---
title: Senate Finance Committee, January 28, 2026
collection: meetings
id: 2026-01-28/senate-finance
cite_as: Senate Finance Committee, January 28, 2026, video https://vimeo.com/1139347686 (machine transcript by Georgia Commons)
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance/text
source_url: https://vimeo.com/1139347686
date: 2026-01-28
status: machine transcript
corpus_version: meetings-2026-10-23-8c15ead0f18d
license: Machine transcript and summaries by Georgia Commons from the General Assembly's public video; the video stays on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel; see about.md
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/house-health.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/house-governmental-affairs.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/index.md
chamber: Senate
body: Senate Finance Committee
body_url: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/senate-finance.md
meeting_kind: committee
session: 2025-2026 Regular Session
start_time: 2026-01-28T15:00:00-05:00
location: MEZZ 1
duration_seconds: 4235.0
video_id: 1139347686
video_title: 01/28/2026 Senate Committee on Finance
agenda_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/agendas/senate/FinanceAgenda1.28.26.pdf
bills_discussed:
  - SB 410
  - SB 408
  - SB 382
summaries_model: gpt-6.1-sol
transcript_turns: 268
transcript_chars: 63304
parts:
  - https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance.md?start=0
  - https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance.md?start=59998
---

# Senate Finance Committee, January 28, 2026

Senate Finance Committee; January 28, 2026; 2025-2026 Regular Session.

Video, on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel: https://vimeo.com/1139347686. Agenda: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/agendas/senate/FinanceAgenda1.28.26.pdf.

> This is a machine transcript of the General Assembly's video, made by a speech-recognition model. It is not an official record and can mishear words, names, and numbers. Speakers are not identified. The video is the record: every timestamp links to the moment it plays.

## Summary written by Georgia Commons

Written by gpt-6.1-sol from the transcript below. It is not part of the record. Quote the transcript or the video, not the summary.

The committee reviewed a study of Georgia’s data center tax exemption and heard proposals to end or shorten it, [SB 410](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb410) and [SB 408](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb408). University of Georgia researchers estimated that the incentive accounted for 30% of the state’s data center activity and generated nine cents in additional state revenue per dollar of forgone tax revenue. Labor and industry witnesses opposed changing the exemption, while another witness questioned claims about local property tax benefits. Neither data center bill received a vote. The committee approved a substitute for [SB 382](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb382), which the sponsor said would make homeowner tax protections mandatory statewide and deliver sales-tax-funded property tax relief sooner. Three members voted against it; the number voting in favor was not stated.

## Bills discussed (3)

Each account was written by gpt-6.1-sol from the stretch of the transcript it names. The bill's number is said in that stretch, unless it was the only bill on a committee's agenda.

### SB 410. State Sales and Use Taxes; the data center equipment sales and use tax exemption; repeal

[SB 410](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb410) (2025-2026 Regular Session). From [0:39:36](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2376s), turns 117 to 197.

The sponsor said [SB 410](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb410) would end new data center sales tax exemption approvals while preserving exemptions approved before the bill became law through the existing 2032 sunset. The sponsor supported keeping data centers in Georgia but said proposed projects were dividing communities and many would come without incentives. The sponsor said protecting existing approvals avoided withdrawing benefits used to attract investment. The chair explained that the fiscal note estimated $77 million in savings in 2027 and $555 million in 2030, with savings limited by existing approvals and companies’ ability to use another computer-equipment exemption until it expires. A committee member questioned protecting business benefits when retiree cost-of-living benefits had previously been withdrawn. Witnesses for Atlanta North Georgia Building Trades and IBEW Local 613 opposed the bill, describing recurring construction, equipment replacement and permanent jobs. A Data Center Coalition witness warned that changing incentives would undermine predictability and send investment elsewhere, and disputed the study’s estimate of incentives’ influence. A former Atlanta development authority member questioned local tax benefits, saying three Fulton County facilities with $2 billion in market value generated about $2 million before abatements because of their appraisals. No vote was taken.

### SB 408. State Sales and Use Taxes; data center equipment sales and use tax exemption; advance the sunset date

[SB 408](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb408) (2025-2026 Regular Session). From [0:50:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3000s), turns 154 to 197.

Witnesses opposed [SB 408](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb408) alongside the proposal to end new exemption approvals. No separate sponsor presentation occurred. An Atlanta North Georgia Building Trades witness urged keeping the existing sunset, saying data centers accounted for 25 million of the organization’s 47 million work hours the previous year and provided recurring equipment-replacement work. An IBEW Local 613 witness said data center construction and operations accounted for 75% of members’ employment and supported long-term maintenance careers. A Data Center Coalition witness argued that predictable incentives were essential for large investments and that projects could move to competing states. The witness cited a recent Virginia report using a 90% estimate for investment attributable to incentives, challenging the Georgia researchers’ 30% estimate. A former Atlanta development authority member challenged claims of large local property tax benefits, citing low appraisals in Fulton County and a $5 million tax cap at the Stanton Springs Meta facility. No vote was taken.

### SB 382. Ad Valorem Taxation; make the state-wide base year homestead exemption mandatory for all political subdivisions

[SB 382](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb382) (2025-2026 Regular Session). From [0:58:32](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3512s), turns 198 to 264.

The sponsor presented a substitute for [SB 382](https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/sb382) to make the statewide homeowner exemption mandatory, limiting annual taxable home-value growth to inflation. The sponsor said about 20% of cities and 70% of school boards had opted out, leaving some homeowners facing double-digit tax increases. The substitute would also apply property-tax-relief sales tax collections through June 30 to that year’s property tax bills rather than delaying relief until the following year. In response to questions, the sponsor said local governments could still adjust tax rates, newly covered jurisdictions would use the current year as their base year, and existing participants would retain the previous year’s base. The sponsor said stronger local protections would remain, with whichever limit provided greater protection applying each year. A Georgia School Boards Association witness said districts faced different financial conditions, rising costs and a 20-mill tax-rate cap. The witness requested authority for school districts to levy a sales tax to offset property taxes. One member raised concerns about school funding needs; the witness confirmed rising costs. The committee approved the substitute with three opposed. The favorable vote count was not stated.

