Comité Special Rules de la Cámara de Representantes, 23 de marzo de 2026 (parte 1)

Transcripción

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

1. 0:07:46

   One, two, three, four, five.

2. 0:07:48

   Oh my word. Oh my word, John.

3. 0:07:50

   Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Special Rules.

4. 0:08:27

   We have five members. That's a quorum. Uh, six members, excuse me. Um, Chairman Bonner, if you'll come on up and tell us about your resolution.

5. 0:08:43

   And what LC number are you working off of, please, sir?

6. 0:08:50

   Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've got LC 630142.

7. 0:08:57

   Okay.

8. 0:08:59

   So, uh, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thanks for, um, allowing me the opportunity to present this resolution. What we're looking to do is to, uh, create a study committee that looks at a pretty important issue. And, uh, in your, in your folders, you should have a handout that looks like this. It's the, it's the FEMA, uh, reimbursement process.

9. 0:09:20

   Yes, sir. We do have that.

10. 0:09:21

    Okay. Good deal. So I put that in there as a reference. And, and what the study committee will do is to look at an issue, uh, similar to what, um, Florida has done to create a local government emergency revolving bridge loan program. Essentially, um, as y- as many of y'all know, it takes so long for that federal assistance to actually get down to our local municipalities and get in those local vendors. So what we're seeking to do is to form a study committee about how we can address that. And both Florida and North Carolina have come up with a, a good way to do that in creating this bridge loan program, where they, they offer no interest loans to those municipalities that have, uh, in an affected area so that they can get those vendors paid.

11. 0:10:04

    And oftentimes, as, as many of you know, those vendors are local vendors, right? Whether it's the folks that are cutting the trees, hauling them off, uh, doing grading work, things like that. But this would explore that, that possibility here in Georgia so that we could c- create that fund and get those folks paid that much faster.

12. 0:10:23

    Okay. And how many members? Uh, five members, is that right?

13. 0:10:26

    That's correct.

14. 0:10:27

    And appointed by the Speaker?

15. 0:10:29

    Correct.

16. 0:10:29

    Okay. All right. All right. Um, any questions from the committee, uh, concerning House Resolution 1650? Okay, what is ... Okay, I'm sorry. Number one, uh-

17. 0:10:43

    Mr. Chairman

18. 0:10:44

    ... Representative Taylor.

19. 0:10:45

    You may have covered this while I was reading. But, um, this committee, the study committee, will also identify how the local municipalities, individuals, how the money would be disseminated to them. Is the study committee gonna cover those areas? I mean, one thing, who's getting the loan? The municipalities are getting the loans.

20. 0:11:02

    That, that's correct.

21. 0:11:03

    Yes.

22. 0:11:04

    This would ... Yeah, the, it, it ... Because the municipalities are the ones that re- that ultimately receive the money from FEMA. So we're not-

23. 0:11:10

    And they redistribute it to the-

24. 0:11:11

    That, that's correct. So we're not looking to do direct payments to, to anybody. We're looking ... Or excuse me, direct payments to those vendors. This would all flow through the, the current process. It would just float that money initially before FEMA-

25. 0:11:24

    FEMA

26. 0:11:24

    ... paid, th- then reimburse the state.

27. 0:11:26

    Got it.

28. 0:11:26

    Correct.

29. 0:11:26

    Thank you.

30. 0:11:27

    Yes. Thank you.

31. 0:11:27

    Thank you for the bill.

32. 0:11:28

    Yeah, thank you for that clarification.

33. 0:11:30

    Okay. Any other questions? What's the will of the committee?

34. 0:11:35

    Do pass.

35. 0:11:36

    To have a do pass. Hear a second? Second. Okay. Any other discussion? Okay. All in favor of House Resolution 1650 say aye.

36. 0:11:47

    Aye.

37. 0:11:48

    All opposed? On the rules. Thank you very much.

38. 0:11:50

    Thank you.

39. 0:11:59

    Can you hear me?

40. 0:12:00

    Yes, sir.

41. 0:12:00

    Mr. Chairman, I have, uh, a motion, please.

42. 0:12:04

    Okay.

43. 0:12:05

    Uh, I move that only the members of this committee, uh, indicated on this, uh, uh, meeting notice, uh, be allowed to vote for the remainder of this session.

44. 0:12:22

    Okay. Um, all of leadership is always in, uh, our ex officio members, and they can come to any member- any meeting they wanna come to any time and vote on the bill.

45. 0:12:32

    Okay.

46. 0:12:33

    All right.

47. 0:12:33

    Just want that on the record.

48. 0:12:34

    Okay, it's on there.

49. 0:12:49

    Okay. Chairman Anderson, come on up.

50. 0:13:01

    Um, tell us what, uh, resolution number you're looking at and the LC number, please, sir.

51. 0:13:06

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm looking at House Resolution 1755.

52. 0:13:11

    Mm-hmm. Okay.

53. 0:13:11

    LC 620487.

54. 0:13:16

    Okay. Uh, tell us about what your resolution does.

55. 0:13:22

    Late last session, I dropped a bill that was, uh, House Bill 871 that would propose to allow local government, school systems, counties, cities, et cetera, to utilize alternative investment pools or investment opportunities. These are very low risk. Very narrowly tailored and very regulated alternative investments. Currently, local governments can, uh, there's a very short list of what they can utilize. They can utilize local banking institutions and the Georgia Fund One accounts that are available.

56. 0:13:56

    And we were looking at some options that would give them the same liquidity, but a slightly higher rate of return. We have a lot of, uh, communities, a lot of cities, counties, and school systems that are sitting on significant reserves. And the better return that they can get while maintaining safety and liquidity, then it's less tax dollars that the taxpayers will have to pay. So we looked at this as an alternative. 871, uh, did not get enough... Well, I mean, it, there was a little pushback, but we couldn't really sort out what the pushback was throughout the session.

57. 0:14:28

    So what I'm proposing is that we do a study committee, and that way it gives us an opportunity to evaluate this to see if it is a, an option that we need to pursue further.

58. 0:14:41

    All right. Uh, any questions from the committee?

59. 0:14:48

    Okay, Representative Campbell.

60. 0:14:50

    Saying the proper time, I make a motion to do pass.

61. 0:14:53

    What number is that?

62. 0:14:56

    It's six.

63. 0:14:56

    Six. Okay. Uh, any other questions before I entertain the, uh, motion do pass? You good? Okay. What number are you? Six? Okay. Go ahead.

64. 0:15:06

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. Is, is this being done anywhere in the state already, or is this currently against the law?

65. 0:15:12

    At, at this pro- at this point, it is not allowed-

66. 0:15:15

    Okay

67. 0:15:15

    ... in, in law. So we're looking at the option of allowing it. But as I say, the s- the purpose of the study committee is to make sure that we do it very carefully.

68. 0:15:23

    Okay. Thank you.

69. 0:15:24

    You're welcome.

70. 0:15:27

    Okay. Uh, any other questions? Okay. Uh, Representative Campbell, I'm ready for your motion.

71. 0:15:33

    I make a motion to do pass.

