Sweet City Landfill sought approval to develop a solid-waste facility in Elbert County. After the County declined to enter a host agreement and ended a tolling arrangement, Sweet City filed suit seeking declarations that the County’s solid-waste ordinance was unconstitutional and that it had vested development rights. The superior court granted broad relief, rejected the County’s motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and held that the ordinance violated the dormant Commerce Clause and equal-protection guarantees. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed and remanded. It held that the County’s July 2012 vote concerned only a proposed host agreement, not a final decision on Sweet City’s special-use-permit application. Because no final permit decision had been made, Sweet City could not invoke futility to avoid the exhaustion requirement; the County’s local authorities first had to decide the application and any vested-rights claim. The Court also held that the ordinance was facially neutral because its siting criteria applied equally to in-state and out-of-state applicants. The superior court therefore had to apply Pike’s balancing test to determine whether the ordinance’s incidental burden on interstate commerce was clearly excessive compared with legitimate local interests. All Justices concurred.