Comité Economic Development and Tourism del Senado, 10 de marzo de 2026

Transcripción

419 turnos. Seleccione un tiempo para reproducir ese momento del video.

1. 0:11:04

   Glad you're here. Got a full, full room, and got three bills that we're gonna, um, take up this morning. Appreciate everybody being here. I'm gonna- we're gonna go ahead and get started for the sake of time, and I'm gonna ask, uh, Senator Mallow, if you will, if you'll, uh, lead us in prayer, please.

2. 0:11:20

   Y'all bow with me. Most gracious Eternal God, our Father, Father, we thank you for life, health, and strength. We thank you for an opportunity to be in this committee meeting today. And Father, bless our work, bless our hands, bless our efforts so that all that we do is pleasing unto you. In the most wonderful, matchless name of the resurrected, the risen Savior, Jesus the Christ, we all said amen.

3. 0:11:37

   Amen. Thank you, Senator. Uh, we're gonna do things just a little bit out of order this morning. Um, I'm gonna ask, um, Representative Leverett, if you'll come up here and, uh, we'll go ahead and get started on your telecoms bill.

4. 0:11:52

   Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

5. 0:12:08

   You got some good help right there, it looks like.

6. 0:12:10

   I do, Mr. Chairman. I really do.

7. 0:12:12

   Moral support.

8. 0:12:14

   Can I go ahead and get started?

9. 0:12:16

   Yes, sir.

10. 0:12:16

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members of the committee, for your time this morning. Uh, and thank you, Mr. Chairman, for putting the bill on the agenda. I greatly appreciate that. I, I, I also appreciate the opportunity to present to the committee House Bill 998. I believe it addresses a vitally important economic development issue for Georgia and its rural communities, which is the continued availability of affordable voice telecommunications, basic telephone service in rural Georgia, especially in communities that might not be served if left to market forces. So to promote these goals, the bill is gonna amend two features of the current Universal Access Program and the Universal Access Fund.

11. 0:12:52

    That's a program and fund that was established by the General Assembly in 1995 to promote access to telephone service across the state. So first, the bill would remove the 20-year term of the fund and extend it for an additional 10 years. Fund is currently scheduled to expire with the disbursements to be made in 2030. HB 998 will extend that period of disbursements through December 31 of 2040. Second, the bill will allow certain Tier 2 exchange companies, and these are the smaller telephone companies that provide service in local calling areas, to, uh, that don't currently participate in the fund, to participate by filing an election by August 1 of this year.

12. 0:13:31

    So we're giving them a narrow window where they could participate if they don't currently participate, if they meet certain criteria. They have to be smaller. They can't be affiliated with a provider that serves more than 50,000 access lines nationwide. And, and this is sort of a central feature of the whole program. They have to be responsible f- for providing basic local exchange services upon reasonable request. That's kind of like the carrier of last resort concept that you have in federal law. The fund has, uh, uh... So the fund, just to be clear, the fund currently exists.

13. 0:14:03

    It's been around a long time. It's administered by the PSC, and the PSC continues today to review and process applications for disbursements from the fund, and they also govern the payments into the fund. So first, sort of a, a, a brief history of the Universal Access Program. It was created in 1995 by the General Assembly. This is when the state began to allow more competition in telephone service. The, the, as a nation, we were all doing that back then. But the General Assembly recognized that in allowing competition in, uh, where m- customers are spread out in more sp- pop- sparsely populated areas, free markets could make basic telephone service either prohibitively expensive, or it could simply not provide service in those areas, which would effectively deny residents of these areas access to telephone service.

14. 0:14:49

    And obviously, that's because when your population density is less, the cost of the infrastructure is slower to be paid back. So the act allowed these Tier 2 exchange companies c- they could elect to be regulated under the act, but in exchange, the local company had to be subject to rate of return regulation, limit the amount of their rates, and have them subject to a PSC review, and they had to commit to provide basic local exchange services upon reasonable request in all of its local calling areas. And this, this is, again, the thing that's like the carrier of last resort.

15. 0:15:19

    So what that means, basically, is they have to provide service where the e- economics alone wouldn't really justify it. Um, in exchange, they could seek reimbursement from the Universal Access Fund for the reasonable cost of providing the service. And that's the purpose of the, of the fund to ad- e- ensure the provision of reasonably priced access to basic local exchange services throughout Georgia. That's the, that's quoting from the statute. So the PSC determines how much is collected and how much is distributed. All landlines are assessed a nominal charge, which is set by the PSC.

16. 0:15:50

    Um, and then those charges get paid into the fund, and then participating Tier 2 companies that have elected to become, uh, access providers can request reimbursement for actual and reasonable costs of providing the ser- the ser- local exchange services in those areas that would not otherwise be served. So the only costs eligible for reimbursement are costs of providing landline service, not cellular, not other kinds of products or services. So the companies apply. There's an application process. They have to provide a detailed itemization of their costs, other detailed financial information, including an audit, and then the PSC reviews the application, and then they can grant or deny the request.

17. 0:16:27

    They can, you know, grant it in part, deny it in part. And the audit requirement is sort of on two levels. They have to submit an audit. They also have to be audited. There's an auditor at the PSC who goes around and audits the companies that participates in the fund each year. They do eight to 12 of them a year. Um, and this is not a unique model to Georgia. A number of states do this. I would say ours is probably more restrictive in what it allows you to be rebu- refunded by, but that's, I think, a, a good feature of the fund. Um, so, i- i- without this fu- how, I mean, how important is this? Without it, I think rural Georgia would not have had access to telecommunication service that it currently enjoys.

18. 0:17:02

    And that access, of course, has an, an immeasurable impact on quality of life and also on economic development in these communities. I mean, it would be... I don't think we'd have a lot of the state projects we've had out in rural Georgia if you didn't have good phone service, good telecommunication service. So, um, it, the, the program, I think, benefits everybody even though it, it, it, it tends to be directed toward providing service in rural areas. Th- the notion is we are assessing everyone in the system for the cost of making sure that system is, is thorough and it's robust.

19. 0:17:36

    Uh, you know, we all benefit. I- if we're in the city, we benefit by being able to call home, uh, out in the country or call Aunt Nellie out in the country, and it, it's, it's beneficial for her to be able to reach us when we're in Atlanta. Um, and i- so, eh, the reason we're extending it at this point, uh, uh, are two reasons. Um, first, the deadline that's currently in statute was premised on the notion that we would have thorough cell coverage everywhere. And while we have it a lot of places, a lot more than we did 30 years ago, it's still not everywhere.

20. 0:18:08

    There are still places where you can't get a cell signal, and so that means unless you have a landline, you can't reach 911. Uh, secondly, many of the local exchange companies depend on financing in order to provide these services, and the fund is currently going to expire in four years, and so that means it's, it's starting to impact their financing which they depend upon to provide services. So we're, we're trying to extend it out that way. And I would say again, the program has worked very well. It's been very beneficial to the state as a whole in addition to the rural areas.