72. 0:15:34

    Okay. Do I hear a second?

73. 0:15:36

    Second.

74. 0:15:36

    Have a second. Any other discussion from the committee? Seeing none, uh, all in favor of House Resolution 1755LC620487, say, "Aye."

75. 0:15:50

    Aye.

76. 0:15:51

    All opposed. Okay, off to Rules. Thank you, sir.

77. 0:15:54

    Thanks, Mr.

78. 0:16:07

    Chair.

79. 0:16:07

    Okay, Chairman Powell, come on over.

80. 0:16:17

    And tell us what resolution you're looking at in LC.

81. 0:16:20

    Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Chairman. HR 1657.

82. 0:16:25

    Okay.

83. 0:16:26

    This is a resolution to create a House Study Committee on Medicaid Waiver Populations and Long-term Financial and Administrative Sustainability. There's a lot of movement that's going on in this market today. And, uh, what we've done in the committee that I work with a lot, we've been looking at, uh, nursing and APAs and all such of this type of st- APRs and all of this, and we just want a good look-see. Now, I understand what the, uh, the drill is, that there's not gonna be a lot of study committees.

84. 0:16:56

    But one of the things, if this goes to the Rules Committee, even if it doesn't pass forward, at least this give us some, uh, credibility to look at that in committee during the interim.

85. 0:17:08

    Okay. All right. Any questions from com- uh, committee members?

86. 0:17:16

    Seeing none, what is the will of the committee?

87. 0:17:21

    Mr. Chair, I move that, uh, do pass.

88. 0:17:25

    Okay. We have a motion to do pass. Do I hear a second?

89. 0:17:28

    Get to be some long days.

90. 0:17:29

    Yeah. Okay, we have a motion to do pass and a second. Any other discussion from the committee members on House Resolution 1657? Seeing none, all in favor say, "Aye."

91. 0:17:42

    Aye.

92. 0:17:42

    All opposed. Okay, on to Rules.

93. 0:17:44

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

94. 0:17:44

    Yes, sir.

95. 0:17:45

    Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate it very much.

96. 0:17:47

    Thank you, sir.

97. 0:17:52

    All right, Representative Townsend, you want to come on up?

98. 0:18:01

    Thank you.

99. 0:18:04

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's HB 1665 LC600338.

100. 0:18:10

     Okay. Tell us what your resolution does.

101. 0:18:13

     Uh, basically this is, uh, refers to the Bad Actors Bill I had before. This will study, hopefully look at a way, it's kind of a carrot and stick kind of thing, a way to cut the red tape for permits, but at the same time, try to keep bad actors out of Georgia coming in for certain projects who may have had egregiousness in the past with their, uh, projects. And so it'll also keep, uh, certain companies coming in. This gives the EPD director more flexibility by looking at their past history and deciding, um, if this is a, a, a good, a, with enough documentation, this is a good reason to deny the applicant, or if it's, if it's a clean past or whatever else, go ahead and process it and cut the red tape for it.

102. 0:18:58

     Um, this basically is a part of a constituent-based, uh, concerns from back home. We've had some issues environmentally with chemical plants, things like that, and so we're just trying to get a big picture look, work with EPD to kind of find out what's the best direction to go. It may be no, it may be no, no action at all. But if there's a way we can kind of meet and get the economic development, if you notice the chairs who signed it, Lynn Smith and Robert, and then, uh, Chairman Stephens, we can get economic development and environmentalists talking together at the same table and talk.

103. 0:19:30

     See if there is a better way of doing this. If not, that's great. If there is, let's work together, work with EPD to make it happen.

104. 0:19:36

     Okay.

105. 0:19:37

     And there's only one suggestion, uh, that I would suggest. Uh, looking at it and talking to others about this because of, uh, we're in the end of the two-year cycle. Uh, instead of having c- certain committees just doing that, I would make it a speaker's choice on who's on the committee instead of, uh- The way I've got it laid out between the two, two specific committees for it.

106. 0:19:58

     Okay. Sounds good. Uh, Representative Taylor.

107. 0:20:02

     Mr. Chairman, help me because isn't this taking place already? Isn't EPD revoking, denying, or amending permits and variances as currently?

108. 0:20:14

     Unfortunately, at, at times they are. It's a long process, and in this case, uh, you have had bad actors who have come into the state, uh, basically changed their LLC, and may be the same people doing it, but a different company name. This will kind of give pause to the EPD director to kind of help look at that a little more in depth. Uh, Florida has passed something similar to this.

109. 0:20:36

     Um, Mr. Chairman, if I may.

110. 0:20:38

     Yes.

111. 0:20:38

     So this study is going to propose additional methods to assist EPD's ability to enforce, revoke, or deny?

112. 0:20:48

     Correct. Out-of-state actors especially.

113. 0:20:51

     And-

114. 0:20:51

     The in-state actors we know about. I mean, all the violations, things like that. And it, it wouldn't pertain to, for example, let's say there's a contractor out of Texas applying for the permit in, in Atlanta, and they had a hurricane come through Houston and knock down his silk fencing. It wouldn't pertain to that. It'd be for egregious violations where maybe that group changed companies' names, they went bankrupt or just got out of the business 'cause they had some accidents, and just changed companies' names and started operating as usual again.

115. 0:21:19

     Well, this is personal because, you know, my county was the BioLab fire.

116. 0:21:22

     Exactly. That's another one.

117. 0:21:23

     And so I, I, I, I need to be extra clear on this.

118. 0:21:26

     Yeah.

119. 0:21:26

     So-

120. 0:21:27

     And this would, this would help in that situation.

121. 0:21:28

     So does this, does this ... Mr. Chairman, does this, uh, study, is it, does it also ... You don't know what's gonna come out of the study. I, I can admit that.

122. 0:21:34

     Not at all.

123. 0:21:36

     But is, I want it to aim at even having more staff to do that because that's, if you're saying that they, they're now falling short on all of these tasks, the, uh, denying, revoking, and amending permits and variances, the study committee is gonna give them ways to increase that, but how do you do that without manpower?

124. 0:21:59

     Well, that's exactly it. If this looks like it's needed, then that's something we go through the appropriations process about allocating a person for it if funding permits.

125. 0:22:07

     Okay.

126. 0:22:07

     So that all kind of ties in together. It's gonna be hard to do that without a study committee.

127. 0:22:10

     Okay. I just, I want to-

128. 0:22:11

     No, that's a good question. That's-

129. 0:22:12

     Yeah

130. 0:22:12

     ... you're accurate.

131. 0:22:13

     I definitely need to k- stay abreast of this 'cause, um, you know, we're still suffering from BioLab down there in Rockdale County. And so-

132. 0:22:19

     If, if you know anything about Brunswick, Georgia, we've had some issues down there.

133. 0:22:22

     I do know about the Brunswick issues, yes. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

134. 0:22:27

     Okay. Any other questions from the committee on House Resolution 1665? Okay, number 17.

135. 0:22:36

     Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. I ... So do you need a motion to make this a blue ribbon committee? Is that what you were asking?

