ÿWPCe/ £Ö'e@ÔXs"ϸwHrr†ô±Lêv²yDÚu¾AN Œµå™rC+ínK?Ó¬.i”ڙᰫÌÖ£d~´0(·ŽÏ–ÛRø°ô•B°pý³NMtrñ˜WljpfèÑ4XyÙ>ÇzÅò ­&êÝb“õ{·l)«d ËcIr Ášˆ®· uGEXļ –DPÁ"\j]°bˆÊ[Æh,tÀ^53rµjÁ+ZL83ÕR7ºB’Dz·E€¿G_ ·68y;j…•ý3@>nñ6¶ù¸!¦¡Ý !!!!!' 1!1!1!1!1!bX*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X* 0ë`*`*`*`* BK+K+ 0¤h+ D5 , D-A, 0Kn,n, AS¹,Æ - 0¤Ò- 0Dv. A«º.˜HP LaserJet 4 Plus,ð,,,,,ð0»¦|Œ-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular¦[ƒ-ü´¨ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(× CEMU]emu}AutoList1(a)(a)(a)(a)(a)(a)(a)(a)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 (a)3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à MCCLANAHAN COAestopped ExhSadlerT.C.A.NatlDistribsSevier UtilKennedey S.W.proferredTansiBradwallPshipStalcupGatlinburgHarwellStacupLILLARDHighers CTASNolichuckeyHuddleston Ñ û Ñ(|3A $§§Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular Ý ƒRö×$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Public€Act€also€includes€a€population€exclusion€provision€that€allows€counties€within€certain€populationÐ ° Ðparameters€to€allocate€the€tax€collected€to€ð ðthe€county€road€fund,€the€county€general€fund€or€any€other€fund€of€theÐ xÈ Ðcounty.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€67„7„201(b).€€Appellee€Decatur€County€does€not€fall€within€these€population€parameters.€Ð @ Ð ?Ý ƒRö×$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOn€September€27,€1995,€the€Tennessee€Office€of€the€Attorney€General€issued€an€opinion€with€regard€to€theÐ ° Ðfollowing€question:€ð ðWhether€private€acts€enacted€on€or€after€June€5,€1984,€distributing€severance€tax€revenues€to€fundsÐ xÈ Ðother€than€the€county€road€fund,€conflict€with€the€general€law€and€are€unconstitutional?ðð€€Tenn.€Op.€Atty.€Gen.€No.€95„Ð @ Ð100.€€The€opinion€stated€that€private€acts€enacted€after€June€5,€1984€are€constitutionally€suspect€and€quite€possiblyÐ X Ðunconstitutional.€€The€Attorney€General€opined,€however,€€that€although€ð ð[t]he€legislature€has€expressed€an€intent€toÐ Ð  Ðeliminate€future€private€acts€concerning€mineral€severance€taxes€after€a€specific€date,ðð€that€ð ða€private€act€that€has€aÐ ˜è Ðdemonstrable€rational€basis€for€special€treatment€for€a€particular€county€could€still€be€upheld€under€the€establishedÐ ` ° Ðinterpretation€of€Article€XI,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.ðð€€The€Attorney€General€indicated€that€this€wasÐ ( x Ðmore€likely€to€occur€in€counties€with€a€small€population€and€very€large€deposits€of€taxable€minerals. ìÝ ƒRö×$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBecause€Vulcan€questioned€the€constitutionality€of€the€tax,€Decatur€County€furnished€a€copy€of€theirÐ ° Ðcomplaint€to€the€Tennessee€Attorney€General.€€The€Attorney€General€declined€to€defend€the€constitutionality€of€theÐ xÈ ÐPrivate€Act,€citing€the€Actððs€limited€application€as€well€as€sufficient€representation€at€the€county€level. `Ý ƒRö×$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSuch€a€finding€would€not€render€the€tax€itself€unconstitutional,€only€the€allocation€of€the€revenues,€and€wouldÐ ° Ðresult€in€a€conclusion€that€the€County€was€required€to€allocate€the€revenues€to€its€road€fund. WÝ ƒRö×$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€basis€for€the€trial€courtððs€holding€is€somewhat€unclear.€€It€is€possible€that€the€finding€of€untimeliness€refersÐ ° Ðto€sections€67„1„901(a)€and€67„1„912€of€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated,€which€provide€that€a€lawsuit€to€recover€taxes€mustÐ xÈ Ðbe€filed€within€six€months€after€payment€under€protest€of€the€tax€in€dispute.€€As€noted€above,€payment€under€protest€isÐ @ Ðnot€required;€therefore,€this€statute€is€inapplicable.€ô\  `‹&Times New Roman Ñ ° Ñ  Ý ƒRö×$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€the€two€prior€decision€by€this€Court,€ò òòòLebanon€Liquors€v.€City€of€Lebanonó óóó,€885€S.W.2d€63€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ° Ð1994),and€ò òòòHoover,€Inc.€v.€Rutherford€Countyó óóó,€885€S.W.2d€67€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994),€it€was€held:Ð xÈ ÐÌà8  àPlaintiffs€argue€that€T.C.A.€Ô‡X¡XòôÁ4ÔððÔ#†ôÁ4òXX¡²#Ô€67„1„901(b)€relieves€the€requirement€of€payment€under€protest€as€aÐ X Ðcondition€precedent€to€the€recovery€of€taxes€to€a€municipality,€by€virtue€of€the€language€of€T.C.A.€Ô‡X¡XòôÁ4ÔððÔ#†ôÁ4òXX¡´#ÔÐ øH Ð67„1„911(a)€which€states€that€ð ðthe€provisions€of€Ô‡X¡XòôÁ4ÔððÔ#†ôÁ4òXX¡C#ÔÔ‡X¡XòôÁ4Ôðð€Ô#†ôÁ4òXX¡‰#Ô67„1„901€.€.€.€apply€to€the€recovery€of€all€taxesÐ è8 Ðcollected€by€any€of€the€municipalities€of€this€state.ðð€€The€legislature€added€T.C.A.€Ô‡X¡XòôÁ4Ôðð€Ô#†ôÁ4òXX¡n#Ô67„1„901(b)€inÐ Ø ( Ð1986€relieving€the€requirement€of€payment€under€protest€for€taxes€due€or€collected€by€the€Stateòòò òóóó ó.€Ð È   ÐHowever,€no€effort€was€made€by€the€legislature€to€amend€the€specific€provisions€of€T.C.A.€Ô‡X¡XòôÁ4ÔððÔ#†ôÁ4òXX¡¸#Ô67„1„Ð ° Ð911(b)€which€explicitly€requires€payment€under€protest€òòto€a€municipalityóó.РðÐ Ð  ÐÌò òòòHooveró óóó,€885€S.W.2d€at€69„70€(quoting€ò òòòLebanon€Liquorsó óóó,€885€S.W.2d€at€66).€€On€this€basis,€the€court€held€that€paymentÐ 0€ Ðunder€protest€was€a€condition€precedent€to€the€recovery€of€taxes€from€a€municipality.€€In€neither€case,€however,€wasÐ øH Ðsection€67„1„1807€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€raised€as€an€issue€on€appeal.