21. 0:18:39

    Um, and it is, is a vital economic development tool. Um, and, um, so that's why we're trying to extend it. Now, we're also putting some guardrails in place in exchange for that extension. First of all, we're limiting the annual disbursements to 50 million. Currently about 40 million a year is disbursed, so we've, we've got a little bit of a, of, of some, uh, sort of cushion there, but there is a limit on disbursements. Uh, second, PSC currently requires the, the an audit be submitted, but that's not in statute, and so we're inserting that in statute.

22. 0:19:10

    And then we're also requiring the PSC to submit a biannual report on the fund to the general assembly just so we can get more information about it in terms of how much is collected, how much is disbursed, and that sort of thing. So again, this is, I think, a, a, a really well-functioning program. We're just trying to keep it around so it can continue to provide benefits to people of the state, and I would greatly appreciate your recommending due pass on this very important bill, Mr. Chairman.

23. 0:19:35

    Thank you, Representative. Um, it's good testimony. Um-

24. 0:19:38

    I could tell you were all just on the edge of your seat.

25. 0:19:40

    Oh, I, hey, I, I learned a lot. Um, got a few questions lighting up right now. Senator Ginn?

26. 0:19:47

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, uh, Representative Leverett, one of the things that, that, uh, a lot has changed in our communications world since 1995. The, uh, when I look at the old landlines, they, they were twisted copper pairs that went to, ah, Grandma's house, and, uh, what was going on. 'Cause I live out there where Grandma's house, so they, uh, in the boondocks as we call it. And now with the advent of, of fiber, and it's much cheaper to run fiber than it is to, to put copper in the ground. The, uh, uh, what are, what are we doing to allow, to make sure that we're advancing our technology for these phone companies to be able to put fiber, which allows for not only that, that phone line, but for other purposes, you know, whether it be the internet access or whatever they may be using that for, so that, you know, we're, we're giving the phone company the, the incentive to, to step up their technology?

27. 0:20:40

    Well, I think there, there are other programs that do that, and the market does that. Uh, I don't know that the fund necessarily is designed to do that 'cause it's, it's primarily intended to reimburse for whatever the reasonable costs of providing that landline service are, whether it be done by older technology or new technology. But the, I think the motivation for most of these companies is to keep their technology current and, 'cause as you say, it, it is cheaper. Of course, it's not without cost. Um, but, um, I, I'm not aware of anything specifically in the fund that is doing that other than the fact that the companies are motivated to do that already.

28. 0:21:14

    But I think Ms. Chatham might be able to-

29. 0:21:16

    Well, since you have Ms. Chatham there beside of you, I was gonna ask Ms. Chatham to address that.

30. 0:21:20

    Yes. Yeah.

31. 0:21:20

    So the, because the main thing that I wanna do is make sure that we're not, uh, antiquating ourselves in the legislation and that the, uh, technology that's out there for phone companies can be using the, the, uh, uh, better methods. So Ms. Chatham, if you don't mind.

32. 0:21:36

    Yes. Is, is my mic... Is it on? Can y'all hear me okay? Okay, so I'm Rhonda Chatham. I'm the executive director of the GTBA. But to your question, you know, I think that landline sometimes is misunderstood. So the term landlines, I think most people do think of that old technology, maybe a rotary phone over copper pair. But really, the term landline actually means how the service is delivered and the service itself rather than the type of device that does that. And so it doesn't matter if it's over copper or fiber, and in areas where you have, um, you know, kind of some sparsity in cell coverage, you wanna have what's considered the landline service so that you can make sure you have an end-to-end connection, so that when the internet's down, you can still call for 911.

33. 0:22:20

    So that phone service is still working even though the internet may be down. So I think it incentivizes our companies to continue to keep their switch rather than sending everything to the cloud.

34. 0:22:31

    When you, uh, I guess, clarify this, in 1995, there weren't a whole lot of landlines that had fiber connections to 'em.

35. 0:22:38

    Yeah. Right.

36. 0:22:38

    So they, uh, they, they were, they... It was, it was kind of in that infancy stage. So they, uh, but when I look at it today, I wanna make sure that when we talk about, uh, the, the technology-

37. 0:22:50

    Mm-hmm

38. 0:22:50

    ... that somebody can run fiber to the home and they can provide that landline through the fiber connection, and there's no prohibition in this legislation that says, "Hey, no, you gotta do it with twisted pair copper."

39. 0:23:01

    Right. Right. Yeah, and, and-

40. 0:23:02

    That's true

41. 0:23:02

    ... I think as, uh, Chairman Leverett mentioned, you know, there are guardrails in place. So when they seek reimbursements, they can only seek reimbursements for the portion of the fund that's providing the voice, not, not any other service. So I think it does incentivize them 'cause it does, you know, allow them to do other things as well. It's-

42. 0:23:18

    Need it be that government never should be holding technology back.

43. 0:23:22

    Yes, exactly.

44. 0:23:22

    So thank you.

45. 0:23:25

    Chairman Watson.

46. 0:23:27

    Yes, sir.

47. 0:23:28

    So.

48. 0:23:29

    Thank you. Uh-

49. 0:23:29

    Which one?

50. 0:23:30

    Got two Chairman Watsons down here.

51. 0:23:31

    The doctor.

52. 0:23:32

    No, you're, you're-

53. 0:23:32

    The doctor. The good doctor.

54. 0:23:32

    Actually, you're the good doctor. I'm sorry.

55. 0:23:34

    Hey, um, Mr. Chairman-

56. 0:23:34

    Just-

57. 0:23:35

    ... Mr. Chairman, if I may, before, uh, the, uh... I think there was a s- about, uh, 1876, it was Watson, come here. Today is the day for the, the, uh, phone company and wow, the invention of the telephone. The, uh, today's the day, and since Dr. Watson is down there, I think it's Watson. I got two of them. Watson, ah, come here.

58. 0:23:56

    I tell you what, Frank, that, that is, uh, that's-

59. 0:23:59

    Information

60. 0:23:59

    ... that's, yeah. I really appreciate that information.

61. 0:24:04

    I should've told you weren't there.

62. 0:24:06

    Yeah. Uh, okay. So, um, uh, ignorance is, uh, curable hopefully. How many tier twos are there, phone companies in the state?

63. 0:24:16

    Um, we have 21 members, and then there's also one additional member, uh, tier two that's not in ours. So there's 22, um, small companies-

64. 0:24:25

    Okay

65. 0:24:25

    ... and then there's also Windstream and Frontier who are considered tier twos that are not part of this fund.

66. 0:24:32

    Okay. Does, uh... What percentage get reimbursed, reimbursement to all of them?

67. 0:24:36

    Right now, all but three do. So there's, uh, 19 that are part of the program and three do not. Some of the smaller ones do not.

68. 0:24:43

    How much do they on average get per year?

69. 0:24:46

    So each company, when they, uh... You know, obviously costs vary per year. So in total, in the aggregate, this past year was around 43 million in, in total for all 18 companies.

