Marshall County commissioners on a special-called meeting adopted a resolution authorizing the county to participate with the Alabama Association of County Commissions (ACCA) in litigation challenging the Alabama Simplified Seller Use Tax (SSUT).

County Attorney (name not specified in the transcript) told the commission the ACCA had circulated a form resolution and that he had adapted it to include Marshall County–specific language explaining the professional-conduct waivers (1.1/1.7) required because his law firm, Wilmer and Lee, represents multiple parties. "I recommend that Marshall County intervene in this case," the county attorney said, adding that the draft preserves ACCA’s form language while adding an informed waiver describing the firm’s potential participation in related matters.

The county attorney said the litigation arises from a suit filed by the city of Tuscaloosa, the Tuscaloosa Board of Education and the city of Mountain Brook in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County. He cited the SSUT statute in the Code of Alabama (transcript citation: section 40-23-191, Code of Alabama 1975) and said the court set a deadline for parties seeking to intervene; the county was asked to return an adopted resolution by Dec. 3 to allow ACCA to coordinate a unified filing before a date referenced in the transcript as Dec. 10.

Commissioners stressed the local fiscal stakes. The chair noted Marshall County had set SSUT receipts aside for a planned jail expansion and had pledged those revenues as security for a bond issue, making the preservation of those funds important to the county’s finances.

Commissioner Watson moved to adopt the resolution "as prepared by our lawyer," and the chair subsequently announced the resolution passed and authorized transmission to the association. The transcript records the motion and the chair’s declaration of passage but does not include a roll-call tally or a named second in the record.

In explaining his edits, the county attorney said the waiver language would make clear that Marshall County understands the firm’s relationships and that the county’s representation in the litigation will be the lead counsel selected and engaged through ACCA. He emphasized that ACCA will coordinate a unified filing for interested counties and that individual counties would not need to separately engage counsel to participate in the coordinated intervention.

The transcript also includes references to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair during commissioners’ legal discussion; the county attorney said the litigation’s arguments will likely address that precedent. He warned the dispute could prompt future legislative changes to the SSUT allocation process.

The commission had no further business after the vote and adjourned the special-called meeting.