€€Consequently,€these€decisions€areÐ À Ðinapplicable€and€we€conclude€that€section€67„1„1807€governs,€removing€the€requirement€of€payment€of€disputed€taxesÐ ˆ Ø Ðas€a€condition€precedent€to€a€suit€for€recovery€of€taxes€from€a€municipality€as€well€as€the€State.- ù-(|G2ö×$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÁ4ò»»Ô d(|3A $££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3A $¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦´»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼¦´»»»ÔÑ8€¡XXdð»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÑ€¯bÑÑ€$Oa Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îà¦´ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼¦´»îîà.#ԈРÜ, ÐÓ  Óà @ àMay€21,€2002€SessionÐ X ÐÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÌò òÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡#ÔDECATUR€COUNTY,€TENNESSEEòòóó€Ð  ` Ðv.€Ð ( x ÐVULCAN€MATERIALS€COMPANYÐ @  Ð___________________________________Ð X ¨ ÐÌòòóóVULCAN€MATERIALS€COMPANY,€WEST€TENNESSEE€GRAVELÐ ˆØ  ÐCOMPANY,€TINKER€SAND€&€GRAVEL€COMPANY,€INC.,€Ð  ð  Ðand€Ô_ÔMcCLANAHANÔ_Ô€ROCK€PRODUCTS€Ð ¸  Ðv.€Ð Ð  ÐDECATUR€COUNTY,€TENNESSEEó óÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÐ è8  ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Decatur€CountyÐ ð@ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€2624à0 @ à€€€€€Ron€E.€Harmon,€ChancellorÐ à0 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<¯` AßÐ ° ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2001„00858„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€12,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¯ÿ ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<Ž` AßÐ ß Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€case€involves€the€constitutionality€of€a€mineral€severance€tax€increase.€€In€1984,€the€TennesseeÐ ŽÞ ÐGeneral€Assembly€enacted€a€public€act€of€statewide€application€authorizing€counties€to€collect€aÐ ~Î Ðmineral€severance€tax,€directing€that€the€proceeds€of€the€tax€be€deposited€in€the€county€road€fund.€Ð n¾ ÐIn€1987,€the€General€Assembly€passed€a€private€act€allowing€Decatur€County€to€impose€a€mineralÐ ^® Ðseverance€tax,€but€allocating€the€revenue€from€the€tax€to€the€countyððs€general€fund.€€Decatur€CountyÐ N ž Ðadopted€the€tax€and€the€proceeds€went€to€the€countyððs€general€fund.€€€In€1994,€the€General€AssemblyÐ >!Ž Ðamended€the€private€act€to€provide€for€an€increase€in€the€mineral€severance€tax.€€Decatur€CountyÐ ."~ Ðadopted€the€increased€rate,€and€then€filed€suit€against€a€company€that€severed€minerals€from€the€earthÐ #n  Ðin€that€county,€to€collect€the€mineral€severance€tax€at€the€increased€rate.€€The€mineral€company,€andÐ $^! Ðthree€other€mineral€companies,€resisted€payment€of€the€tax,€arguing€inter€alia€that€the€tax€wasÐ þ$N " Ðunconstitutional€under€Article€XI,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,€the€equal€protectionÐ î%>!# Ðclause,€because€the€proceeds€were€allocated€to€the€countyððs€general€fund,€rather€than€to€the€countyÐ Þ&."$ Ðroad€fund,€as€directed€in€the€public€act€authorizing€the€tax.€€€After€a€trial,€the€trial€court€held€that€theÐ Î'#% Ðmineral€companies€were€estopped€from€arguing€that€the€tax€was€unconstitutional,€and,€in€theÐ ¾($& Ðalternative,€that€the€tax€was€constitutional€because€the€mineral€companies€failed€to€show€that€thereÐ ®)þ$' Ðwas€not€a€rational€basis€for€the€allocation€of€the€funds€to€the€countyððs€general€fund€rather€than€to€theÐ ž*î%( Ðroad€fund.€€Both€parties€appealed.€€We€affirm€in€part€and€reverse€in€part,€finding€that€the€mineralÐ Ž+Þ&) Ðcompanies€were€not€required€to€pay€the€tax€in€protest,€that€the€mineral€companies€have€standing€toÐ ~,Î'* Ðsue€and€are€not€estopped€from€contesting€the€constitutionality€of€the€tax,€and€finally€that€the€tax€isÐ n-¾(+ý> Ðconstitutional€because€there€is€a€rational€basis€for€allocating€the€revenue€to€the€countyððs€general€fundÐ ° Ðrather€than€to€its€road€fund.€€Ð  ð ÐÌÓNÓò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€in€PartÐ €Ð Ðand€Reversed€in€Partó óÐ pÀ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼¦´»àX¡&#ÔÔ‡X¡X.¼¦´ÔHolly€K.€Ô_ÔLillardÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòAlan€E.€Highers,€J.,€óóand€òòDavidÐ P   ÐR.€Farmer,€J.óó,€joined.Ð @  ÐÌRobert€E.€Boston€and€Mark€W.€Peters,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€appellants€Vulcan€MaterialsÐ  p  ÐCompany,€West€Tennessee€Gravel€Company,€Tinker€Sand€&€Gravel€Company,€Inc.,€andÐ `  ÐÔ_ÔMcClanahanÔ_Ô€Rock€Products.Ð P  ÐÌJames€I.€Pentecost€and€Jennifer€K.€Craig,€Jackson,€Tennessee,€for€appellees,€Decatur€County,Ð à0  ÐTennessee.Ð Ð  ÐÓµÓÓ  ÓÌò òÓ  ÓÓÓOPINIONó óÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡ä#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÐ ° ÐÓ¦ÓÓ  ÓÓÓÓ Óà  àIn€1984,€the€Tennessee€General€Assembly€enacted€section€67„7„201€of€Tennessee€CodeÐ à ÐAnnotated,€a€Public€Act€(ð ðPublic€Actðð)€that€authorizes€counties€to€impose€a€mineral€severance€taxÐ €Ð Ðon€entities€that€sever€minerals€from€the€earth.€€The€Public€Act€requires€that€the€county€legislativeÐ pÀ Ðbody€authorize€the€tax,€and€directs€the€county€to€deposit€the€revenue€from€the€tax€into€the€countyððsÐ `° Ðroad€fund.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€67„7„201(a).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€à  àÐ P  Ðà  àIn€1986,€the€legislative€body€of€Plaintiff/Appellee€Decatur€County,€the€County€Commission,€Ð 0€ Ðdiscussed€adopting€a€mineral€severance€tax,€proposing€to€allocate€the€revenues€to€the€county€generalÐ  p Ðfund€rather€than€to€the€county€road€fund.