70. 0:24:58

    Oh, wow. Gotcha. Yeah.

71. 0:24:58

    But it depends on each year what their-

72. 0:25:00

    Sure

73. 0:25:00

    ... expenses are. It varies.

74. 0:25:02

    What, what, uh, how much is in the fund?

75. 0:25:05

    Um, so that, that amount is not actually public. That's part of why we changed this so that we would know. The Public Service Commission has those amounts they collected on the phone bills, and then the amount when our companies submit for their reimbursements. They just look at their reimbursements, not... They don't say, "Okay, this is how much is in the fund, so you're gonna get it all." It goes based on how, whatever their costs are.

76. 0:25:28

    Hm. But we will know in the future, I'm assuming?

77. 0:25:30

    You will. You will know.

78. 0:25:31

    Okay. And that, that fund comes from a fee. Where, where is that fee?

79. 0:25:35

    On, on the landlines only, so any sort of fixed voice. Um, it doesn't go on cellular, uh, right now.

80. 0:25:42

    Okay. Thank you.

81. 0:25:43

    And if I may, Mr. Chairman, the, the provisions on the report are toward the end of the bill from line 111 on page five.

82. 0:25:49

    Mm-hmm.

83. 0:25:49

    So there's a requirement that, that the PSC begin pr- providing a report with specific information, such as some of the information you're seeking in your question right now.

84. 0:25:58

    Great. Thank you. I see that.

85. 0:26:04

    Chairman Bearden.

86. 0:26:06

    Thank you, Chairman. Just two quick questions just to clarify. These smaller companies especially that helps the rural Georgia folks, if they request the landline, y'all don't get to pick or choose on that. You've got to provide that service, correct?

87. 0:26:18

    Yes, that's correct.

88. 0:26:18

    No matter where they are.

89. 0:26:19

    Yes, that's correct.

90. 0:26:20

    And also, as we're moving forward towards next gen 911, while some of our areas don't have cellular service, it's still very important for them to have that landline to make sure that the law enforcement or EMS or fire can reach them.

91. 0:26:35

    Yes.

92. 0:26:35

    That I know.

93. 0:26:36

    Yes.

94. 0:26:36

    Okay.

95. 0:26:36

    That's, that's extremely important.

96. 0:26:37

    Thank you.

97. 0:26:38

    And, and conversely, Mr., Mr. Senator, to, to make sure the person can call-

98. 0:26:42

    Mm-hmm

99. 0:26:43

    ... and reach 911-

100. 0:26:44

     Yep

101. 0:26:44

     ... to, to summon them. Uh, 'cause with, uh, with the s- with a cellphone, you can't always reach them and do that.

102. 0:26:49

     Right. Thank you.

103. 0:26:53

     Chairman Burns.

104. 0:26:56

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, again, just a, a quick question for clarification. So the PSC manages the fund, is that correct?

105. 0:27:02

     Yeah.

106. 0:27:02

     And right now we're not sure what the total balance is. There is a reasonable monthly fee that is attached to the local subscriber's phone bill. How much is that fee?

107. 0:27:12

     It varies. It's 5.25%, so it varies between, like, $2.50. I've seen some that are, like, $2.66. But with telephone being regulated, the, you know, the, the costs are, are-

108. 0:27:25

     The, the cost is a percentage-

109. 0:27:26

     Yes, it's a percentage

110. 0:27:27

     ... of the, of the, of the monthly fee. Is that true?

111. 0:27:29

     Yes, it is.

112. 0:27:30

     Okay. Thank you.

113. 0:27:30

     I got two more. Sorry. Uh, Chairman Hodges, my suite mate.

114. 0:27:39

     Thank you, Chairman Suite Mate. I appreciate that.

115. 0:27:44

     Just, just a couple of questions. I would imagine with the, um... As people do away with their landlines, that this fund would be shrinking. Is that correct?

116. 0:27:55

     Yes.

117. 0:27:56

     Okay. And eventually technology will make it go away.

118. 0:28:00

     Yeah.

119. 0:28:00

     So it's sort of a stopgap to make sure that we have phone service in places where we don't have cell. We, we... Just to make sure that people can communicate. Um, I think I've got three of these companies in my district, and as an old banker, I've done some business with some of these companies too, and I... My question is, you know, with all the, um, this day and time with all the, the progress we've made in communication technology, if this fund went away tomorrow, what would the effect be for rural Georgia?

120. 0:28:35

     So unfortunately, I feel like they, you know... And of course nothing is known for sure, but I feel like they would have to, they'd have some tough decisions to make because the cost to provide that service does not, you know, you don't make it up in sparsely populated areas. So I think they would have to, you know, start looking at do we raise rates 'cause they would no longer, you know, they could seek not, you know, deregulation. Do we, uh, increase rates to cover the cost, or do we stop serving some of the customers in our area and, and, you know, forgo our carrier of last resort-

121. 0:29:05

     That's true

122. 0:29:05

     ... or, you know, do we just not continue to keep up our networks, like Senator Ginn mentioned?

123. 0:29:10

     So you wouldn't have the, um, you wouldn't have the quality-

124. 0:29:15

     Mm-hmm

125. 0:29:15

     ... of communication without this fund-

126. 0:29:17

     That's right

127. 0:29:17

     ... I take it you wouldn't.

128. 0:29:18

     Right.

129. 0:29:19

     And you wouldn't have the affordability either.

130. 0:29:21

     Mm-hmm.

131. 0:29:24

     Chairman Farmer Watson.

132. 0:29:27

     Thank you. Thank you for that, uh, clarification there, uh, Mr. Chairman. Um, but more, more of a comment, uh, and to that point, um, as a, uh, as a homeowner in rural Georgia, as a business owner in rural Georgia, um, we, we still, in the produce industry, we still have a very old-fashioned business where we get on the phone every morning and we call our buyers, and we find out what other people are doing, and, and we do that on landlines. And so it is extremely important for what we do. I also, you know, obviously represent a lot of grandmas, and I have a lot of, uh, my district that does not have good cell service.

133. 0:30:01

     Um, so, uh, definitely wanna make sure that we, we keep this, uh, going, um, so that I can keep my business going and that other people that do what I do in my area can keep their business going. So just wanted to make that plug there, and thank y'all for bringing the bill.

134. 0:30:18

     Thank you.

135. 0:30:18

     All right. We appreciate it. You ready?

136. 0:30:22

     I'm ready when you ready.

137. 0:30:23

     Uh, Mr. Chairman, in honor of it being March the 10th, 1876, Alexander Graham Bell said to, uh, on the first communication on the phone line was, "Mr. Watson, come here. I want to see you." Said then, "I move do pass on LC 560570S, March the 10th, 1876."

138. 0:30:45

     I'll second it.

139. 0:30:45

     Got a motion.

140. 0:30:46

     Second.

141. 0:30:47

     Second from, uh, Chairman Hodges. All in favor, uh, raise your right hand, please.