136. 0:22:42

     Not f- no, not for this one. The speaker's just gonna ... Uh, it'd be the speaker's choice for, uh, choosing s- the committee members, uh, for this committee itself. Um-

137. 0:22:51

     I didn't know

138. 0:22:52

     ... it would be phrased instead of, instead, on page two, under two, um-

139. 0:22:58

     So do we need to make an amendment?

140. 0:22:59

     It, it'd be an amendment. Right now it says three comes from House Committee of Natural Resources, three from Economic Development. Due to retirements and things like that, it's really gonna be better as one of, uh, what they said earlier about just letting the, the committee members be chosen by the speaker's office basically.

141. 0:23:16

     So are you saying w- you wanna, you wanna amend, put an amendment to the bill?

142. 0:23:21

     Yeah. It, it'd just be an amendment to allow the s- uh, speaker to pick the, the members and select the chairman.

143. 0:23:26

     Okay. Tell me what line you're looking at on the, uh, resolution.

144. 0:23:29

     We're looking at page two. We're looking at, uh, lines 21, 22.

145. 0:23:41

     So basically take out that whole-

146. 0:23:42

     Really that entire section basically.

147. 0:23:45

     I-

148. 0:23:45

     Members and officers.

149. 0:23:46

     So take out the entire section all the way down to line 27, is that correct? No, excuse me. 21. Uh, twen- 29. 21 to 26.

150. 0:23:55

     Yeah, 21 through, uh, 26.

151. 0:23:58

     Okay. You would just adjust, edit-

152. 0:24:00

     And then the speaker would, the speaker would, uh, pick the committee.

153. 0:24:03

     The committee would be, yeah, the speaker would designate the members- Members ... of the committee and, and chairperson. Okay. Let's, let's move on first. The first thing we've got to do is get a motion to do pass on the resolution, and then it will be open for an amendment after that.

154. 0:24:20

     Motion to pass.

155. 0:24:20

     To pass. Okay. We got m-

156. 0:24:22

     Question.

157. 0:24:23

     Okay, we got one more question. Uh, Representative Griffin.

158. 0:24:28

     Out of my ignorance, what's the difference between a study committee and a blue ribbon committee? I have not had that.

159. 0:24:36

     I've never served on a blue ribbon study committee. Um-

160. 0:24:39

     I was just told this earlier, if I could answer, Mr. Chairman.

161. 0:24:42

     Yes, sir.

162. 0:24:42

     Okay.

163. 0:24:43

     I was told by the speaker office basically, uh, the speaker would, uh, appoint a committee for whatever project he wants or committee he wants without going through the legislative process.

164. 0:24:53

     Okay.

165. 0:24:54

     This would be going through the legislative process.

166. 0:24:56

     Yeah, I know.

167. 0:24:56

     He would still m- choose the members. But if speaker wants to do a blue ribbon committee this year, uh, he would do it either at the end of the session or right after session and say, "I'm appointing these folks for this reason."

168. 0:25:07

     I do know he had a s- blue ribbon study committee for insurance this past summer, so.

169. 0:25:11

     He did.

170. 0:25:12

     He did. Okay. All right. So, uh, do you want to, you wanna make a motion?

171. 0:25:18

     So moved.

172. 0:25:19

     Okay, I got a motion to pass. Do I hear a second?

173. 0:25:22

     Second.

174. 0:25:23

     Second. Okay. All right, now we're ready for the amendment. So you want to, to exclude from line 21 down to 26 and have that removed from the bill, is that correct?

175. 0:25:33

     Yes, sir.

176. 0:25:34

     All right.

177. 0:25:35

     And just make it speaker's choice for committee members.

178. 0:25:39

     Okay. Yeah.

179. 0:25:40

     That way he can, we can deal with retirements and everything else.

180. 0:25:42

     And chairperson.

181. 0:25:43

     And chairperson, correct.

182. 0:25:49

     Right.

183. 0:25:49

     Line 20 s- line 27, we can put a S at the end of members, and the speaker shall, shall designate a member or all members Of the committee And chairperson And chairperson of the committee.

184. 0:26:02

     Perfect.

185. 0:26:02

     Is that correct?

186. 0:26:03

     Yes, sir.

187. 0:26:04

     Okay.

188. 0:26:04

     Thank you.

189. 0:26:05

     All right. All right, so, uh, we have a motion to pass and a second. Now it's time for the amendment. Do I hear a motion on the amendment?

190. 0:26:13

     So moved.

191. 0:26:14

     Okay, so moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. All right.

192. 0:26:20

     We're gonna call this the Townsend amendment. Okay. All right, the Townsend amendment, um, okay, House Resolution 1665 as amended in the Townsend amendment. Um, all in favor say aye. Aye.

193. 0:26:38

     Aye.

194. 0:26:38

     All opposed. We gotta vote for the- We did ... amendment We did, did we? Yeah.

195. 0:26:42

     Yeah, we gotta vote on the amendment.

196. 0:26:44

     Okay, I thought we did. Okay. All right, let's vote on the amendment.

197. 0:26:49

     I thought we voted on it.

198. 0:26:50

     I thought they did, yeah.

199. 0:26:52

     Did we? I thought we just voted for it to pass.

200. 0:26:57

     We did. We, we make a motion to pass, but we didn't vote. Someone had to make a good pass.

201. 0:27:03

     And chair person.

202. 0:27:04

     Right.

203. 0:27:12

     We have to

204. 0:27:17

     make a motion to pass the amendment and then vote on the bill as amended.

205. 0:27:22

     Okay. Are you worried about it?

206. 0:27:41

     Okay. Let's let the council make a decision.

207. 0:28:04

     Mr. Chairman, we made a motion to do pass, but we didn't have vote.

208. 0:28:07

     Oh, that's right. I'm sorry. My bad.

209. 0:28:19

     Okay.

210. 0:28:19

     So we've corrected that. Did you finish it with-

211. 0:28:22

     Yeah, I, I did.

212. 0:28:23

     Sorry.

213. 0:28:34

     Okay, Representative Townsend, let me go over this one more time. We got a little change in it from, uh-

214. 0:28:39

     Okay

215. 0:28:39

     ... the council. Okay. Starting on line 19, "The committee shall be composed of seven members of the House of Representatives designated by the speaker." Is that correct? Okay.

216. 0:28:51

     Yes, sir.

217. 0:28:52

     Uh, on line 27, "The speaker shall designate all members and the chairperson of the committee."

218. 0:28:59

     Yes, sir.

219. 0:29:00

     Is that correct?

220. 0:29:00

     Perfect.

221. 0:29:01

     Is that, is that your c- uh, amendment as you wish to have it?

222. 0:29:04

     Yes, it is.

223. 0:29:04

     Mm-hmm. Okay. All right. Now we will go back and do it again. All right, do I hear a motion on the amendment?

224. 0:29:11

     So moved.

225. 0:29:12

     So moved. Okay. Do I hear a second? Got a second. All right. All in favor of the Townsend amendment, say aye. Aye.

226. 0:29:21

     Aye.

227. 0:29:21

     All opposed. Okay. All right. So now we vote on the bill e- entirely.