€On€March€12,€1987,€the€Tennessee€General€AssemblyÐ ` Ðenacted€a€Private€Act€authorizing€Decatur€County€to€assess€a€mineral€severance€tax€of€five€cents€perÐ P Ðton€of€minerals€severed€from€the€earth.€€The€Private€Act€directed€that€the€revenue€from€the€tax€beÐ ð@ Ðdeposited€into€the€Decatur€County€general€fund€or€such€other€fund€as€designated€by€the€DecaturÐ à0 ÐCounty€legislative€body.€€On€May€18,€1987,€the€Decatur€County€Commission€adopted€the€mineralÐ Ð  Ðseverance€tax€authorized€by€the€General€Assembly.€€Ð À! Ðà  àOver€six€years€later,€on€February€2,€1994,€the€Tennessee€General€Assembly€amended€theÐ  #ð! ÐPrivate€Act,€increasing€the€authorized€tax€rate€from€five€cents€to€fifteen€cents€per€ton€of€mineralsÐ $à" Ðsevered.€€On€October€17,€1994,€the€Decatur€County€Commission€adopted€the€mineral€severance€taxÐ €%Ð # Ðat€the€increased€rate;€however,€the€Commission€deferred€collection€of€the€increased€tax€until€AprilÐ p&À!$ Ð30,€1995.€Ð `'°"% Ðà  àOn€February€13,€1995,€employees€of€Defendant/Appellee€Vulcan€Materials€CompanyÐ ° Ð(ð ðVulcanðð)€told€a€Decatur€County€official€that€Vulcan€believed€that€the€mineral€severance€tax€wasÐ  ð Ðunconstitutional€because€the€funds€were€being€deposited€into€the€County€general€fund€rather€thanÐ à Ðinto€the€County€road€fund,€as€directed€in€the€Public€Act.€€The€County€denied€Vulcanððs€request€toÐ €Ð Ðcease€collecting€the€tax.€€The€next€day,€the€Decatur€County€Commission€adopted€a€resolution€askingÐ pÀ Ðthe€Tennessee€General€Assembly€to€amend€section€67„7„201€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€toÐ ` ° Ðexempt€Decatur€County€from€the€provision€requiring€the€tax€revenue€to€be€allocated€to€the€CountyÐ P   Ðroad€fund.€€No€such€amendment€was€enacted€by€the€General€Assembly.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð @  ÐÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡ñ#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ôà  àOn€November€21,€1995,€Decatur€County€filed€a€lawsuit€against€Vulcan€Materials€CompanyÐ  p  Ðfor€failure€to€pay€the€mineral€severance€tax€at€the€increased€rate€for€the€month€of€May€1995.€€DecaturÐ `  ÐCounty€argued€that,€although€the€collection€of€tax€was€deferred€until€after€April€30,€1995,€theÐ P  Ðdeferment€was€only€a€grace€period,€and€therefore€the€effective€date€of€the€tax€was€still€October€17,Ð ð@  Ð1994.€€Thus,€Decatur€County€claimed,€the€minerals€that€Vulcan€severed€and€sold€in€May€1995€wereÐ à0  Ðsubject€to€the€increased€tax€rate.Ð Ð  Ðà  àVulcanððs€response€to€Decatur€Countyððs€lawsuit€asserted€that€the€tax€was€illegal,€and€that€theÐ ° Ðdoctrine€of€unclean€hands€prevented€Decatur€County€from€collecting€the€tax.€€Vulcan€claimed€thatÐ  ð Ðthe€tax€was€unconstitutional€because€the€County€unlawfully€deposited€the€collected€revenue€into€itsÐ à ÐCounty€general€fund€rather€than€its€County€road€fund.׃˜×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Vulcan€was€joined€by€three€other€companiesÐ €Ð Ðsubject€to€the€Decatur€County€mineral€severance€tax,€West€Tennessee€Gravel€Company,€Tinker€SandÐ pÀ Ð&€Gravel€Company,€Inc.,€and€Ô_ÔMcClanahanÔ_Ô€Rock€Products€ò òó ó(hereinafter€collectively€ð ðmineralÐ `° Ðcompaniesðð).€€Ð P  Ðà  àOn€May€2,€1997,€the€mineral€companies€moved€for€summary€judgment,€asserting€theÐ 0€ Ðunconstitutionality€of€the€mineral€severance€tax€allocation.€€The€motion€was€denied.€€The€mineralÐ  p Ðcompanies€were€granted€permission€by€the€trial€court€to€seek€permission€from€this€Court€to€appealÐ ` Ðthe€denial€of€the€summary€judgment€motion.€€This€Court€denied€the€mineral€companiesðð€applicationÐ P Ðfor€interlocutory€appeal€under€Rule€9€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€Ð ð@ Ðà  àOn€September€25€and€26,€2000,€a€bench€trial€was€held.€€Decatur€County€argued€at€trial€thatÐ ° ÐVulcan€should€be€required€to€pay€the€mineral€severance€tax€at€the€increased€rate€for€minerals€severedÐ  ð Ðand€sold€in€May€1995.€€Vulcan€argued€that€the€County€had€deferred€implementation€of€the€increasedÐ à Ðtax€rate€until€after€April€20,€1995.€€In€addition,€the€mineral€companies€asserted€that€the€tax€was€aÐ €Ð Ðviolation€of€the€ð ðequal€protectionðð€provision€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€because€the€Private€ActÐ pÀ Ðpermitted€Decatur€County€to€allocate€the€tax€revenues€to€its€general€fund,€contrary€to€the€Public€ActÐ ` ° Ðapplicable€to€all€counties€directing€that€such€revenues€be€allocated€to€the€road€fund.€€Decatur€CountyÐ P   Ðmaintained€that€the€tax€was€not€unconstitutional,€and€argued€the€mineral€companies€ò òó ówere€estoppedÐ @  Ðfrom€asserting€that€the€tax€was€unconstitutional€because€they€had€paid€the€tax€at€the€previous€rateÐ 0 € Ðsince€1987.Ð  p  Ðà  àAt€trial,€the€parties€agreed€that,€in€order€to€find€the€tax€was€not€unconstitutional,€the€trial€courtÐ P  Ðhad€to€conclude€that€Decatur€County€had€a€rational€basis€for€allocating€the€revenues€from€the€mineralÐ ð@  Ðseverance€tax€to€the€County€general€fund€instead€of€to€the€County€road€fund.€€Consequently,€theÐ à0  ÐCounty€introduced€into€evidence€exhibits€and€witness€testimony€regarding€its€reasons€for€directingÐ Ð  Ðthe€revenues€to€the€general€fund.€Ô‡Xmw XXX¡ÔThe€Decatur€County€Trustee,€as€well€as€Decatur€CountyÐ À ÐCommissioners,€testified€at€length€on€the€Countyððs€financial€difficulties€and€crises€that€the€CountyÐ À Ðfaced€when€the€severance€tax€was€implemented€in€1987.