142. 0:30:57

     I don't know if he knew which Mr. Watson he was calling. Looks like we have a-

143. 0:31:03

     Thank you

144. 0:31:03

     ... unanimous vote. Uh, thank you guys very much. We appreciate it.

145. 0:31:06

     Thank you so much.

146. 0:31:06

     Thank y'all.

147. 0:31:09

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members of the committee.

148. 0:31:17

     Rob, you got a rural, rural phone line?

149. 0:31:19

     What's that?

150. 0:31:20

     You got a rural, rural phone line?

151. 0:31:21

     I, well, I used to. I don't anymore.

152. 0:31:23

     I just turned 20, Ken, so I don't.

153. 0:31:27

     I live in the city, big city of Eltonsville.

154. 0:31:29

     Good to see you, Rob.

155. 0:31:30

     So Rhonda was the only one who signed up, and she was there, so we're good.

156. 0:31:33

     Okay.

157. 0:31:38

     All right. Uh, we're gonna move into, um, House Bill 376. Representative Hilton, if you don't mind coming up and presenting this to us. Tell us the LC number. I forgot that one on the, on the last bill there, if you don't mind.

158. 0:31:56

     Come on in, guys. Come on in.

159. 0:32:02

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the committee, come for the policy, stay for the history lessons, I guess. This is great. Uh, I'll be reading from LC560607S. All right.

160. 0:32:20

     Perfect.

161. 0:32:21

     This is House Bill 376. This aims to address, uh, some of the historic treasures that we really have all over the state, from every corner, from Augusta to Columbus to Macon. We've got a great program in place right now, the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit. Unfortunately, that program, which is scheduled to sunset at the, the 2029, 2030, is effectively sunsetted because we've reached the, the cap, and so, uh, of that program. And so this bill aims to increase that cap on an already successful program that generates for every dollar invested somewhere between three to six dollars in, in economic, uh, growth and activity.

162. 0:32:59

     Uh, like I said, each one of our districts has, uh, this historic treasure. We wanna see those reinvested in, uh, developed, uh, and, and we wanna continue to in- incentivize that, that activity. I'll walk you through just a couple portions of the bill here. Uh, main kind of meat of it is line 3031. We're gonna keep, uh, at 25%, uh, existing credits that have been issued prior to this year. We're gonna add some additional incentive for, uh, some of our rural structures, uh, making it, uh, a little bit more lucrative, uh, going to 30%, uh, on rural structures and down to 20%, uh, in, in the more denser populated areas of our state.

163. 0:33:44

     And then you'll see on line, really the crux of it, on line thir- uh, 52, where we increase it from the 30 to 60. Uh, I've got some folks here with, uh, Historic Preservation Trust, and maybe let you guys weigh in on the program, and...

164. 0:34:03

     Sure, thank you. Good morning, senators. My name's Wright Mitchell. I'm the president and CEO of the Georgia Trust for Historic Preservation. We've also got our senior director of legislative advocacy and historic preservation here, Ben Sutton. We have a historic rehabilitation tax credit program right now that is effectively dead. So there is no financial incentive that exists to revitalize our historic resources. Um, all we're doing is simply seeking to put this program back into play by increasing the caps from 30 million to 60 million, and we're also creating an incentive for rural areas, um, that need this credit.

165. 0:34:41

     So we're just simply asking the committee to approve this, uh, doubling of the cap and the change in the percentages.

166. 0:34:48

     Yeah, I think it's appropriate it's going through this committee because really once you revitalize one of these structures, uh, you know, you've seen kind of our downtown and where a lot of these structures are. You reh- rehabilitate, revitalize these, it causes kind of ancillary effect, kind of a halo effect all, all around these. And so, um, good project, and, uh, passed on a, a pretty wide bi- bipartisan basis, uh, in committee and in the House.

167. 0:35:12

     All right. Thank you, Representative. Um, who's number four? All right. S- Senator Summers.

168. 0:35:23

     Thank you for bringing the bill. It's, uh, vitally important to rural Georgia, as you well know, and, uh, my question is, is, is it may be twofold question. Um, have we used up the 30 million? I mean, basically is that the issue? The 30 million's used up, so additional 30 million. Well, I mean, my gosh, in, in one town you could use up $30 million if, if, if, if people got into the program or whatever it is. Yeah, that type of thing. Is there any way to put... Is there any way to say y- you got 159 counties, 120 of them are rural.

169. 0:35:54

     Uh, is there a way to... I know obviously it gives the metro area too, but I mean, $30 million is a lot of money, but it doesn't sound like a lot of money when you start doing renovation. Uh, what I'm trying to say is, is there a way to say, "Okay, this county, this county, this county," or can whoever applies for it first gets it? I guess is what I'm asking.

170. 0:36:11

     I think-

171. 0:36:11

     Yeah, right now it's a-

172. 0:36:12

     Yeah, it's first come, first serve right now.

173. 0:36:14

     First come, first serve.

174. 0:36:15

     Yeah.

175. 0:36:16

     Okay.

176. 0:36:18

     Yeah, you, you'd, you'd have to be a pretty big project. Like, for example, to use 15, it'd have to be a 75 million, I mean a big project.

177. 0:36:27

     Yeah.

178. 0:36:27

     So, um, we're... Generally these are pretty small. I, I don't know, what would you say the average kinda claim is?

179. 0:36:35

     I mean, the m- majority are small, small projects in rural towns.

180. 0:36:40

     Yeah.

181. 0:36:40

     You know?

182. 0:36:41

     Yeah. We don't-

183. 0:36:42

     And of course it's a percentage of that project, I understand.

184. 0:36:44

     Yeah, yeah, yeah.

185. 0:36:45

     Yeah, yeah. Yeah.

186. 0:36:47

     Thank you for bringing that, Bill.

187. 0:36:48

     Yes, sir.

188. 0:36:50

     Chairman Burns.

189. 0:36:51

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I... Thanks for bringing the bill, and I certainly support the, uh, the initiative. I think my concern is the distribution of funds. Uh, right now we have a lot of projects out there that are, that are sitting and waiting for some bandwidth. But one major developer sticks a, of, uh, an application on the line and consumes everything. So I'm more concerned about, uh, equitable availability of these, uh, resources across our state, not just in one or two locations.

190. 0:37:26

     So how would you address that challenge?

191. 0:37:30

     So I believe we address that-

192. 0:37:32

     Well, you- you've got rural in there.

193. 0:37:34

     42.

194. 0:37:34

     Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, we address that on, thank you, well, really starting on line 42, uh, through really 47. Uh, we have caps on individual projects. So you can go up to 15 million, uh-

195. 0:37:53

     That's, uh, roughly 25% of the total amount.

196. 0:37:59

     Well, it'd be half of the, the increase, yeah. But in order to claim-

197. 0:38:02

     Well, it, it... Yeah.

198. 0:38:03

     Yeah. In order to claim the full 15, you'd have to generate, uh, 200 full-time jobs, uh, or 5 million in annual payroll. Uh, a- again, the size project for that, very few and far between. Uh, a- again, it'd have to be about a $75 million project, and we just don't see those.