228. 0:29:28

     Yes, sir.

229. 0:29:28

     Okay? We got a mo- we got a move and a second. Okay? All in favor of House Resolution 1665, LC 60338 as amended, say aye. Aye.

230. 0:29:42

     Aye.

231. 0:29:42

     All opposed. Okay, on the roof.

232. 0:29:44

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee.

233. 0:29:46

     All right.

234. 0:29:50

     Representative Townsend moves the committee ask Speaker Gilchrist-

235. 0:29:57

     Very good.

236. 0:29:58

     Uh, Representative Franklin, come on up.

237. 0:30:06

     I will be with you in just a minute. Okay.

238. 0:30:09

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

239. 0:30:11

     All right, tell us your resolution number and the LC number, please, sir.

240. 0:30:15

     Okay. House Resolution 1792.

241. 0:30:21

     Okay.

242. 0:30:21

     The LC number is 620485.

243. 0:30:25

     Okay.

244. 0:30:26

     Mr. Chairman, members of committee, this, uh, resolution came about because, um, I think e- everybody's aware that we're having, uh, in Georgia, we have a housing affordability crisis, uh, currently going on. And what this resolution does is it, it asks, um, the, uh, Department of Community Affairs just to give a pause on their adoption of the 2024 energy conservation code that they're reviewing, and just to maintain what they're currently doing now. All the other states that are surrounding us are currently doing that as well, um, from my understanding. And the reason why it came out is that if this is implemented now, it's gonna cause housing, uh, costs to go up, um, exponentially, costing tens of thousands of dollars, and it's gonna more than likely, uh, from those that, that know, it's gonna affect the housing market in Georgia, so.

245. 0:31:09

     So this is the resolution. I'm happy to take any questions.

246. 0:31:12

     Okay. Uh, Representative McQueen, you have a question?

247. 0:31:16

     Yes. Yes, Mr. Chair. Um, uh, what exactly does the 2024 code do?

248. 0:31:22

     So it, um... I'm not sure, like, line by line what it does, but I think that from my understanding, there's more stricter energy codes that, um, all the housing when they're being built has to go through.

249. 0:31:33

     Okay.

250. 0:31:33

     And those stricter codes allows the cost of the building to go e- exponentially up. I mean, I'm talking, like, tens of thousands of dollars for it.

251. 0:31:40

     Mm.

252. 0:31:40

     And the study shows that if, if, um, a co- one inc- $1,000 increase in home prices, uh, prices out over 5,000 homes in the market. So it has a dramatic effect to it. So we're just asking for a pause-

253. 0:31:52

     Mm

254. 0:31:53

     ... right now, so that we can get the affordable housing settled and st- and, you know, uh, w- the costs won't go up.

255. 0:31:59

     Mm.

256. 0:32:00

     And then, uh, uh, they could look at it later if they want to, but-

257. 0:32:03

     Mr. Chairman, if I may?

258. 0:32:04

     Yes.

259. 0:32:04

     Is there, is there a, um, once... If, if they agree, right?

260. 0:32:08

     Mm-hmm.

261. 0:32:08

     If, if it's agreed, and then it comes back, does, do, are we in a situation where, um- ... costs could go, like, rise back up, shoot back up?

262. 0:32:17

     If they, if they implement it, yes.

263. 0:32:19

     Okay. And, and, sorry, just one second. Thank you. Um, and so the, the co- the energy code is to ensure... I know you can't go through it line by line, but just what, what are they trying to, um, make sure that the construction includes?

264. 0:32:35

     Well, I could actually let the expert kinda, uh, give it about it if you would like. Um, I have a-

265. 0:32:40

     Yes, please. Hi.

266. 0:32:43

     I got, um-

267. 0:32:44

     Come on up to the podium and you can-

268. 0:32:46

     Austin Hackney here

269. 0:32:46

     ... introduce yourself and-

270. 0:32:48

     With the Home Builders of Georgia. Yep

271. 0:32:50

     ... shed a little light on the situation.

272. 0:32:52

     Thank you, Representative. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, my name's Austin Hackney, here with the Home Builders Association of Georgia, uh, here to answer any questions.

273. 0:32:59

     Thank, thank you. I'm just trying to make sure that pausing the, whatever the code is, is not going to, um, adversely affect, like, the quality of the homes being built. Like, is-

274. 0:33:11

     Sure

275. 0:33:11

     ... like, so can you explain, like, what does the code enforcement do now?

276. 0:33:15

     Sure.

277. 0:33:15

     Thank you.

278. 0:33:16

     So the, we, we have nine mandatory construction codes in Georgia, and they're different books for different topics. You got a code for electrical, mechanical, plumbing, et cetera. The energy code is the only one of the nine that doesn't deal with safety factors in the house. It's just the insulation values in your walls. So, so it's a real cost-focused code because you're trying to spend some money to save some money on your energy bill. So right now we build new homes to the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code with Georgia amendments.

279. 0:33:47

     So DCA meets every year to amend the codes, uh, really at the request of any citizen that thinks they have a good idea for a code amendment. So they do this process regularly. The resolution itself just asks them to pause adoption o- of the new energy code mandates on housing, keep us where we are on the status quo for a little bit longer during this affordability crisis. But to your question, if they, if they take that urging under consideration, they don't adopt new mandates on new houses today, but five years from now they do, that's just gonna be another policy decision by the state's policymakers on what the right cost for those new mandates is, and what kind of return on your investment you're gonna get.

280. 0:34:29

     I would think you got a handout that shows you what the, we estimate the cost impacts are to, uh, new homes, and what that return on your investment is, which at this point is pretty minimal. And, you know, right now those 2015 energy codes is as robust as anything we've ever required in the state before. So my 80-year-old house down the road, um, doesn't have much insulation at all unless I put it in there. Any new house built today under the current codes is gonna be pretty robust on insulation values.

281. 0:35:00

     This new code adds more to that equation, which kinda gets us into diminishing returns on, on your investment.

282. 0:35:07

     I just wanna make sure that it's a safety issue.

283. 0:35:09

     This is the only code with no safety factors at all.

284. 0:35:12

     Thank you.

285. 0:35:12

     Thank you. I'm gonna have you to remain just a second. Uh, Representative Taylor?

286. 0:35:16

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, so who came up with these new 2025, um, amendments and, uh, increases? Was it the General Assembly or was it DCA? W- where, where did these new numbers come from?

287. 0:35:32

     So the international-

288. 0:35:33

     Requirements

289. 0:35:33

     ... codes are developed by ICC, the International Code Council, and it's a non-governmental entity. It's made up by stakeholders, contractors, building inspectors, and building officials that work for the cities and counties, all come together at this international code writing body. So it's a legislative process. There's a lot of give and take. Um, unfortunately, I think we've seen a, a kind of a change, a shift towards a lot of the manufacturers being involved in the code process. So in our estimation, a lot of these new insulation requirements are not great for home buyers.

290. 0:36:07

     They're great for insulation manufacturers.

291. 0:36:09

     Mm-hmm.

