SB 593: Development Impact Fees; disclosure of impact fees upon transfer of ownership; provide

In plain language

What the bill does

Who it affects

Why it matters

Key provisions

From the bill

Discussed in meetings (11)

The House and Senate meetings that took this bill up, from their machine transcripts. Each account was written by Georgia Commons with AI and is not part of the record; the video is what was said.

1. Senate State and Local Governmental Operations Committee, March 2, 2026

   From 0:16:05 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said SB 593 would require cities and counties to disclose total development impact fees upon request so prospective buyers could budget before purchasing land. The sponsor described a constituent who was initially told sewer impact fees would not apply to homes using septic systems, but later faced nearly $1 million in charges across more than 1,000 lots. Committee members asked what project details applicants would need to supply and whether local governments would be bound by their estimates. The sponsor said applicants should provide specific plans and could not expect a firm figure from a vague request. Another member asked about consultation with ACCG and the Georgia Municipal Association. The sponsor said neither had been consulted yet, but discussions could follow committee approval. Members also raised differences among zoning categories and utility arrangements. A member offered an amendment requiring a written request that includes a specific description of the project’s scope. The sponsor accepted it, and the committee adopted it unanimously. The committee then approved the bill as amended, without a stated vote count.

2. Senate Rules Committee, March 5, 2026

   From 0:30:34 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said SB 593 would require a county to disclose development impact fees when a developer submits an application and requests the fee amount. The sponsor said the purpose was to prevent unexpected large fees later and confirmed that such a problem had occurred in the sponsor's district. The committee unanimously included the bill in the floor-calendar package.

3. Senate floor session, March 6, 2026 (legislative day 28, part 1)

   From 8:51:42 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel · Confirmed by the bill's status history (Senate Tabled)

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The presenting member said SB 593 would let prospective land buyers submit a written request to a local government for detailed development impact fees associated with a specific proposed project. The presenting member said current procedures did not provide that opportunity before ownership and described impact fees as a way to have development help pay infrastructure costs rather than leaving those costs to existing residents. No questions or opposing speeches followed. The Senate adopted the committee substitute and passed the bill, 50 to 0.

4. House Governmental Affairs Committee, March 18, 2026

   From 0:34:50 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The chair presented the bill on behalf of its Senate sponsor. The chair explained that a county or municipality imposing development impact fees would have to disclose the total fees due for specified parcels upon a transfer of ownership, following a written request that describes the project's scope. The chair described the proposal as a transparency measure. No substantive questions or testimony followed. The committee approved the bill by voice vote, with no count stated.

5. House Rules Committee, March 20, 2026

   From 0:56:34 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said SB 593 would require a city or county to disclose development impact fees after receiving a detailed written request describing a proposed project. The sponsor cited a constituent who was told there would be no fees but faced more than $800,000 after buying property. One committee member asked how quickly a local government would have to respond. The sponsor said the bill did not set a deadline, suggested a reasonable time, and acknowledged that a deadline might need consideration. The member cautioned against rushed estimates that could shift development costs to other taxpayers. A second member asked how fees could be calculated before a buyer had settled the property's use or development density. The sponsor said the request would need to specify the intended zoning, number of homes or other development details, though it would not have to be a complete zoning application. No amendment or vote was recorded.

• Read aloud: Senate floor session, February 26, 2026 (legislative day 25), 0:23:33
• Read aloud: Senate floor session, March 3, 2026 (legislative day 26), 0:36:52
• Read aloud: Senate floor session, March 4, 2026 (legislative day 27), 0:51:43
• Read aloud: House floor session, March 9, 2026 (legislative day 29), 1:03:22
• Read aloud: House floor session, March 10, 2026 (legislative day 30), 0:47:27
• Read aloud: House floor session, March 19, 2026 (legislative day 34), 0:34:49

Status timeline

Sponsors

Votes

Topics