HB 609: Local government; prohibitions on employees holding interest in redevelopment activities; revise provisions

Under current Georgia law (O.C.G.A. § 36-44-21), any elected official, appointed official, or employee of a local government, board, commission, or redevelopment agency is barred from voluntarily acquiring an interest in property or contracts tied to a redevelopment area. This bill narrows who that ban covers. Instead of applying to all employees of the political subdivision, the ban would only apply to employees whose primary job responsibilities relate to creating or administering a redevelopment area or redevelopment activities. Elected and appointed officials remain fully covered regardless of their job duties. The rest of the law stays the same: involuntary interests must still be disclosed in writing and entered into the legislative body's minutes, violations remain voidable by the local legislative body, and failing to comply still counts as misconduct in office. The bill repeals conflicting laws and does not state a delayed effective date.

• Narrows the redevelopment conflict-of-interest ban in O.C.G.A. § 36-44-21 so it no longer covers every employee of a local political subdivision, board, commission, or redevelopment agency.
• Limits the ban to employees whose primary job responsibilities relate to creating or administering a redevelopment area or redevelopment activities.
• Keeps the ban fully in place for elected and appointed officials regardless of their job duties.
• Leaves unchanged the requirement that involuntary property or contract interests be disclosed in writing and recorded in the local legislative body's minutes.
• Leaves unchanged the rule that violating contracts can be voided and that failing to disclose constitutes misconduct in office.

Local government employees across Georgia, especially those working for redevelopment agencies, boards, or commissions; elected and appointed local officials, who remain fully covered; and local legislative bodies that review disclosures and decide whether to void improper contracts.

Employees whose jobs have nothing to do with redevelopment, such as clerks or maintenance staff in an unrelated department, would no longer be barred from owning property or holding contracts tied to a redevelopment area, while officials and redevelopment staff would still face that restriction.

• Section 1 revises O.C.G.A. § 36-44-21(a) by striking 'or employee' from the blanket prohibition and adding a new phrase limiting the ban to an employee whose primary job responsibilities relate to redevelopment area creation or administration.
• Elected and appointed officials remain covered by the ban regardless of their duties.
• Subsection (a) still requires written disclosure of involuntary acquired interests to the local legislative body, entered on its minutes, and to the redevelopment agency.
• Subsection (b) keeps in place that a violating contract or undisclosed interest is voidable by the local legislative body, except for security tied to redevelopment bonds.
• Subsection (c) keeps in place that failing to comply with the disclosure rule is misconduct in office.
• Section 2 repeals all laws in conflict with the Act.

1. 2025-02-27House Second Readers (Cámara de Representantes)
2. 2025-02-26House First Readers (Cámara de Representantes)
3. 2025-02-24House Hopper (Cámara de Representantes)

• Teddy Reese (D, HD-140)Patrocinador principal
• Carolyn Hugley (D, HD-141)
• Carmen Rice (R, HD-139)
• Debbie Buckner (D, HD-137)
• Vance Smith (R, HD-138)

• local government ethics
• redevelopment law
• conflict of interest
• public employees