292. 0:36:10

     And so-

293. 0:36:10

     Oh, manufacturers

294. 0:36:11

     ... the cost impact that you see there is a collection of data from US Department of Energy and the Pacific Northwest Laboratories that does a lot of this work to, uh, find the cost impacts. And then the Home Innovation Research Lab is the group that came up with, uh, um, the payback period based on the, the cost savings or the energy savings that DOE published, and then combining that with what the contractors see how much it's gonna cost to implement these mandates.

295. 0:36:43

     And that's how they get to that payback period.

296. 0:36:44

     Mr. Chairman.

297. 0:36:45

     Yes.

298. 0:36:46

     Um, so help me understand. If the California can enact a building code freeze and Delaware can review the code and totally reject it due to its cost, um, I'm trying to understand what, Representative Franklin, does the s- the urging does. H- how it's not forcible, enforceable. So h- have you spoken to DCA to say, "Please don't implement these new requirements because da, da, da, da, da?" I mean, where are they?

299. 0:37:14

     I, I haven't, uh, personally spoken to them. But what we're doing is this, this resolution, by having this resolution and passing the House, is giving them a loud voice, our voice, in asking them to pause on this, not to do this. The Senate is doing another one just like this as well. Um, it just passed out of the committee, um, yesterday, I believe.

300. 0:37:31

     This morning.

301. 0:37:32

     This morning. Um, so with those two combined, um, it's a, it's a really loud, strong voice that the General Assembly is saying, you know, that caution is needed here and, uh, and just take a pause. So.

302. 0:37:42

     Is there a reason why we didn't reach out to DCA?

303. 0:37:45

     Um, I've got this, uh, this kind of fell in my lap about two or three days ago.

304. 0:37:48

     Oh.

305. 0:37:49

     Um, and the urgency of it is we gotta get this through before, um, this session's over with. Um, that's why I didn't call them personally myself. But I know there's a lot of people been working on this, like Austin, for example, and you heard his answer. He's embedded in this conversation, so.

306. 0:38:02

     Okay.

307. 0:38:02

     And, and I could potentially reassure you that w- um, at least the Home Builders Association's been talking to DCA-

308. 0:38:08

     Okay

309. 0:38:08

     ... since last summer about this issue. And, and the task force itself at DCA ha- has had three meetings to discuss. They'll probably have 10 more. Um, but this urging resolution I think would be heard by those task force members as they review this international code and decide what to do with it here in Georgia.

310. 0:38:24

     And Mr. Chairman, I wanted to know when does it, when would this be implemented, the new codes? When would it be, or supposedly would go into effect?

311. 0:38:33

     So, uh, thank you for the question. And typically, w- when they review starting in January, which they are with this code, it would, uh, this task force will review the code, make their determination. They'll communicate that to the State Codes Advisory Committee, which is a statutory group, uh, housed at DCA, and then they would make a recommendation to the DCA board about what to do with this new construction code. So if all three of those, uh, suggest, uh, or, or, or commit to pushing it forward, then the effective date would probably Jan- January 1 next year.

312. 0:39:04

     Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you very much.

313. 0:39:08

     Thank you, Austin, for the help.

314. 0:39:09

     Thank you.

315. 0:39:10

     Uh, Representative Rhodes.

316. 0:39:11

     Yeah, I was just gonna, uh, comment to, uh, Mr. Hackney. We had a, uh, huge builder event at Lake Oconee, and I got stopped numerous times on this. Is it not true that even on smaller houses, you're looking at a automatic 8 to $10,000 more, and on a larger house, you're 20 to $30,000 just on this new regulation, which is overkill in my opinion? We're at an all-time high of building per square foot, and this is just completely overkill, and all of us need to be very adamant reaching out to this task force to tell them we don't need this.

317. 0:39:43

     Is that not true, Mr. Hackney?

318. 0:39:45

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It, it, that is true. The, the cost impact, uh, dollars that you see in your handout are, uh, from a model home for 2,400 square feet. So a very average sized house. That certainly grows as the house gets bigger. And i- if I could, before I give the mic back-

319. 0:40:01

     Please do

320. 0:40:01

     ... I, I would just want to say that that State Codes Advisory Committee at DCA is, is made up of industry stakeholders, like the ICC code bodies, and it's a beacon of a, a government entity that works well. Uh, and, um, so typically you don't see us up here talking about the work that that code body does because it's, it's running, uh, full steam ahead on, on all cylinders. And it, and it uses, uh, industry stakeholders, uh, to get to the technical issues that they're working through. So, uh, I'd want to use my time at the mic to, to really let y'all know that they do a great job over there.

321. 0:40:36

     And, and over the past two years, they've done task forces for the other eight- ... mandatory construction codes, and that's been a very smooth process and collaborative, uh, with all sides of the issue. So this, this in particular, uh, we just wanna hope that the legislature would make their voice heard, as, as has been said. Thank you.

322. 0:40:54

     Thank you, Austin. Uh, thank you for your help. Okay, anything else you need to add, uh, Representative, uh, Franklin?

323. 0:41:02

     Um, no, Mr. Chairman, that's it.

324. 0:41:03

     Okay.

325. 0:41:03

     I just ask for your favorable consideration to it.

326. 0:41:05

     Okay. Uh, committee members, what's the will of the committee?

327. 0:41:09

     Pass.

328. 0:41:09

     Have a motion to pass. Hear a second?

329. 0:41:12

     Yes.

330. 0:41:12

     We have a second. Any, uh, discussion on, uh, House Resolution 1792, LC 620485? None? Okay, all in favor of House Resolution 1792 say aye.

331. 0:41:27

     Aye.

332. 0:41:27

     All opposed. Okay, on to rules. Thank you, sir.

333. 0:41:30

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

334. 0:41:32

     Okay.

335. 0:41:45

     Okay, Representative Clifton, come on up. I know you've got two, is that right?

336. 0:41:49

     Yes, sir.

337. 0:41:50

     All right.

338. 0:41:51

     Pass these, um, amendments out for Representative Smith, all right?

339. 0:41:56

     Okay. Yes, sir.

340. 0:41:57

     Will it be a quick sub?

341. 0:41:58

     No, I'm trying to do what I gotta do. I'm supposed to be in another place right now, so I'm gonna try to move very quickly if that's all right with y'all.

342. 0:42:06

     Which one are you, uh, uh, have a sub for? Which one of the resolutions?

343. 0:42:11

     This is for 1748.

344. 0:42:13

     Okay.

345. 0:42:13

     Do you have a map?

346. 0:42:14

     Yes, sir. If you wouldn't mind.

347. 0:42:30

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm gonna start with, um-

348. 0:42:32

     Thank you

349. 0:42:32

     ... 1748.

350. 0:42:33

     Oh, wait, wait just a minute. Let me get a copy.

351. 0:42:36

     Oh.

352. 0:42:37

     Okay.

353. 0:42:38

     I was just going to... I'm sorry.

354. 0:42:39

     That's okay. So, uh, this is a sub for House Resolution 1748?

355. 0:42:46

     Yes, sir.