199. 0:38:22

     Do you have that, uh, you have that data? Do you have the data that shows the projects and how much they were over the last three years?

200. 0:38:28

     Mm-hmm. Yep.

201. 0:38:28

     I'd like to see that.

202. 0:38:29

     Okay.

203. 0:38:33

     Chairman Hodges.

204. 0:38:35

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, thanks for bringing the bill. I've, I've, I've, I like this credit, I always have, um, because it addresses, uh, economics in our cities across the state of Georgia, but it also has an impact on our maintaining our cultural heritage and, and keeping these beautiful structures, um, for ge- future generations. My question is this: You're going from 30 to 60, or you're asking to go from 30 to 60.

205. 0:39:07

     You got any idea what the demand is? I mean, if you're going from 30 to 60, what... I mean, if, if the sky was the limit, any idea what the demand would be?

206. 0:39:19

     It, it would be far more than 60.

207. 0:39:22

     Yeah.

208. 0:39:22

     Yeah.

209. 0:39:23

     85.

210. 0:39:23

     About 85 million, I think is the figure that we've come up with.

211. 0:39:27

     Okay. Just wondering.

212. 0:39:31

     Y'all hopefully... I, I believe there was a packet that was distri- distributed. Uh, this has some of the... Yeah, very good. Uh-

213. 0:39:39

     Is that what I thought it was?

214. 0:39:40

     Yeah. A question came up as to kinda list of projects. This is a great example of, of some that have been claimed over the last several years.

215. 0:39:47

     Senator Jordan has one. All right.

216. 0:39:51

     Senator Ginn.

217. 0:39:53

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the bill it references certified structures, and I don't see any definition for certified structure, what a certified structure is. Can you elaborate on that?

218. 0:40:05

     So a c- a certified structure would be a structure that's eligible for the National Register or already listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

219. 0:40:16

     Thank you.

220. 0:40:19

     I've got Senator Mallow.

221. 0:40:22

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, y- you all publish an annual list of, uh, the 10 most vulnerable historic properties throughout our entire state that are in peril. Is that not true?

222. 0:40:32

     That is correct. It's called Our Places in Peril list, yes.

223. 0:40:35

     Uh, and y'all put that list on Facebook. I f- I follow the Georgia, uh, Historic Trust for Preservation, or however you, you put it. Um, and most of those places are in our more rural communities, where, uh, as we look as a state to invest in tourism, many people leave, come to the more metro areas, and then travel out to some of our more rural communities to see those, uh, historic sites. It's one of the attractions, I think, that bring people to Georgia. Um, and is it your opinion that o- if, if this was approved, maybe we'd cut that top 10 list down by a few, uh, because folks would be able to take on some of those additional projects, especially in rural Georgia where it's hard to get local and county governments to add in some of the financing needed, um, because the scope of the project and the complexity just sometimes without this credit would just make it unimaginable to accomplish?

224. 0:41:27

     Sure. So a- absolutely a lot of these projects aren't viable without the credit.

225. 0:41:33

     So right now we have no credit. There are a lot of these, um, you know, developers that are just sitting there waiting for credits to become available. So it would certainly be our hope that by, uh, re-energizing the program, we can start to see some revitalization of some of these buildings that are sitting vacant and dormant.

226. 0:41:55

     Chairman, uh, Ben Watson.

227. 0:41:58

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, just help me understand it out, and believe me, from Savannah, I'm, I'm a big proponent of this. Uh, it's been used in our area and has preserved a lot of historic buildings that would've been, uh, torn down. So I certainly agree with, uh, Senator Hodges, uh, relating to that. The... Help me understand a little bit, the 30 million to 60 million is what we're, uh, proposing, and that is, that's every, that's per year? It starts over every year, or help me, help me understand.

228. 0:42:28

     It, it's an annual-

229. 0:42:29

     Yeah

230. 0:42:29

     ... cap. So it's, that's what's addressed every year. Um, and then the, um, population bill fif- the po- county having a population less than 50,000. Is that not a population bill and the constitutionality of that? Help me understand that.

231. 0:42:46

     So to answer your first question, so the 30 to si- 60 is the total program cap. So, um, uh, we mentioned kind of the demand here, so yeah, that could fill up pretty quickly, uh, before the, the sunset that we have. Um, on the population, again, we had that drawn up leg council. I... They didn't identify any constitutional issues at the time. I'll defer to them. Yeah.

232. 0:43:10

     Okay. All right. Thank you.

233. 0:43:11

     Yep.

234. 0:43:14

     Senator, um, uh, Chairman Sam Watson.

235. 0:43:18

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I just, uh, wanted to again vouch for this program. It's been extremely successful across, uh, rural Georgia and in many of the small towns that I represent, and so thank y'all for bringing the bill and, uh, at the appropriate time, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to pass.

236. 0:43:35

     I got a, a motion and a second. Thank you. Um, I, I, before we vote, I just, you know, it's, I don't know if this is appropriate time or not, but, um, you know, the last two bills have been about rural Georgia, a lot about rural Georgia, and I think that's important, and people over, they don't really think about that when they think about economic development. And I, I just appreciate everybody being here this morning, and I, I appreciate a good bill like this. So, um, all in favor?

237. 0:44:04

     Oh, sorry. I wanted to vote. I vote for rural Georgia. All right. Thank y'all, uh, very much. We appreciate it.

238. 0:44:13

     Mr. Chairman, we in Johns Creek care about rural Georgia.

239. 0:44:16

     Thank you.

240. 0:44:18

     Thank you.

241. 0:44:18

     We're in Johns Creek? Rural.

242. 0:44:21

     Rural.

243. 0:44:23

     Very rural.

244. 0:44:24

     Used to be. Used to be.

245. 0:44:27

     At least. That's it.

246. 0:44:32

     Now? Oh, I'm so, I'm sor-

247. 0:44:39

     Obviously we didn't even-

248. 0:44:41

     The town might not be that much.

249. 0:44:44

     Maybe to the-

250. 0:44:45

     It was the town itself, yeah.

251. 0:44:49

     Absolutely.

252. 0:44:55

     I think it, we just got out of our, uh, over my skis just a second. Let me talk to leg council for a minute.

253. 0:45:13

     Mr. Chairman, just for procedural clarity, I'll move for reconsideration of that do pass vote.

254. 0:45:18

     On LC560607S.

255. 0:45:21

     On LC560607S.

256. 0:45:24

     Second.

257. 0:45:26

     We've got a couple words we gotta fix. Very, they're, they're minor, but-

258. 0:45:30

     Yeah

259. 0:45:30

     ... it'd be better to go ahead and do it now.

260. 0:45:34

     Motion to reconsider.

261. 0:45:37

     Oh, and all right. All in favor of reconsideration, raise your hand. Thank y'all.