€€They€testified€that€a€wheel€tax€and€a€salesÐ ¬ü Ðtax€referendum€had€been€voted€down€by€Decatur€County€residents,€and€that,€at€one€time,€the€generalÐ ˜è Ðfund€was€so€depleted€that€the€County€had€to€borrow€money€for€general€operating€expenses.€€AÐ „Ô ÐDecatur€County€Executive€testified€that€County€employees€needed€medical€insurance,€a€retirementÐ pÀ Ðplan,€and€wage€increases.€€Decatur€County€presented€proof€that,€prior€to€implementation€of€theÐ \¬ Ðmineral€severance€tax,€the€recreation€department,€the€sheriffððs€department,€and€the€fire€departmentÐ H˜ Ðall€needed€operating€expenses;€that€the€County€did€not€have€funds€for€a€new€jail€that€had€beenÐ 4„ Ðrequired€by€court€order;€and€that€County€schools€were€in€need€of€repairs.€€The€Decatur€CountyÐ  p ÐExecutive€testified€that€the€County€Commission€at€that€time€was€attempting€to€keep€County€tax€ratesÐ  \ Ðlow€in€consideration€of€the€large€proportion€of€poor€and€elderly€residents€in€the€County.€€Ð øH Ðà  àThe€parties€stipulated€that€Decatur€County€ranks€seventy„second€out€of€ninety„five€countiesÐ Ð  Ðin€per„capita€income,€and€that€it€ranks€fifty„ninth€out€of€ninety„five€counties€for€miles€of€countyÐ ¼  Ðroads.€€Trial€exhibits€showed€that€Decatur€County€had€the€twenty„first€lowest€property€tax€in€theÐ ¨ ø ÐState,€and€that€the€Countyððs€tax€rate€at€the€time€of€the€trial€was€the€eighth€lowest€in€the€State.€Ð ”!ä ÐWitness€testimony€evinced€that€Decatur€County€has€an€ð ðaverageðð€amount€of€minerals€as€comparedÐ €"Ð  Ðto€other€counties€in€Tennessee;€however,€exhibits€at€trial€showed€that€among€counties€that€collectedÐ l#¼! Ðthe€mineral€severance€tax,€Decatur€County€collected€the€second€highest€amount.€€Ô#†X¡X XXmw./#ÔÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡h #ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÔ‡Xmw XXX¡ÔA€representativeÐ X$¨" Ðof€the€Tennessee€County€Technical€Assistance€Service€(ð ðCTASðð),€a€state„run€entity€tasked€withÐ D%” # Ðassisting€counties€in€their€operations,€testified€that,€not€including€federal€dollars,€almost€twenty„nineÐ 0&€!$ Ðpercent€of€Decatur€Countyððs€budget€was€derived€from€the€severance€tax€revenue,€which€was€theÐ 'l"% Ðlargest€percentage€of€any€county€in€Tennessee.Ô#†X¡X XXmw+8#ÔÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡ 8#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÐ (X#& ÐÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡M:#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ôà  àOn€March€8,€2001,€the€trial€court€issued€its€findings.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€mineralsÐ à)0%( Ðsold€by€Vulcan€in€May€1995€were€severed,€ready€for€sale,€and€stockpiled€prior€to€the€effective€dateÐ Ð* &) Ðof€the€tax€increase,€and€that€therefore,€Vulcan€owed€no€additional€tax€for€that€time.€€The€trial€courtÐ À+'* Ðalso€concluded€that€Vulcan€was€estopped€from€arguing€the€constitutionality€of€Decatur€CountyððsÐ ° Ðimposition€of€the€mineral€severance€tax€because€of€the€passage€of€time.€€In€the€alternative,€the€trialÐ  ð Ðcourt€found€that€Decatur€County€had€a€rational€basis€for€the€allocation€of€its€mineral€tax€revenuesÐ à Ðand€that€the€mineral€companies€failed€to€carry€their€burden€of€proving€that€the€allocation€of€the€taxÐ €Ð Ðrevenue€was€unconstitutional.€€The€trial€court€held€that€the€County€ð ðneeded€the€money€for€generalÐ pÀ Ðoperating€expenses€and€to€cover€costs€out€of€its€general€funds€and€did€not€require€the€money€in€itsÐ ` ° Ðroad€fund,ðð€and€that€ð ðother€funds€coming€into€the€road€fund€were€sufficient€to€meet€the€demands€ofÐ P   Ðthe€road€fund.ðð€€Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡¤:#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔThe€trial€judge€stated:Ð @  Ðà8  àIt€does€not€appear€logical€or€reasonable€that€the€county€would€divert€much€neededÐ  p  Ðfunds€from€its€general€fund€into€the€road€fund€where€the€need€for€said€funds€did€notÐ `  Ðexist€and€were€either€to€be€held€in€perpetuity€or€uselessly€applied€where€no€actualÐ P  Ðneed€existed€while€the€general€fund€of€the€Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡¾?#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ôcounty€providing€for€all€other€necessaryÐ ð@  Ðgovernmental€tasks€lay€in€want.Ðà0 Ð Ð  ÐÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡šA#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔThus,€the€trial€court€held€that€the€mineral€companies€were€required€to€pay€the€tax€for€mineralsÐ À Ðsevered€after€May€1995.€€€From€this€judgment,€both€Decatur€County€and€the€mineral€companies€nowÐ ° Ðappeal.€Ð  ð Ðà  àOn€appeal,€the€mineral€companies€argue€that€the€tax€is€unconstitutional,€maintaining€that€theÐ €Ð Ðtrial€court€erred€when€it€found€that€Decatur€Countyððs€ð ðneedðð€for€the€additional€revenue€was€a€rationalÐ pÀ Ðbasis€for€reallocating€the€funds€to€the€County€general€fund.€€The€mineral€companies€also€assert€thatÐ `° Ðthe€trial€court€erred€when€it€found€that€they€were€estopped€from€filing€suit€against€Decatur€CountyÐ P  Ðbecause€the€County€failed€to€plead€the€statute€of€limitations,€or€payment€under€protest,€and€becauseÐ @ Ðestoppel€is€not€favored€under€Tennessee€law.€€Decatur€County€maintains€on€appeal€that€the€trial€courtÐ 0€ Ðproperly€found€that€its€allocation€of€the€tax€revenue€to€the€County€general€fund€is€constitutional,€andÐ  p Ðthat€the€mineral€companies€were€estopped€from€filing€suit€against€Decatur€County.