356. 0:42:47

     And tell me the LC number that you're looking at.

357. 0:42:49

     560690S.

358. 0:42:52

     Okay. We got you. Okay, tell us what your resolution does.

359. 0:42:57

     So, um, when, uh, states want to build new projects, um, they are required to hire design firms, architects, engineers, all sorts of people, in order to create a full set of plans. This study committee is really, um, looking at how that is done, uh, but more importantly, what, um, criteria they're being held to, what, um, how much of a full scope design. Um, and so it's just looking at a lot of different, make sure we're doing things the best way and hopefully finding things that we can make better.

360. 0:43:29

     Okay.

361. 0:43:30

     Including the funding.

362. 0:43:31

     So this study ma- committee is just gonna be looking at the, uh, typically the same thing that we were looking at a minute ago, is builders and, uh, architects and, and how they do it, and if they have a license, and so on and so forth. Is that what you're saying?

363. 0:43:47

     Uh, it's more of to what, um, standard, um, the design firms, architects, engineers are being held to as far as, again, completing a full design. We've gotten into some interesting situations where some of the design is being shed over to the contractor. Um, this committee is to determine to what extent that actually is and with hopes of potentially legislation that would, um, make this a little more even.

364. 0:44:14

     So has that been an issue? We've, we've got problems with that now that we need to study that? Okay.

365. 0:44:19

     Yes, sir.

366. 0:44:19

     Is that happening in your district?

367. 0:44:21

     Yes, sir.

368. 0:44:21

     Okay. All right. Okay, uh, Representative Taylor.

369. 0:44:25

     Um, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, maybe what started me off is design teams. So we're talk- I, I know you say ensuring clear architectural and, and design documentation, but we are talking about structure, building structures. Does this study also Well, would it also look at the cost factors? 'Cause what you're saying is that the government has free will and, and all this freedom to hire whoever they want as a design team. And does it ...

370. 0:44:56

     So this study, will it also look at the cost factors, where there could be cost savings opposed to just this free willing going on?

371. 0:45:05

     Um, I, I think it, we can look at a lot of different things. The, um, a section of it is, um, looking at, you know, who we're working with and why. Um-

372. 0:45:14

     Yeah

373. 0:45:14

     ... another piece of it is if we're letting, if we're paying this firm to give a full design scope of services, are they actually providing that?

374. 0:45:23

     Gotcha

375. 0:45:23

     But through the process of their design, are they asking, um, somebody else to do the design for something that, um, that they've been paid to do?

376. 0:45:32

     That's the clarity.

377. 0:45:32

     Okay.

378. 0:45:32

     Okay, thank you.

379. 0:45:34

     Okay.

380. 0:45:34

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

381. 0:45:38

     Okay. Any other questions from the committee members? Um, representative, um, will you tell us where your, uh, changes was in your sub, what changed?

382. 0:45:49

     So originally, um, it was this bill started, um, from another bill. Um, and through looking through that, we've decided to make a little bit of an adjustment. Um, so it's not ... But originally it was more heavily weighted on the selection process. Um, while I do believe we will discuss that as part of the criteria of what you get from selecting design firms, um, we've adjusted this to be more of a, more of looking into, uh, whether we're getting a full complete scope of, um, design from the design team.

383. 0:46:26

     Okay. All right. Any other questions from the committee? Okay. What is the will of the committee on House Resolution 1748? On LC number 5606906. Okay. You have a motion to pass. You have a second. Okay. Any other discussion from the committee members? All in favor say aye.

384. 0:46:52

     Aye.

385. 0:46:52

     All opposed. Okay. On the rules of this one, you got one more, right?

386. 0:46:56

     Yes, sir. Uh, the next one is House Resolution 1749.

387. 0:47:01

     Is that the one you need?

388. 0:47:03

     LC number 630145. Um, this, um, study committee has a very special place to my heart. I have two young, three young kids at home. I, man, I almost forgot about them. A five-week old at home right now.

389. 0:47:17

     Ooh.

390. 0:47:17

     I've got two young kids that could be in the realm of what this is looking at, and another one that I'm sure at some point will as well. Um, online video games for kids have become a huge thing, big money aspect of it. Um, I want to look at the fact of how our kids are being protected. Um, kids on these games are able to talk to anybody and anywhere, and the disclosure of who people actually are, um, the willingness of the, um, platforms or the games to actually regulate and to hold people accountable.

391. 0:47:48

     This bill is to look and see, again, if our children are being protected while they're allowed to be, while they're playing video games. This has nothing to do with the content of the g- well, I shouldn't say that. This has very little to do with the content of the game itself. Um, there are certain games that I played growing up that I don't think, I won't let my kids play, but I'm not looking at regulating the content of video games specifically. Um, it's more of, again, the ability for, uh, during online gaming for a child to communicate with someone that might be representing themself to be a child and absolutely is not a child.

392. 0:48:24

     Okay, Representative Taylor.

393. 0:48:26

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

394. 0:48:27

     Thank you so much for bringing the bill.

395. 0:48:28

     I really appreciate it. Let me, um, I guess as a result of the study committee's findings, what do you expect or hope to take place next?

396. 0:48:38

     My hope is-

397. 0:48:39

     I mean, because it's Georgia, I mean, I, I don't know how we could limit or limit access or change the rules of the game for just our state. So what, if the, the results of this study tells you what and what do you do next?

398. 0:48:53

     So five states have already entered into suit against certain video game companies.

399. 0:48:58

     Okay. Okay.

400. 0:48:58

     Um, Georgia is currently under investigation for certain companies, um, but has not filed suit. My goal on this is to, from what I've learned ... I got, like I said, I'm, I'm not a politician. I'm just gonna say it, guys. What I've determined is there is absolute willful negligence-

401. 0:49:15

     Yeah

402. 0:49:15

     ... that is happening on the, on the side of the platforms. I believe through the study committee we will determine how wrong, is the word I will choose to use, um, these people really are and how much they're allowing it to happen. Um, if nothing comes from this other than spreading a huge loud word of education-

403. 0:49:33

     Okay

404. 0:49:33

     ... to our parents and our constituents to let them know what type of danger their kids could actually be, um, if that's all that happens, that's great. Uh, what I do believe is through the study committee w- what we will truly determine to be an, a very, very big issue. I do believe we can get creative in some legislation and hold these people accountable.

405. 0:49:50

     Well, thank you for bringing the bill.

406. 0:49:51

     Yes, ma'am.

407. 0:49:51

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

408. 0:49:53

     Okay, Representative Beckles.

409. 0:49:55

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I had authored a bill, Digital Age Gates. It was heard. It's sitting in rules right now. That's something that, um, I think is very important when it comes to thinking about the children and cybersecurity, just awareness. If you can also add to your study committee looking at security awareness and training age appropriate.

410. 0:50:26

     Okay. I'd have to look at that bill.

411. 0:50:28

     Mm-hmm.

412. 0:50:28

     We, we-

413. 0:50:29

     I, I'll get you, I'll send you the information.

414. 0:50:30

     Yeah, that'd be great. I'm, I'm, I'm all about protecting kids. That's really the big part of what this is.