262. 0:45:43

     Thank you. Uh, and yeah, we got over our skis a little bit there. So, uh, Department of Revenue came to us yesterday, said they had a couple administrative changes to it, just, I believe, two words. So, uh, if someone will call on my friend from DOR.

263. 0:45:58

     It's all about money.

264. 0:46:06

     Good morning, Chairman, members of the committee. My name is Joe Snowden. I'm the government affairs director at the Department of Revenue. I really appreciate y'all's patience on this one. Um, we did not quite catch something ahead of crossover, so we have, uh, spoken with the sponsor as well as, uh, members of the community who are interested in this, and everybody seems to be in favor of these changes. Um, but-

265. 0:46:26

     Thank you

266. 0:46:28

     ... so, uh, for administration purposes, we'd, we'd like to ask for just two quick changes to this bill if possible. Um, so the first being that on lines 30 and 32, the bill uses the word issued prior to January 1, 2026. So for administrative purposes of this bill, that language would probably be preferred to be the word approved. These credits are pre-approved by DCA long before they are issued. So for the sake of consistency as well as, you know, following the intent of this bill, the change from issued to approved there would be very helpful in our ability to administer it.

267. 0:47:04

     Um, secondarily, the other change being that there are a couple separate dates throughout this bill. So if you look in, uh, section B, lines 30 and 32, or sorry, my fault, uh, 31 and 33, you'll see Jan 1, '26, but then in the section two where the act becomes effective, you see July 1, '26, and then for tax years beginning on or after Jan 1, 2027. That's a bunch of dates, and we wanna make sure that we're fully clear on the intent of this bill before we administer it in a way that was not that case. So for consistency's sake, we'd either prefer to see that be ...

268. 0:47:37

     act shall become effective, um, and apply to tax years beginning on July 1, 2026, or the inverse being that we would change, um, the Jan 1, '26 in lines 31 and 33 to 2027. But the intent, as I understand it, would be to change section two to just s- speak specifically to July 1, 2026, for the act and, uh, applicable tax years to become effective.

269. 0:48:05

     And I have texted this to Ali if he wants to speak to that.

270. 0:48:11

     Go ahead, Senator Ginn.

271. 0:48:12

     I'm, I'm not sure if I understand. You wanna change in section two?

272. 0:48:16

     So f- as the bill reads, if you look at lines 31 and 33, it's issued on or after Jan 1, 2026. But then in section two, it says effective July 1, 2026. So at a bare minimum that would need to come forward in section one in those lines, or you would just make it applicable to everything in 2026.

273. 0:48:41

     So pick your de- um, give us the exact verbiage what you want.

274. 0:48:45

     Okay. Um, if to, for the eas- the easiest and simplest change would to be, this act shall become effective, um, and be applicable to all taxable years beginning on or after July 1, or Jan 1, 2026.

275. 0:49:00

     So just strike, just strike the July 1, 2026 in-

276. 0:49:04

     You were on 56

277. 0:49:04

     ... on line 56.

278. 0:49:06

     Yes.

279. 0:49:06

     You can't make it retro-

280. 0:49:07

     You can't make retro- retro-

281. 0:49:08

     Yeah.

282. 0:49:09

     Well, it would be applicable to this tax year, so we would open up the, the funding on July 1, '26 of this year for people to apply.

283. 0:49:18

     Okay. Director. Mr. Chairman. Senator M-

284. 0:49:23

     Senator McLaurin.

285. 0:49:24

     Thank you. I me- I mean, and thank you to our, I, I understand that you're concerned about a potential-

286. 0:49:29

     Mm-hmm

287. 0:49:30

     ... drafting problem. I'm not so sure there's a problem if, I mean, the... So going back to line 31 or 3031, says we're, we're, we're classifying with lines 30 and 31 which expenditures are eligible for the credit and the extent of the credit, right? Just because the act becomes effective on July 1st of this year, I don't know that that means that the statutory treatment of those credits after the fact is any less in effect, if that makes sense.

288. 0:50:03

     And I think, I think we can work with that as well.

289. 0:50:05

     Okay.

290. 0:50:05

     It was more, it was, that's really just cleanup. I think we can work with it as it is. If we just wanna focus on changing the word issued to, uh, approved, that is-

291. 0:50:13

     Sure

292. 0:50:13

     ... that we can, we can work with that.

293. 0:50:14

     As, as an eight-year student of the extent to which legislators can tie their own shoelaces together, I think it might be in our best interest to just-

294. 0:50:21

     Oh, okay. Then yes

295. 0:50:22

     ... let that go.

296. 0:50:22

     That, I, I think we can work with that.

297. 0:50:23

     Okay. Thank you.

298. 0:50:24

     All right. So we'll stick with the one. Perfect.

299. 0:50:25

     Chairman Burns, you good?

300. 0:50:27

     I wave.

301. 0:50:28

     Okay.

302. 0:50:29

     I do wanna make sure, though, uh, that, I mean, line 57 does concern me, 'cause we wanna make sure that these become available in taxable year 2026, and line 57 is in conflict with that. I would say we change th- 57 to read Jan 1, 2026.

303. 0:50:55

     And that'd be the only change, yeah.

304. 0:50:56

     This year, yeah.

305. 0:50:57

     Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So the, the, so the two changes would be changed issued on lines 30 and 32 to approved, and then change line 57 to Jan 1, 2026.

306. 0:51:19

     So moved.

307. 0:51:21

     Do we need to call that?

308. 0:51:22

     I c- I can.

309. 0:51:24

     Senator McLaurin.

310. 0:51:24

     Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the Johns Creek Amendment, and that is an omnibus amendment that would change the word issued on lines 30 and 32 to approved. And on line 57 it would change 2027 to 2026.

311. 0:51:42

     Second.

312. 0:51:43

     Got a motion and a second. All in favor, raise your right hand.

313. 0:51:49

     Thank you.

314. 0:51:49

     All the amendments

315. 0:51:51

     That's on the amendment. All right, now all in favor of, uh, of the bill a- as it's, uh, amended, LC number 560607S. You wanna do that by substitute or amended?

316. 0:52:10

     As amended.

317. 0:52:10

     As amended. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Um, do I have a motion to pass it as amended?

318. 0:52:16

     Motion to pass, Mr. Chairman, as amended.

319. 0:52:19

     Got a motion.

320. 0:52:20

     Second.

321. 0:52:21

     Got a second. All in favor, raise your right hand. Thank you.

322. 0:52:26

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

323. 0:52:27

     Thank you, guys.

324. 0:52:27

     Thank y'all very much. I'm sorry for messing up the bill.

325. 0:52:32

     No, you're fine. Let the bill hear the, the floor, doesn't it?

326. 0:52:38

     That's right. All right, now we've got, uh, S... We're gonna have a hearing on SB 416 from the undisputed, uh, best dressed Senator Halpern.

327. 0:52:50

     Undisputed.

328. 0:52:52

     Un- undisputed. That ain't good.

329. 0:52:58

     Good morning, Mr. Chairman and committee. I am here to discuss, there's should be a sub in your folders, LC 590302S. Okay. No?

