how I read the legalese.

But since the low-level trial court didn’t originally rule on this case, its getting thrown back to the Appeals Court to reconsider it again…this time without the option of deeming the contract as “unconstitutional”.

Now I’m no lawyer (can’t you tell?), but this sounds like a huge blow for the county.  Any lawyers out there want to weigh in?

The full ruling can be read here (or you can just read the summary after the jump).

As to why you should care about this case, take a look at this old summary I wrote back when the GA Supreme Court heard it, or just take the mayor’s word for it when he says you have two options for lower city taxes: annexation or winning the HOST ruling.

Also, a HUGE shout out goes to Thomas Wheatley, who provided me with this info that I’ve been waiting on for nearly 6 months!

UPDATE: The AJC picks up the story.

CITY OF DECATUR ET AL. V. DEKALB COUNTY (S08G0105)The Georgia Supreme Court has thrown out a ruling by the Georgia Court of Appeals involving a dispute over tax revenues between four municipalities and the DeKalb County government. The Appeals Court overstepped its bounds, today’s decision says, by interpreting a provision of the state Constitution.

“The Court of Appeals has limited jurisdiction to review constitutional questions,” says today’s unanimous decision, written by Justice Robert Benham. In this case, the Appeals Court went too far by defining what “services” means as used in the Constitution’s Intergovernmental Contracts Clause, when that issue has not yet been decided by the Supreme Court. “None of the cases involving the Intergovernmental Contracts Clause decided by this Court has construed ‘services’ as used in the Clause,” the opinion says.

In 2000, the cities of Decatur, Chamblee, Doraville and Stone Mountain sued the county based on a 49-year intergovernmental agreement. The agreement requires the county to share with cities a portion of Homestead Option Sales and Use Tax (HOST) money, a countywide $.01 sales tax approved by voters to help offset property taxes. The cities argue that for years, the county has tried to get out of its contractual obligations by the way it calculates payments. The county argues that the Constitution permits contracts only for services, facilities or equipment, yet the cities have spent the tax revenue on things as wide-ranging as lease purchase repayments and debt service. After the trial court ruled in favor of the cities, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision, finding that the intergovernmental contract is not valid under the Georgia constitution.

With today’s decision, the high court is sending the case back to the Court of Appeals with instructions that it consider the trial court’s ruling, but without addressing the constitutional issue. The Supreme Court points out that because the trial court did not rule on the issue, the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to do so.

Presiding Justice Carol Hunstein and Justice George Carley did not participate in this case. They were replaced by Superior Court Judge Joseph H. Booth of the Piedmont Judicial Circuit and Superior Court Judge Wendy Lee Shoob of the Atlanta Judicial Circuit.

Attorneys for Appellant (cities)

: Robert Wilson, Bryan Downs, Roslyn Mowatt, Keri WareAttorneys for Appellee (county)

: L. Joseph Loveland, Letitia McDonald, Jason Edgecombe