Elbert County v. Sweet City Landfill, Llc., 297 Ga. 429

Background

Sweet City Landfill, LLC applied in 2009 for county approvals to develop a municipal solid waste landfill and sought simultaneous issuance of a Special Use Permit (SUP), zoning estoppel letter, and certificate of plan consistency.
At application time the County was amending its ordinances to (initially) exempt "waste to energy" facilities from the SUP requirement; Sweet City tried to qualify under that exemption.
The County pursued a separate waste-to-energy proposal (Plant Granite) and later amended its ordinance to require SUPs for all solid waste facilities.
On July 9, 2012 the Board voted not to enter a proposed host agreement with Sweet City and terminated a tolling agreement; the Board did not, in the minutes, expressly rule on Sweet City’s SUP.
Sweet City sued in superior court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging (among other claims) that the County ordinance violated the dormant Commerce Clause and that the July 9 action denied equal protection and vested rights; the superior court granted summary judgment to Sweet City on multiple claims.
The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed and remanded, concluding the trial court erred by reaching the merits without requiring administrative exhaustion on some claims and by failing to apply the Pike balancing test on the Commerce Clause claim.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the July 9, 2012 Board action was a final, appealable decision thus barring Sweet City’s lawsuit for failure to timely appeal	The Board’s action was not a final decision on the SUP; it only declined a host agreement and terminated tolling, so no appeal was required	If the Board made a final determination on Sweet City’s SUP, Sweet City had 30 days to appeal under OCGA §5-3-20 and failure to do so forecloses court review	The minutes showed no final action on the SUP; trial court correctly found no final Board determination, so the County’s timeliness argument failed on those facts
Whether Sweet City was required to exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief (or whether futility exception applied)	Returning to the Board would be futile given the County’s prior conduct and likely outcome	Administrative exhaustion is required; futility exception applies only when the same body already made the decision on the issue	Court held exhaustion was required because the Board had not rendered a prior decision; the futility exception did not apply
Whether Sweet City had vested rights and received an equal protection violation from the July 9 action	Sweet City claimed a vested right to a letter of compliance and unequal treatment compared to Plant Granite	County argued no final denial occurred so vested-rights and equal-protection claims were premature	Trial court erred to decide vested-rights and equal-protection merits without a final administrative denial; these claims must await a final local decision
Whether the County’s solid waste ordinance violated the dormant Commerce Clause (facial challenge)	Ordinance effectively bans private landfills in the county and imposes burdens on interstate commerce; trial court should find it unconstitutional without Pike balancing	County argued ordinance is even-handed, advances legitimate local interests (public safety, roads, natural resources), and courts must apply Pike balancing before invalidating it	Supreme Court held the trial court erred by not applying Pike; because the ordinance is not facially discriminatory the Pike balancing test must be applied on remand

Key Cases Cited

Mortgage Alliance Corp. v. Pickens Co., 294 Ga. 212 (discusses 30–day appeal deadline and administrative exhaustion)
Chadwick v. Gwinnett Cnty., 257 Ga. 59 (land-use decision appealability)
Wetherington v. State, 295 Ga. 172 (appeal of void judgment results in reversal)
Darden v. Ravan, 232 Ga. 756 (appealability and void judgments)
City of Suwanee v. Settles Bridge Farm, LLC, 292 Ga. 434 (narrow futility exception to exhaustion)
Cooper v. Unified Gov’t of Athens Clarke Cnty., 277 Ga. 360 (vested-rights claims require a final denial by local authority)
Catoosa County v. R.N. Talley Prop., 282 Ga. 373 (equal-protection zoning review)
United Haulers Assn. Inc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt Auth., 550 U.S. 330 (dormant Commerce Clause framework)
Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc., 397 U.S. 137 (balancing test for non-discriminatory burden on interstate commerce)
King v. City of Bainbridge, 272 Ga. 427 (no exhaustion required for facial challenges to ordinance)
Ansley v. Raczka–Long, 293 Ga. 138 (genuine issues of fact defeat summary judgment)