330. 0:53:16

     There should be something.

331. 0:53:16

     That's fine. Let-

332. 0:53:19

     I don't have it.

333. 0:53:21

     What do you have? 590212?

334. 0:53:24

     Yes.

335. 0:53:24

     Yes.

336. 0:53:24

     Okay.

337. 0:53:26

     Yes.

338. 0:53:26

     I will talk through the small, they're very, very minor changes, um, in the sub, but, but important, so I will do that. But let me first just generally explain to you about the bill. I'm gonna start with something that may have happened to you and is certainly happening to a lot of people around the country. You search for a hotel room online. You click on one of the links that appears in that search, and the page looks exactly like the hotel's website.

339. 0:53:58

     Same photos, same branding, same name. So you book the room, but you don't realize that you're actually not booking with the hotel at all, and instead, you book through an unaffiliated third-party website, sometimes at a higher price, sometimes with hidden fees, and sometimes with reservations, most times, all the time, with reservations that the hotel ne- n- never actually receives. And so it's only when you arrive at the hotel that you discover that you weren't booking directly with the hotel at all, and now you and the hotel are left scrambling to find you a room at a rate that you can afford.

340. 0:54:38

     And that's exactly the problem that this bill, Senate Bill 416, addresses. It is a targeted consumer protection measure that's addressing a growing problem in the online travel marketplace, which is deceptive third-party hotel booking websites. The bill simply requires that if a booking website is not the hotel, it must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact before the consumer completes the transaction. So not buried in the fine print, not hidden in a small hyperlink, and not after you've put in all of your personal or payment information, and just clear, straightforward disclosure so people know who they are actually doing business with.

341. 0:55:22

     This bill importantly does not prohibit third-party booking platforms from operating. It is simply requiring transparency. Um, the legislation's also very carefully scoped, working with hotels and some of their, uh, their partner organizations. So it explicitly exempts hotel-owned booking platforms, sites with direct contractual relationships with hotels, or official housing bureaus for events and conferences. So legitimate platforms and partnerships continue operating exactly as they do today.

342. 0:55:58

     But the reason the bill exists is because this is a widespread problem. Industry research estimates that deceptive online booking practices cost consumers approximately $5.7 billion annually across the country. And here in Georgia, in general, fraud reports consistently rank among the highest in the country, with hundreds of millions of dollars in losses reported by Georgians each year. So this bill helps address one piece of that problem by ensuring transparency in a high-risk transactional environment, which is the online travel booking space.

343. 0:56:37

     So it ultimately protects consumers who deserve to know who they're transacting with, hotels whose reputations are often damaged by bookings that they never controlled, and Georgia's tourism economy, which depends on trust and positive customer experiences. Um, Georgia, as one of the nation's top tourism states, has every reason to lead in protecting travelers in our hospitality industry, but it's really important, too, that you realize and know that most of the people renting hotels in Georgia are Georgians.

344. 0:57:12

     So this bill helps us protect Georgians, and at its core, it's about something very simple, honesty and transparency when Georgians book a hotel online. This is a balanced consumer protection bill, and, uh, and I will pause there to just tell you a couple of changes that were in the sub that you don't have. But if you look at lines, it's 10-1393. It's, if you look at line 23,

345. 0:57:47

     um, we have, after the, the franchisor of the physical accommodation, we've added in, "Or any entity authorized to enter into contracts for online booking services on behalf of any such owner, operator, or franchisor," and got rid of, "To provide online reservations." This is, this is, um, well-thought-out language with both the hotel, the hotel, hotels, the hotel industry, and of course, some of their partners.

346. 0:58:20

     And by partners, think of places like Expedia, but also think of Airbnb. And then on lines, um, 30-

347. 0:58:32

     Let me get you to go back to-

348. 0:58:34

     Okay, hold on. B. An online platform. It's on line 42, um, after 43. "Provided that the online platform has an affiliation contract," we got rid of, "With the owner, operator, or franchisor," and put instead, "For," for. So striking, "With the owner, operator, or franchisor of," and adding the word, "For." Those are the only changes, um, that the sub made, and again, that was in direct conversation and agreement with the industry, and I am told that this bill, uh, is one of the strongest bills that they have seen to support the problem, or to help try to begin to fix the problem that really is occurring everywhere.

349. 0:59:33

     And my friend, Chris Hardman, is here from the Georgia Hotel and Lodging Association, if you have no questions for me.

350. 0:59:44

     You got a few words. Oh.

351. 0:59:46

     Yeah, I'll, I'll be brief, brief in the interest of time, Mr. Chairman. I wanna thank you, uh, for hearing about this issue during the Senate Study Committee on making Georgia the number one state for tourism. I really wanna thank Senator Halpern. Uh, what she's put together is truly perfected language. Um, if, if this language were to pass, Georgia would be leading the way in this type of consumer protection. Um, no other state has even been able to consider this type of language. This is something that has happened to so many individuals, I'm sure many of your peers, many of your friends, but also the most vulnerable in Georgia, those are our senior citizens.

352. 1:00:18

     Um, this is something that we want to be able to say that, "Hey, we are trying to protect Georgians." The majority p- of people that stay in hotels in Georgia are Georgians, which I know this committee has heard befo- before, and this is just, uh, one way to bring a certain level of protection to those individuals. Um, I'd also, uh, like to bring up, a- as we all know, there's one of the, uh, largest events coming to the State of Georgia, um, that is the FIFA World Cup in June. And can you imagine if you spent your life savings to come to the State of Georgia, um, to come and visit, and you show up to a hotel, and all of a sudden you try to check in and there's no record of your reservation?

353. 1:00:54

     Not only that, but the entire hotel is booked and every hotel for 50 miles is booked, and you have nowhere to go. So that is something. That is... This is one way we can protect those individuals that are coming in. And I know, Mr. Chairman, you're gonna be hearing from a, from a victim that you might not expect to be a victim here in, here in a little while, so, um, and he might be able to give you some of his, uh, stories that he's seen. But it truly is deceptive when you have two of the same looking websites, I mean, I mean, literally exact, and one's fake and one's not.

354. 1:01:25

     Thank you. Um, thank you, Chris. Um, right quick before we go, got a couple questions. Um, and before we go into the question, you mind repeating the LC number right quick?

355. 1:01:34

     The LC is... Okay. Uh, uh, you're, you're working off of LC590212.

356. 1:01:45

     Okay. Thank you. Um, Senator McLaurin.

357. 1:01:51

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, great bill, and totally understood, too, or heard loud and clear the point about this is not like getting a defective product shipped in the mail. This is a public safety issue because you're showing up physically to a place where you do not have a booking, and you might have nowhere to go that night.

358. 1:02:06

     Right.

359. 1:02:06

     Um, so it makes a lot of sense to me. In terms of the amendment language you want-

360. 1:02:10

     Yeah

361. 1:02:10

     ... um, I'm happy to help move the amendments if... Do you have a copy of that language for the-

362. 1:02:15

     I, I-

363. 1:02:16

     We got the line 43 one, I think, down.