€€Decatur€CountyÐ ` Ðargues€that€the€mineral€companies€should€be€barred€from€challenging€the€legality€of€the€tax€becauseÐ P Ðthey€failed€to€pay€under€protest,€and€that€the€mineral€companies€do€not€have€standing€to€bring€theirÐ ð@ Ðcounterclaim€because€they€have€suffered€no€injury.€€Decatur€County€also€contends€that€€the€trial€courtÐ à0 Ðerred€when€it€found€that€Vulcan€ò òó ówas€not€liable,€at€the€higher€tax€rate,€for€minerals€it€sold€during€MayÐ Ð  Ð1995.€€We€address€first€the€mineral€companiesðð€standing€to€bring€suit€and€the€timeliness€of€theirÐ À! Ðaction,€then€the€constitutionality€of€the€tax€revenue€allocation,€and€finally,€Vulcanððs€tax€liability€atÐ °"  Ðthe€increased€rate€for€the€month€of€May€1995.Ð  #ð! Ðà  àThe€standard€of€review€on€appeal€is€de€novo€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€findingsÐ €%Ð # Ðof€fact,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€shows€otherwise.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(d);ò òòò€seeÐ p&À!$ ÐWright€v.€City€of€Knoxvilleó óóó,€898€S.W.2d€177,€181.€€Similarly,€questions€of€law€are€reviewed€deÐ `'°"% Ðnovo;€however,€no€presumption€of€correctness€attaches€to€questions€of€law.€€ò òòòSee€Barge€v.€Sadleró óóó,Ð P( #& Ðâ â70€S.W.3d€623,€686€(Tenn.€2002).Ð @)$' Ðà  àDecatur€County€argues€that€the€mineral€companies€may€not€contest€the€legality€of€the€mineralÐ ° Ðseverance€tax€at€the€increased€rate€because€they€failed€to€pay€the€disputed€tax€under€protest.€€DecaturÐ  ð ÐCounty€relies€on€section€67„1„901(a)€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated,€which€provides:€ò òó óÐ à Ðâ âÔ‡#Xmw XXX¡Ôò òó óà8  àIn€all€cases€where€not€otherwise€provided€in€which€an€officer,€charged€by€law€withÐ pÀ Ðthe€collection€of€revenue€due€the€state,€shall€institute€any€proceeding,€or€take€anyÐ \ ¬ Ðsteps€for€the€collection€of€the€sum€alleged€or€claimed€to€be€due€by€the€officer€fromÐ H ˜ Ðany€citizen,€the€person€against€whom€the€proceeding€or€step€is€taken€shall,€if€thatÐ 4 „ Ðperson€conceives€the€same€to€be€unjust€or€illegal,€or€against€any€statute€or€clause€ofÐ  p Ðthe€constitution€of€the€state,€pay€the€same€under€protest.Ô#†X¡X X#XmwN#ÔÔ‡Xmw XXX¡ÔÐ \ Ð Ð  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€67„1„901€(Supp.€2001).€€Ô#†X¡X XXmw²P#ÔÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡WB#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔDecatur€County€further€cites€section€67„1„912,€whichÐ ä4  Ðstates€that€section€67„1„901€applies€to€the€collection€of€taxes€by€a€county,€and€requires€that€all€suchÐ ä4  Ðactions€be€brought€within€six€months€of€the€protest€payment€of€the€disputed€debt.€Tenn.€CodeÐ Ô$  ÐAnnotated€ððÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡cQ#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ô€67„1„912(b)(2)€(Supp.€2001).€€Ð Ä  Ðà  àThe€mineral€companies€maintain€that€ð ðpayment€under€protestðð€is€not€a€condition€precedentÐ ¤ô Ðto€a€claim€that€the€tax€is€illegal.€€The€mineral€companies€rely€on€section€67„1„1807€of€TennesseeÐ ”ä ÐCode€Annotated,€which€states:Ð „Ô ÐÓ Óà8  à(d)(1)à0` Ð Ð à€It€shall€not€be€a€condition€precedent€for€suit€for€recovery€of€taxes€paid€on€orÐ d´ Ðafter€January€1,€1986,€that€the€same€be€paid€under€protest,€involuntarily,€orÐ T¤ Ðunder€duress.ÐD”` Ð ` Ð  Ðà  àà ` à.€.€.€.€Ð 4„ ÐÓ€ (× 83ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚3£gVÝÔ2× Ô(Ú  ÚeÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝTo€the€extent€that€the€provisions€of€this€section€conflict€with€any€otherÐ $t Ðprovision€of€law,€the€provisions€of€this€section€shall€control€and€supersede€allÐ d Ðsuch€laws.݃3£gV VÝŒÐT` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  Ýà8  àÐ Ð Ð  ÐÓ ÓTenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€67„1„1807€(1998).€€Thus,€in€a€suit€to€recover€taxes€paid€after€January€1,€1986,Ð ä4 Ðpayment€of€the€tax€under€protest€is€not€a€condition€precedent€to€a€claim€against€the€governmentalÐ Ô$ Ðentity€imposing€the€tax.€€The€language€of€section€67„1„1807€is€quite€broad,€and€would€encompassÐ Ä  Ðclaims€regarding€taxes€paid€to€a€municipality€such€as€Decatur€County,€as€well€as€taxes€paid€to€theÐ ´! ÐState.׃)×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Further,€the€statute€clearly€states€that€the€provisions€of€section€67„1„1807€will€control€in€theÐ ¤"ô  Ðevent€of€a€conflict€of€law.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€must€conclude€that€the€mineral€companiesÐ ° Ðwere€not€required€to€pay€the€disputed€tax€under€protest€as€a€condition€precedent€to€asserting€a€claim€Ð  ð Ðagainst€the€county€regarding€the€illegality€of€the€tax.€Ð à Ðà  àDecatur€County€next€argues€that€the€mineral€companies€have€no€standing€to€sue€the€CountyÐ pÀ Ðbecause€the€mineral€companies€have€not€suffered€an€injury.€€Decatur€County€asserts€that€the€mineralÐ ` ° Ðcompanies€cannot€show€they€are€subject€to€an€increased€tax€burden,€nor€can€they€show€that€the€fundsÐ P   Ðcollected€are€being€allocated€in€contravention€of€the€Private€Act.€€Decatur€County€also€claims€that,Ð @  Ðbecause€the€mineral€companies€are€not€entitled€to€a€refund€even€if€the€allocation€of€the€tax€revenueÐ 0 € Ðis€declared€unconstitutional,€the€mineral€companies€are€therefore€not€entitled€to€relief.€The€mineralÐ  p  Ðcompanies,€on€the€other€hand,€argue€that€they€have€standing€because€the€Public€Act€requires€theÐ `  ÐCounty€to€utilize€the€tax€revenue€for€a€specific€purpose,€and€the€County€is€using€those€funds€in€aÐ P  Ðcontrary€way.