415. 0:50:35

     Yeah.

416. 0:50:35

     Uh, there is a, a level of safety that parents believe their kids have as long as they're in a room and they're not in public. And, um-

417. 0:50:42

     Mm-hmm. But it's not safe

418. 0:50:42

     ... what they need to understand is it's-

419. 0:50:44

     It's not safe

420. 0:50:45

     ... not close.

421. 0:50:45

     No.

422. 0:50:45

     It is so far ... I would make an argument in today's day and age they might be safer in public.

423. 0:50:49

     Mm-hmm.

424. 0:50:49

     Because the anonymity people have and what they're willing to do with that is just-

425. 0:50:54

     I'll, I'll send you the bill.

426. 0:50:55

     That'd be great. Thank you.

427. 0:50:56

     You're welcome.

428. 0:50:57

     I like the resolution. Okay, uh, ladies and gentlemen, any discussion on House Resolution 1749 LC630145?

429. 0:51:09

     Make a motion to pass.

430. 0:51:11

     Yeah, we have a, we have a motion to pass and a second. Any other discussion from the committee? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

431. 0:51:18

     Aye.

432. 0:51:19

     All opposed. All right, on to rules. Thank you very much.

433. 0:51:24

     Thank you very much.

434. 0:51:25

     O- okay, Judge Gunter, come on up and you got a couple of them, I see.

435. 0:51:29

     On the Senate.

436. 0:51:30

     Yeah.

437. 0:51:30

     Which one would you like to do first?

438. 0:51:32

     It doesn't matter with me. You pick.

439. 0:51:35

     All right. Well, let's do the serious one first.

440. 0:51:37

     Okay.

441. 0:51:38

     Um, this is House Resolution 1703. Uh, this comes from a decision that the Supreme Court recently made about our, uh, justice system, uh, the, the criminal side. Um, we... There's been a lot of rules and stuff that came through the judicial branch of government, uh, when there's a conflict of interest, and for the, uh, public defenders to follow that, those rules. Anyway, it's created a huge mess over the last several years to which the court now recognizes and in, uh, Chief Justice's concurring opinion of, uh, which, which is mentioned in here.

442. 0:52:19

     I think it's, uh, it's one of these two cases. Anyway, uh, basically, he was describing some of the problems that have been created, uh, by the court itself. And so this is a study committee to go over, uh, where those rules came from and w- you know, what we're trying to do is clean it up so that we can move cases a lot quicker, not have so much conflict where we have, um, millions of dollars being spent on conflict counsel.

443. 0:52:50

     Uh, you know, and that, and that, that's a huge problem. I'm on Appropriations and I'm on the Judiciary C- Subcommittee, and that's some of the stuff we've been dealing with with the Public Defender's office and how much they're spending on conflict counsel. And, uh, in my opinion, it's never been necessary to have all of these rules that the court put in place years ago. And the chief was not the chief back then. He wasn't even on the court when all that started. Uh, but he now recognizes that it needs to be fixed, and that...

444. 0:53:21

     I'll stand for any questions that you have.

445. 0:53:23

     So this resolution's to do a study committee to really just try to clean up the code a little from cases that have been handed down-

446. 0:53:31

     Yes

447. 0:53:31

     ... over the years.

448. 0:53:32

     Instead of trying... Uh, this opinion didn't come out until just a week or two ago. And instead of trying to put something that important together all at once, uh, the idea was to put it in a study committee and give us some time to think about it before we act on it.

449. 0:53:49

     Okay. And so you're, uh, this would be composed of 12 members, is that correct?

450. 0:53:53

     Correct.

451. 0:53:54

     Okay. All right. All right. Any questions from the committee on Judge Gunter's House Resolution 1703 LC650088?

452. 0:54:06

     Yeah.

453. 0:54:07

     Seeing no questions, what is the will of the committee?

454. 0:54:10

     Move to pass.

455. 0:54:10

     Have a move to pass.

456. 0:54:12

     Second.

457. 0:54:12

     Have a second. Any other discussion? All in favor of House Res- Resolution 1703 say aye.

458. 0:54:22

     Aye.

459. 0:54:22

     All opposed. Okay, that one's on to rules.

460. 0:54:25

     All right. Thank you, committee. I appreciate that. Uh, now that we've taken care of the serious stuff.

461. 0:54:30

     Okay.

462. 0:54:31

     Uh, this is House Resolution 1707, and this is the creation of the Georgia Legislative Golf Caucus. Now, there... I w- I was just sitting in the chamber one day, and the, uh, the Sports Caucus came up, and I was thinking, "Well, what sports are in that?" And it, it didn't have golf. And, uh, so I started thinking, You know, I don't know that I've ever remember a time when we had a golf cau- caucus. And h- I am 66 years old. I've been playing golf since I was 16, so that's 50 years.

463. 0:55:04

     This, it's a game that you can live, or a lifetime to play. And, um, what I wanna do with this caucus is to grow the game of golf in Georgia. This, this isn't a caucus to join if you wanna play Augusta National. Of course, if that ever gets offered to us, I'm sure we'd take it, but-

464. 0:55:23

     E- everybody'd wanna be a member.

465. 0:55:25

     That's right. But, uh, really what I wanna do is, is... I mean, there's so many ways to grow the game, starting with the young. Uh, I'd like to see more of the, uh, LPGA come in and play golf tournaments here in Georgia. Um, I'd like to see some of the other, like Korn Ferry and some of the other tours-

466. 0:55:45

     Yes

467. 0:55:46

     ... um, come to Georgia. We got some great golf courses that would challenge anybody. And, uh, and also, the, the other thing is the, the state owns several golf courses, one of them being the one on Jekyll Island. And, uh, so w- I think, uh, doing an inventory of the golf courses that the state has, seeing what their needs are. Uh, it's just stuff like that. And, and then of course, once we get the caucus going, I would be relying on ideas from its members to see where we go from there.

468. 0:56:19

     Sounds good. Uh, Representative Taylor.

469. 0:56:23

     Just two quick questions. Um, one, it's gonna be unisex, the caucus?

470. 0:56:27

     Yeah. Oh, yeah. This isn't just... Uh, golf is for everybody.

471. 0:56:31

     Okay. I just wanna make sure that's clear-

472. 0:56:33

     Oh, yeah

473. 0:56:33

     ... that we, we are gonna have, um, that it's gonna be unisex. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

474. 0:56:41

     Okay. Representative Beckles?

475. 0:56:43

     I have the same question as Representative Taylor.

476. 0:56:45

     Okay.

477. 0:56:47

     It wasn't clear.

478. 0:56:48

     All right. Representative McQueen.

479. 0:56:50

     Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, as, as from someone who, uh, rode past John A., m, is it John A. White Golf Course in southwest Atlanta almost every day-

480. 0:57:01

     Uh-huh

481. 0:57:02

     Yep, Cascade, yep. Um, I like the fact that what you said at towards the end of looking to see what the needs are of the golf courses in Georgia.

482. 0:57:12

     Mm-hmm.