364. 1:02:18

     Yeah.

365. 1:02:18

     But it would be great to just get the... Perfect. Okay. And, and my understanding is the affiliation contract piece, that's to make sure that if anybody holds themselves out as able to book a room, that effectively they have a physical contract to prove that. That's essentially what that's all about, right?

366. 1:02:35

     So the, the affiliation contract is, let's say... let's, let's use Expedia, for example, right?

367. 1:02:41

     Yeah.

368. 1:02:41

     They're gonna have a contract with the hotel-

369. 1:02:43

     Right

370. 1:02:43

     ... or the brand or the ownership group, and that, that contract is, we want, we wanna be able to protect that.

371. 1:02:48

     Right.

372. 1:02:48

     We're not going after the, um, S- Senator Halpern's language is not going after those, uh, you know, well-established legal entities like a booking.com-

373. 1:02:57

     Right

374. 1:02:57

     ... or an Expedia or an Airbnb, and this, this language is actually just something to make it even more clear that-

375. 1:03:02

     Yep

376. 1:03:02

     ... that affiliation contract.

377. 1:03:04

     Uh, and as, just for clarity, the committee, it seems like what the affiliation contract amendment, the language-

378. 1:03:07

     Mm-hmm

379. 1:03:07

     ... is doing is just saying that is the wall that, of proof-

380. 1:03:10

     Exactly

381. 1:03:11

     ... that you need to differentiate between the legitimate bookers and the ones who are saying that they can book the room, but they can't show that contract to prove that they can actually do it.

382. 1:03:20

     You're spot on.

383. 1:03:20

     Okay, perfect. So we're good to go whenever we're ready. Thanks.

384. 1:03:23

     So we'll, we're hearing it only, so we're not gonna amendm- amend it and-

385. 1:03:28

     Okay

386. 1:03:28

     ... you know, we're gonna try to, we're gonna try to find a vehicle for this 'cause I think it's very good, a very good bill. Um, Senator Ginn.

387. 1:03:36

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Senator Halpern, can you help me? I, I, thinking about logistics, okay, if I'm booking a room in a h- a hotel in another state, but I'm here in Georgia, uh, or I'm at, in another state and I'm, or another part of the planet, then, uh, and I'm booking a room in Georgia, which one does it protect? Does it protect somebody from out of state booking a room in Georgia or somebody from Georgia booking a room somewhere else on the planet?

388. 1:04:02

     So this is, um, this would be a Georgia State law.

389. 1:04:05

     Mm-hmm.

390. 1:04:05

     So this is there to protect Georgians, um, booking a hotel in Georgia or anybody coming and booking a hotel here in the State of Georgia, um, because we d- we do not have authority to, uh, go after other states.

391. 1:04:17

     So it only protects for people r- that are renting hotels in Georgia.

392. 1:04:21

     It protects small businesses, the small business hoteliers throughout the State of Georgia, as well as the, uh, individuals that are coming and staying in our hot- in our hotels.

393. 1:04:29

     Thank you.

394. 1:04:31

     Chairman Summers.

395. 1:04:34

     Excellent. I like the bill. Wh- uh, why can't we include things like rental cars and all that kind of stuff, too? I mean, they're-

396. 1:04:40

     Airline.

397. 1:04:40

     It's the same animal, you know what I'm saying? I'm just asking.

398. 1:04:45

     I, I would say, uh, Mr. Chairman, this is the first step, um, in a, uh, long process in ensuring that, that there are all types of consumer protections out there here in the State of Georgia for our, our citizens.

399. 1:04:58

     Yeah, I mean, I, I don't disagree. I, I, I, I've heard stories on airlines. I haven't heard stories on rental cars, but I have heard stories on airlines, and it's the same story.

400. 1:05:08

     Same story.

401. 1:05:09

     You think it-

402. 1:05:09

     That's what I mean, airline-

403. 1:05:10

     ... is a legitimate place

404. 1:05:10

     ... rental cars, whatever.

405. 1:05:11

     That's right.

406. 1:05:11

     Mm-hmm.

407. 1:05:11

     The question is how do you police the internet? That's, that's gonna be our challenge, obviously. You know, but that's... Yes.

408. 1:05:17

     But, but at least it's a start so that we do have... Because if we have the rule in place, then we are better able to go after those bad actors. Right now, we have, um, we, we have laws in place around fraud, but they're, they're not, they're not as strong as they need to be to actually prevent people and keep them from trying this in our state for th- especially for the online-

409. 1:05:43

     Mm-hmm

410. 1:05:43

     ... booking travel space.

411. 1:05:46

     Thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

412. 1:05:48

     All right. Um, Senator McLaurin.

413. 1:05:52

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I wanted to respond to the senator. You know, one thing everybody should remember with the Fair Business Practices Act is that a violation can be remedied or enforced by state officials. And so it's not just a civil suit in terms of trying to find the website, sue 'em. Yeah, they could get the government power basically to shut it down if, if there's an issue. So, yeah, yeah.

414. 1:06:13

     We've got, uh, a few minutes here. I'm gonna ask, um, Hunter Loggins if he'd come up, and, uh, he's a victim of, uh, of this maybe cyber crime. I don't know what you would call this.

415. 1:06:29

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, not technically a victim because I just got a little frustrated. So there were red flags along the way that I should have picked up on, but I didn't. I, I don't claim to be the m- most discerning and perceptive individual, but if I almost got scammed, then it's happening across the board. Um, just a little brief story. I know we're coming up on time. I was looking to bo- book a hotel from one of the bou- boutique hotels around, uh, Atlanta.

416. 1:07:00

     I won't say any names, um, but I'm sure you're familiar with a, a lot of them. And you pull up on your phone, you search the name of the, the hotel, and, you know, there's legit looking websites that come up, and you click on 'em, and like Senator Halpern said, it looks exactly like the, the, a legit website. And you're scrolling through, you're trying to book rooms, and what happened was it, there was prices listed, but the, the navigation was a little wonky, so I called.

417. 1:07:33

     It seemed to be outsourced. That's fine. A lot of small businesses do that. I just got frustrated because they were trying to charge me $300 over what the listing price was, and not until I talked to Chris did he tell me that could've been a scam. So again, if it's happening to me, it's happening across the board. So I appreciate the committee looking at the issue and, uh, looking to address it.

418. 1:07:57

     Thank you. We appreciate your testimony. Anybody else have any other questions? All right, we appreciate you bringing this to us, Senator, and, uh, look forward to helping, uh, get this thing attached to something and, uh, getting it into law. With that, I think we're finished. Thank y'all for being here this morning. Had a couple good bills. Um, wanna remind y'all of the Economic Development and Tourism Committee dinner tomorrow night. Um, y'all have a little flyer in your, uh, packet there.

419. 1:08:30

     So y'all, y'all come see us tomorrow night. With that, we are adjourned.