€€If€the€allocation€of€the€tax€is€unconstitutional,€the€mineral€companies€argue,€the€taxÐ ð@  Ðis€void€and€they€are€entitled€to€a€refund€of€taxes€paid.€€Ð à0  Ðà  àStanding€is€a€judicially€created€doctrine€mandating€that€a€party€objecting€to€theÐ À Ðconstitutionality€of€a€law€have€a€personal€stake€in€the€outcome€of€the€controversy€in€order€to€bringÐ ° Ðthe€action.€€òòò òMetro.€Air€Research€Testing€Auth.,€Inc.€v.€Metro.€Gov.€of€Nashville€and€DavidsonÐ  ð ÐCountyó óóó,€842€S.W.2d€611,€615€(Tenn.€1992)Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡éR#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ô.€€Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡qb#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔThis€determination€is€made€without€regard€to€theÐ à Ðcorrectness,€or€constitutionality,€of€the€law.€€€òòò òÔ_ÔNatððlÔ_Ô€Gas€Distribs.€v.€Sevier€County€Util.€Dist.óóó ó,€7Ð €Ð ÐS.W.3d€41,€44€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999)€(citation€omitted).Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡¶b#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ôòòò ò€óóó óÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡d#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ô€In€order€to€show€that€it€is€properly€situatedÐ pÀ Ðto€bring€such€an€action,€a€party€must€demonstrate€ð ð(1)€that€it€sustained€a€distinct€and€palpable€injury,Ð `° Ð(2)€that€the€injury€was€caused€by€the€challenged€conduct,ò òó ó€and€(3)€that€the€injury€is€apt€to€be€redressedÐ P  Ðby€a€remedy€that€the€court€is€prepared€to€give.ðð€€òòò òMetro.€Air€ó óóóat€615€(citing€òòò òAllen€v.€Wrightó óóó,€468€U.S.Ð @ Ð737,€752€(1983)).€€Here,€the€mineral€companies€operate€their€businesses€in€Decatur€County,€pay€theÐ 0€ Ðseverance€tax€to€the€County,€and€the€County€accepts€their€payments€ofò òó ó€the€mineral€severance€tax€atÐ  p Ðissue.€€While€a€finding€that€the€allocation€of€the€tax€was€unconstitutional€would€not€likely€result€inÐ ` Ða€refund,׃!À×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€mineral€companies€have€sufficient€specific€injury€to€confer€standing.€€ò òòòSee€KennedyÐ P Ðâ âv.€Montgomery€Countyó óóó,€38€S.W.€1075,€1075€(Tenn.€1896).€€ò òÐ ð@ Ðó óà  àNext,€the€mineral€companies€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€they€failed€toÐ ° Ðâ âtimely€bring€suit€against€Decatur€County.€€The€decision€of€the€trial€court€appears€to€be€based€on€the€Ð  ð Ðdoctrine€of€estoppel.׃"×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trial€judge€stated€that€there€was€ample€time€between€1987€and€1995€forÐ à Ðthe€mineral€companies€to€challenge€the€constitutionality€of€the€tax,€and€that€they€had€proferred€noÐ €Ð Ðreason€justifying€the€delay€of€many€years€in€bringing€suit.€€Consequently,€the€trial€court€held€that€theÐ pÀ Ðmineral€companies€were€ð ðnow€estopped€by€their€failure€to€act.ðð€€Ð ` ° Ðà  àThe€equitable€doctrine€of€estoppel€has€been€described€as€a€defense€thatÐ @  Ðà8  à.€.€.€arises€from€the€conduct€or€silence€of€a€party€and€is€sometimes€referred€to€asÐ  p  Ðequitable€estoppel€.€.€.€.€€When€a€man€has€been€misled€by€the€untruth€propounded€byÐ `  Ðanother,€òòand€acted€to€his€detriment€in€reliance€upon€the€misrepresentationóó,€theÐ P  Ðmisleading€party€will€be€estopped€to€show€that€the€true€facts€are€contrary€to€those€heÐ ð@  Ðfirst€propounded.Ðà0 Ð Ð  Ðòòò òDuke€v.€Hopperó óóó,€486€S.W.2d€744,€748€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1972)€(emphasis€added);€òòò òsee€also€Hicks€v.Ð À ÐCoxó óóó,€978€S.W.2d€544,€550€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998);€òòò òArthur€v.€Lake€Tansi€Village,€Inc.ó óóó,€590€S.W.2dÐ ° Ð923,€930€(Tenn.€1979).€€Thus,€in€order€to€assert€estoppel€as€a€defense,€the€party€asserting€the€doctrineÐ  ð Ðmust€have€acted€to€his€detriment€in€reliance€on€a€misrepresentation.€€In€this€case€there€is€no€allegationÐ à Ðof€a€misrepresentation€and€Decatur€County€does€not€allege€that€it€acted€to€its€detriment€based€on€theÐ €Ð Ðmineral€companiesðð€actions€or€failure€to€act.€€Hence,€the€doctrine€of€estoppel€is€inapplicable€to€thisÐ pÀ Ðlawsuit.€€Consequently,€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€with€regard€to€the€failure€of€the€mineralÐ `° Ðcompanies€to€timely€assert€the€illegality€of€the€allocation€of€the€tax€is€reversed.€€Ð P  Ðà  àWe€now€address€the€constitutionality€of€the€Private€Act€enacted€by€the€General€AssemblyÐ 0€ Ðpertaining€to€Decatur€County,€allocating€the€revenue€from€the€mineral€severance€tax€to€the€CountyÐ  p Ðgeneral€fund€instead€of€its€road€fund.€€Sections€67„7„201€and€67„7„207€of€Tennessee€CodeÐ ` ÐAnnotated,€public€acts€with€statewide€application,€permit€any€county€to€levy€a€mineral€severance€taxÐ P Ðon€all€ð ðsand,€gravel,€sandstone,€chert€and€limestone€severed€from€the€ground€within€its€jurisdiction.ðð€Ð ð@ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€67„7„201(a)€(1998).€€The€statute€directs:€€ð ðThe€tax€shall€be€levied€for€the€use€andÐ à0 Ðbenefit€of€the€county€only,€to€be€allocated€and€applied€to€its€county€road€fund€.€.€.€.ðð€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€€It€states:Ð Ð  Ðð ðThese€revenues€shall€become€a€part€of€the€county€road€fund€of€the€county,€and€shall€be€used€for€theÐ À! Ðconstruction,€maintenance€and€repair€of€the€county€system.