483. 0:57:12

     Um, because I know people usually don't, uh, think of Southwest Atlanta as a place where a golf course would be, but it's been there forever. And so, um, I like that. And it's for someone who's always, always wanted to learn the game, I would definitely join the caucus. So at the appropriate time, I make a motion to pass.

484. 0:57:29

     Okay, we got one more question. Okay. Uh, Representative Rhodes.

485. 0:57:34

     Yeah, I was just gonna say, uh, Mr. Chairman, you know, we just spent millions redoing the golf course down at Jekyll.

486. 0:57:38

     Oh, yeah.

487. 0:57:39

     Have a brand new track out there, and I was just gonna get you to maybe offer an amendment to send to Director Williams that we get automatic field trip.

488. 0:57:47

     Well, that would be the first meeting I think would be down there.

489. 0:57:50

     There you go. There you go. Okay. Uh, Representative McQueen, you have a, a motion?

490. 0:57:55

     Yes. I move to pass.

491. 0:57:57

     Okay. Do I hear a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. Any other discussion on House Resolution 1707 LC64-0099? Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

492. 0:58:12

     Aye.

493. 0:58:13

     All opposed? All right. On to Rules. Thank you.

494. 0:58:16

     Thank y'all very much. I appreciate it.

495. 0:58:17

     Don't you, uh-

496. 0:58:18

     We'll see what this turns out to be.

497. 0:58:20

     Okay. I wish some of our judiciary meetings would be this short, don't you?

498. 0:58:23

     Oh, yeah. Well, mine kind of flew by. That's how I got here, so.

499. 0:58:26

     Oh, okay. Thank you very much.

500. 0:58:28

     Okay. Thank you.

501. 0:58:32

     Okay. Is anybody else back here? Oh, there's Rob. Yep.

502. 0:58:35

     Yeah, I'm okay.

503. 0:58:36

     Okay. Chairman Leverett, come on around.

504. 0:58:45

     And tell us what resolution you're looking at and the LC number.

505. 0:58:49

     Actually, I do not have a copy with me, Mr. Chairman. I apologize.

506. 0:58:55

     Okay. You know it by heart, don't you?

507. 0:58:57

     I wish I did, but sadly I do not. It's resolution 1674, and the LC number is LC60-0345.

508. 0:59:06

     Okay.

509. 0:59:11

     Um, and this is, uh, just a resolution to create a study committee concerning state governance of EMS. I don't know if you all remember when my EMS bill failed miserably on the floor, 53 to something. I certainly have not forgotten it. Um, but I think part of the concern was we were going a little too fast given the sort of very complex, um, e- ecosphere that, that EMS touches. And so, um, we, uh, just are, are trying to do a study committee to get input from everybody that was impacted.

510. 0:59:42

     I'd hoped I could do it, uh, in the waning hours before we got into a sitting committee, but that was probably in retrospect unrealistic. So this is just to have a standards, uh, study committee to look at the issues. And again, it's not about everything to do with EMS. It's not about licensure. It's not about what, uh, professions are have to be licensed as part of the EMS program. It's not about the structure of the local programs. It's about the state, the role of the state, uh, governing entity. Um, my bill had proposed to create a, a board and to move, um, the state office of EMS under that board.

511. 1:00:17

     Um, that's one thing we could look at, but we'll take input on, on whatever folks are interested in. Um, but it is, I think, uh, there is a, I think a, a, a consensus in the EMS community that some changes do need to be made.

512. 1:00:31

     Okay. Thank you very much. Any questions from the committee members? Okay, seeing none. What, what exactly, I don't remember- Let me get your num- what number are you? 16. 16. Okay. Pull your mic. Just what is, what is the guts of it, so to speak? I mean, the main, the main thing the bill does.

513. 1:00:52

     The bill?

514. 1:00:53

     Yeah. The, well-

515. 1:00:54

     This bill just simply creates a study committee-

516. 1:00:56

     Oh, creates-

517. 1:00:57

     ... to look at state governance of, of EMS, and to examine different structures and what could be done.

518. 1:01:02

     Okay.

519. 1:01:06

     Okay. Any other questions? I don't see any on my lit up here. What is the will of the committee?

520. 1:01:13

     Do pass.

521. 1:01:14

     Have a motion to pass and a second. Any other discussion? All in favor of House Resolution 1674 LC60-0345 say aye.

522. 1:01:28

     Aye.

523. 1:01:29

     All opposed? All right, off to Rules. Thank you, sir.

524. 1:01:32

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

525. 1:01:32

     Yes, sir.

526. 1:01:33

     Thank you to the committee.

527. 1:01:42

     All right. There's only one more that I know. There's only one more, uh, resolution, and he is presenting another, I think, over in the Senate. So we're gonna be at ease for about 15 minutes to see if he shows up and if-

528. 1:01:58

     Can I make a motion?

529. 1:01:58

     Okay. What's your motion?

530. 1:01:59

     Motion to adjourn.

531. 1:02:00

     No, ma'am. I will not accept your motion. No-

532. 1:02:02

     It's a superseding forces of a-

533. 1:02:05

     This is a busy time of the year for all of us, and, uh, trying to be in three different places at one time, and I will not accept your motion to adjourn. Uh, we're gonna be at ease for 15 minutes, okay?

534. 1:02:16

     It's a superseding motion.

535. 1:02:18

     Thank you.

536. 1:02:20

     Mr. Chairman, I see two. Is it one or two? I see Bonar and Wade.

537. 1:02:25

     We got one-

538. 1:02:34

     Action.

539. 1:02:35

     I know I did not.

540. 1:02:37

     Even that one.

541. 1:02:38

     It's, it's enforcement. That's the most recent.

542. 1:02:41

     I know it is.

543. 1:02:44

     It's-

544. 1:02:44

     Okay. We need to chair a box. No, no. Go by the rules.

545. 1:05:08

     We just ask a question about like the one thing that-

546. 1:05:11

     Oh.

547. 1:05:11

     I think I saw.

548. 1:05:12

     Right.

549. 1:05:14

     Yeah.

550. 1:05:14

     Yep.

551. 1:06:59

     Yeah, I got it. No, no, no.

552. 1:07:03

     I

553. 1:07:06

     started with B.

554. 1:07:11

     Next to it. No, no. You didn't. That, that had nothing to do with you. I'm just trying to... The other day, the other day I was trying to, I'm just trying to get my support.

555. 1:07:32

     I know.

556. 1:07:32

     Yeah, yeah, yeah. Sure, that's, you want good reasons to do that.

557. 1:07:36

     I ain't never been on one of them.

558. 1:07:39

     Local foundation.

559. 1:07:40

     Yeah.

560. 1:07:40

     You've been on it twice now. It's just that final step, you know? Yeah. All right.

561. 1:07:49

     Tomorrow afternoon.

562. 1:07:50

     Yes, sir. Absolutely. Absolutely. We'll get it there. We'll get it there. All right. But, um-

563. 1:07:58

     I don't know. They do have rocks.

564. 1:07:59

     They do something.

565. 1:08:00

     But we don't, it's not research