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€67„7„207(b)€(1998).€Ð °"  ÐIn€contrast,€Private€Chapter€Number€35,€Private€Acts€of€1987,€authorizes€Decatur€County€to€depositÐ  #ð! Ðthe€tax€revenue€collected€from€the€mineral€severance€tax€ð ðin€the€general€fund€of€Decatur€County€forÐ $à" Ðgeneral€county€purposes,€or€such€other€fund€as€may€be€designated€by€resolution€of€the€DecaturÐ €%Ð # ÐCounty€legislative€body.ðð€€1987€Tenn.€Priv.€Acts€35,€ðð€6.€€The€record€shows€that€between€June€1987Ð p&À!$ Ðand€August€2000,€Decatur€County€collected€$€2,900,656.11€in€mineral€severance€taxes€from€the€fourÐ `'°"% Ðѯb Ñâ âÑû°Ñâ âÑ  Ñmineral€companies€that€are€parties€to€this€appeal,€of€which€$€2,829,243.11€was€allocated€to€DecaturÐ û ÐCountyððs€general€fund,€and€$€71,413€allocated€to€the€Countyððs€road€fund.Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡kd#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÐ ëð Ðà  àThe€mineral€companies€assert€on€appeal€that€the€reallocation€of€the€tax€revenue€is€in€violationÐ ËÐ Ðof€Article€XI,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,€which€states:€ð ðThe€legislature€shall€have€noÐ »À Ðpower€to€suspend€any€general€law€for€the€benefit€of€any€particular€individual,€nor€to€pass€any€lawÐ « ° Ðfor€the€benefit€of€individuals€inconsistent€with€the€general€laws€of€the€land.ðð€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€XI,Ð ›   Ððð€8.€€Tennessee€courts€have€long€recognized€that€Article€XI,€Section€8€is€similar€to€the€equalÐ ‹  Ðprotection€clause€of€the€United€States€Constitution.€€ò òòòSee€King„Bradwall€Ô_ÔPððshipÔ_Ô€v.€Johnson€Controls,Ð { € ÐInc.ó óóó,€865€S.W.2d€18,€21€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€€Consequently,€an€equal€protection€analysis€isÐ k p  Ðapplied€to€a€challenge€under€Article€XI,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€Therefore,€toÐ [`  Ðsurvive€such€a€constitutional€challenge,€Private€Act€Number€35€must€pass€a€ð ðreasonable€relationshipððÐ KP  Ðor€ð ðrational€basisðð€test.€€òòò òStalcup€v.€City€of€Gatlinburgó óóó,€577€S.W.2d€439,€442€(Tenn.€1979);Ð ;@  Ðòòò òBrentwood€Liquors€Corp.€of€Williamson€County€v.€Foxó óóó,€496€S.W.2d€456,€457€(Tenn.€1973).€€If€theÐ +0  ÐPrivate€Act€does€not€pass€the€ð ðreasonable€relationshipðð€or€ð ðrational€basisðð€test,€it€is€in€contraventionÐ   Ðto€the€general€law,€and€consequently,€unconstitutional.€€ò òòòSee€Harwell€v.€Leechóóó ó,€672€S.W.2d€761Ð   Ð(Tenn.€1984).Ð û ÐÔ‡#Xmw XXX¡Ôà  àWe€are€mindful€of€the€heavy€presumption€that€legislation€enacted€by€the€TennesseeÐ Ûà ÐLegislature€is€constitutional.€€The€Legislature€has€the€ability€to€do€ð ðall€things€not€prohibited€by€theÐ ÇÌ ÐConstitution€of€this€State€or€of€the€United€States.ðð€€òòò òNolichuckey€Sand€Co.€v.€Huddlestonó óóó,€896Ð ³¸ ÐS.W.2d€782,€788€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994)€(citations€omitted).€€Thus,€this€Court€must€uphold€legislationÐ Ÿ¤ Ðenacted€by€the€General€Assembly,€unless€such€a€law€ð ðdirectly€impinges€on€the€state€or€federalÐ ‹ Ðconstitution€.€.€.ðð€€òòò òId.ó ó€óó(citation€omitted).€€It€is€our€obligation,€when€construing€a€statute,€to€adopt€aÐ w| Ðconstruction€that€upholds€the€statute€and€avoids€constitutional€conflict€when€ð ðany€reasonableÐ ch ÐÔ#†X¡X X#Xmwø€#ÔÔ‡#Xmw XXX¡Ôconstruction€exists€that€satisfies€the€requirements€of€the€Constitution.ðð€€òòò òId.ó ó€óó(citation€omitted).€€€€Ô#†X¡X X#Xmwœ„#ÔÔ‡#Xmw XXX¡Ô€Ô#†X¡X X#XmwS…#ÔÓ?+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °œX?ÓÔ‡#Xmw XXX¡ÔÐ OT ÐÔ#†X¡X X#XmwÕ…#ÔÔ#†¼¦´»XX¡&z#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ôà  àThe€mineral€companies€assert€that,€under€Tennessee€law,€for€a€private€act€that€is€in€oppositionÐ ', Ðto€general€law€to€be€constitutional,€the€classification€the€private€act€makes€must€be€reasonably€relatedÐ  Ðto€or€rationally€based€upon€the€object€of€the€enactment.€€òòò òSee€Stalcupóóó ó,€577€S.W.2d€at€442;€òòò òBrentwoodÐ   ÐLiquors€Corp.€ó óóó496€S.W.2d€at€457.€€In€òòò òStalcup€v.€City€of€Gatlinburgó óóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÐ ÷ ü Ðfound€that€a€tax€imposed€on€businesses,€in€contravention€of€ò òó óstate€law,€was€constitutional€because€theÐ ç!ì Ðtaxation€on€Gatlinburg€businesses,€as€opposed€to€other€businesses€in€Tennessee,€was€rationallyÐ ×"Ü  Ðrelated€to€the€object€of€the€enactment,€that€is,€the€burden€placed€on€the€City€of€Gatlinburg€by€theÐ Ç#Ì! Ðlarge€amount€of€tourism€in€Gatlinburg.€€ò òòòStalcupóóó ó,€577€S.W.2d€at€442.€€Similarly,€in€€òòò òBrentwoodÐ ·$¼" ÐLiquors€Corp.€of€Williamson€County€v.€Foxó óóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€found€that€a€county€lawÐ §%¬ # Ðimposing€a€tax€in€excess€of€the€state„authorized€rate€on€liquor€stores€in€Williamson€County,€for€theÐ —&œ!$ Ðbenefit€of€the€county€hospital,€was€not€rationally€related€to€any€object€of€the€enactment€of€thatÐ ‡'Œ"% Ðstatute,€because€there€was€no€stated€reason€for€the€additional€tax€burden€on€Williamson€CountyÐ w(|#& Ðliquor€dealers€as€opposed€to€similar€liquor€dealers€throughout€the€state.€€€òòò òBrentwoodó óóó,€496€S.W.2dÐ g)l$' Ðâ âat€454„55,€457.€€Ð W*\%( Ðà  àIn€this€case,€unlike€ò òòòStalcupó óóó€and€ò òòòBrentwood€Liquor€Corp.ó óóó,€the€classification€made€by€theÐ û Ðâ âPrivate€Act€in€dispute€is€the€òòallocationóó€of€the€tax€revenue,€not€the€òòimpositionóó€of€the€tax€itself.€€ThereÐ ëð Ðis€no€discrimination€in€the€imposition€of€the€tax€in€Decatur€County,€only€a€change€in€the€allocationÐ Ûà Ðof€the€tax€revenue.€Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡O†#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´Ô€The€record€from€the€trial€court€below€shows€that€Decatur€County€collects€theÐ ËÐ Ðsecond„highest€amount€of€mineral€severance€tax€in€the€State.€€Of€the€seven€highest„collectingÐ »À Ðcounties€in€the€State,€six€have€a€greater€per„capita€income€level€than€Decatur€County,€and€all€haveÐ « ° Ða€greater€population,€greater€land€area,€and€more€miles€of€county€road€than€Decatur€County.€€It€isÐ ›   Ðundisputed€that,€while€the€roads€did€not€need€additional€funding,€the€general€fund€was€depleted€toÐ ‹  Ðthe€point€that€the€County€was€compelled€to€borrow€money€for€operating€expenses.€€The€SheriffððsÐ { € Ðdepartment,€the€fire€department,€the€recreation€department,€and€the€solid€waste€department€all€lackedÐ k p  Ðsufficient€funding.€€The€Decatur€County€Jail€was€under€an€order€to€add€jail€cells;€the€policeÐ [`  Ðdepartment€needed€new€patrol€cars;€and€the€County€schools€needed€a€variety€of€repairs.€TheÐ KP  Ðtestimony€indicated€that€the€County€had€a€disproportionate€number€of€low„income€and€elderlyÐ ;@  Ðcitizens€who€would€have€difficulty€paying€taxes,€such€as€property€taxes,€at€a€level€that€wouldÐ +0  Ðadequately€fund€necessary€County€government€operations.€Ð   Ðà  àThus,€in€this€instance,€Decatur€County€has€substantially€less€residents€who€pay€property€taxesÐ û Ðand€other€general€taxes€to€fund€county€government€services,€such€as€fire,€police,€and€schools.€€TheseÐ ëð Ðservices€are€necessary.€€Some€monies€are€of€course€also€necessary€to€fund€repair€of€county€roads.€Ð Ûà ÐA€rural€county,€however,€such€as€Decatur€County,€has€less€need€for€funds€for€roads.€€Ð ËÐ Ðà  àMeanwhile,€Decatur€County€has€substantial€mineral€deposits€subject€to€the€mineral€severanceÐ «° Ðtax.€€Without€question€Decatur€County€is€authorized€to€collect€the€mineral€severance€tax€at€theÐ ›  Ðincreased€rate,€and€the€mineral€companies€in€this€case€are€obligated€to€pay€it.€€Under€the€reasoningÐ ‹ Ðurged€by€the€mineral€companies,€if€the€County€collected€the€revenue€from€the€mineral€severance€taxÐ {€ Ðand€put€it€in€the€county€road€fund€and€paved€the€county€roads€with€gold,€leaving€other€necessaryÐ kp Ðgovernment€services€wanting,€this€would€be€constitutionally€acceptable.€€Decatur€County€choseÐ [` Ðinstead€to€direct€those€revenues€to€general€government€operations.€€Based€on€the€record€in€this€case,Ð KP Ðwe€find€there€is€a€rational€basis€for€this€decision€and€conclude€that€the€allocation€of€the€tax€revenueÐ ;@ Ðis€not€unconstitutional.€€Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡ËŽ#ÔÔ‡X¡X»¼¦´ÔÐ + 0 Ðà  àFinally,€Decatur€County€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Vulcan€did€not€oweÐ  " Ðadditional€taxes€for€the€period€of€May€1995€for€minerals€sold€during€that€month.€€In€October€1994,Ð û"  Ðthe€Decatur€County€Commission€adopted€a€resolution€to€increase€the€mineral€severance€tax€from€fiveÐ ë#ð! Ðcents€to€fifteen€cents€per€ton.€€At€that€time,€the€Commission€deferred€collection€of€the€tax€at€theÐ Û$à" Ðincreased€rate€until€after€April€30,€1995.€€The€trial€court€found€that€minerals€sold€by€Vulcan€in€MayÐ Ë%Ð # Ð1995€were€ð ðsevered,€ready€for€sale,€and€stockpiled€prior€to€the€effective€date€of€the€increase€tax€.€.Ð »&À!$ Ð.€.ðð€€Vulcan€paid€the€tax€rate€of€five€cents€per€ton€for€minerals€that€were€sold€in€or€after€May€1995,Ð «'°"% Ðbut€severed€and€stockpiled€prior€to€May€1995.€€Decatur€County€argues€that€the€County€CommissionÐ ›( #& Ðonly€meant€to€defer€òòcollectionóó€of€the€tax,€and€not€òòliabilityóó€for€the€tax,€and€therefore,€the€new€tax€rateÐ ‹)$' Ðapplied€beginning€on€October€17,€1994,€when€the€County€Commission€adopted€the€resolutionÐ {*€%( Ðincreasing€the€tax€rate.€€The€minutes€of€the€Decatur€County€Commission€meeting€dated€October€17,Ð k+p&) Ð1994€state€that€ð ðtax€collectionðð€was€ð ðto€be€deferred€until€after€April€30,€1995.ðð€€While€this€is€notÐ û Ðentirely€clear,€we€conclude€that€the€resolution€indicates€an€intent€that€the€increased€tax€rate€not€applyÐ ëð Ðuntil€May€1995.€€Consequently,€the€trial€court€properly€held€that€Vulcan€is€not€liable€for€additionalÐ Ûà Ðtaxes€for€the€period€of€May€1995.€€Ð ËÐ Ðà  àIn€sum,€we€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€mineral€companies€were€required€to€payÐ « ° Ðthe€disputed€tax€under€protest,€and€that€they€were€estopped€from€questioning€the€constitutionalityÐ ›   Ðof€the€allocation€of€the€tax.€€We€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€Private€Act€allocating€theÐ ‹  Ðrevenue€from€the€mineral€severance€tax€to€the€Decatur€County€general€fund€is€not€unconstitutional.€Ð { € ÐWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€holding€that€Vulcan€bears€no€additional€tax€liability€for€the€month€of€MayÐ k p  Ð1995.Ð [`  Ðà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€part€and€reversed€in€part€as€set€forth€above.€Ð ;@  ÐCosts€are€taxed€equally€to€appellee€ò òó óDecatur€County,€Tennessee,€and€appellants€Vulcan€MaterialsÐ +0  ÐCompany,€West€Tennessee€Gravel€Company,€Tinker€Sand€&€Gravel€Company,€Inc.,€andÐ   ÐÔ_ÔMcClanahanÔ_Ô€Rock€Products,€and€their€sureties,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ô#†¼¦´»XX¡ù™#ÔòòóóÔ€X¡X»¼¦´ÔÐ   Ðà  àà ` àÌÌÓ Óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ›  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àHOLLY€K.€LILLARD,€JUDGEÐ ‹ Ð