> The transcript runs 63,304 characters. A reader that cannot take it at once can read it in 2 parts: part 1 https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance.md?start=0; part 2 https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-01-28/senate-finance.md?start=59998.

## Transcript (268 turns)

[0:14:09](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=849s) We could cease all discussion at this time. And Senator Albers, our vice chair, would you, uh, lead us in the invocation for the first meeting of 2026 Finance Committee?

[0:14:18](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=858s) Please bow your heads. Lord, we, uh, thank you for this day. We thank you for the opportunity to come together and work on this important legislation. Lord, just ask you bless us, uh, and provide us your clarity and your wisdom and discernment. For it's Jesus' name we pray, amen.

[0:14:33](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=873s) So we've, we've lost a, a few members to run either for, uh, I think one for governor, one for, uh, lieutenant governor, one for, uh, that left to be the US treasurer. But, uh, so we've had a little bit of turnover on this committee. But we have a great group here. Um, for those of you that, I think most everybody knows, but Diego, my assistant here, uh, administrative assistant, I believe this is his sixth year with me. So, you know, I'll tell you other guys, if you take care of your people, you might keep, keep them around.

[0:15:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=904s) We also have our, our intern from Georgia State, uh, Donasha Hunter. Where's the ... Raise your hand, Donasha. So she's helping us out this year as well. We have a new legislative counsel, Ollie Rod, over here, if you'd raise your hand, that, that, that writes the bills for us. And then our, uh, research analyst, Josh Grigsby. Um, so those are the, the people here this year. So we're gonna call this meeting to order.

[0:15:36](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=936s) And, uh, the first thing I was gonna do, w- I had ordered a study back in April, I believe it was. Uh, we order about six studies each. The chairman of House weighs the means to me. And this is one of my ordered that was done by the, uh, the Department of Audits. I don't get involved in who does it. They handle it. I don't wanna know. And they picked the, uh, Carl Vinson Institute of Government, I believe, to do this one. And, um, we will try later on to, to go over all of those, uh, that we did. And we may possibly do it jointly with the House.

[0:16:08](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=968s) We did it last year, but we haven't been able to arrange it yet. But they're here just to talk specifically about, um, this particular study and what they did before we, before we get started on it. And so, uh, Matt Taylor from our audit department, you wanna speak for just a minute and maybe introduce who you have here? Y'all can come up as well if you'd like to.

[0:16:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=998s) Okay. Um, well, uh, yeah, I'm, I'm Matt Taylor with the Department of Audits. Um, I, uh, wanna thank the committee and the member- the chair and the members for having us here today to discuss this report. Uh, I have with me two researchers from UGA's Carl Vinson Institute of Government, um, Dr. Tommy Shepherd and Dr. Greg Wilson. Um, I'm going ... Do we have the presentation? Uh, sorry about that. Uh, there we go. I guess click through this.

[0:17:08](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1028s) There's no click, no clicker. All right. Um, so I, I'm gonna move through the introductory slides very quickly. Uh, we normally spend a little more time on this. I, I, I know everyone wants to hear from them. Uh, so this, this process is part of a, uh, a Senate Bill 6 passed in 2021. It was updated in 2024. Uh, we have contractors do all these projects as required by the law. The, the bills, uh, the reports include net change in economic activity, state revenue, state expenditures, uh, public benefit.

[0:17:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1065s) The changes, uh, made sure they included things like comparisons to other states, uh, whether or not the purpose was met. Um, a- as the chairman said, we received 12 requests, uh, for the 2025. That's our, our list. Today we're only going to talk about the high-tech data center equipment exemption. Um, I've covered this in, in prior years that what you can expect to see in these types of reports. The researchers typically use IMPLAN to determine the economic activity.

[0:18:16](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1096s) Uh, they do include kind of the ripple effect, the, you know, the, the companies that receive the benefit directly, their suppliers, and any activity coming from the employees of, uh, any of those companies. Um, an important point in these reports is the but for analysis that the researchers come up with that is trying to determine within an industry what portion of, of the activity is a result of the incentive. So you can have a lot of activity going on, for instance, grocery store food sales. There's a lot of that.

[0:18:47](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1127s) However, we ... And, and we have an exemption for grocery store food sales. All sales are not because of that exemption. Exemption goes away, people are still gonna buy food. So that's a pretty good, y- you know, easy to understand example. Um, I probably should mention here, some of you may have noticed a couple of weeks ago, we, we released a revised summary of this report. That was a Department of Audits product. The report did not change. UGA's report has not changed since it was released in December. They did not need to change. It was correct. When I summarized, when the department summarized that report, some of those economic activity numbers, we used total numbers before the but for.

[0:19:27](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1167s) So those were real numbers related to the industry, but we had not applied the 30% but for. So the numbers you see in the summary today are the numbers attributable to the incentive. Um, I can speak to that more if I need to. Um, and then there's always, uh, some limitations to consider with these reports. That this first one here is that not all of the incentives that, that we're asked to review have an economic development, uh, purpose. This one does, so that's, you know, that's not, not terribly relevant to today's discussion.

[0:20:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1200s) Um, and then also the, the, the changes in these numbers are for a set period in time. And so these are kind of short-term reviews, um, and they can't measure things like the state's reputation for business and, and, and things like that

[0:20:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1214s) And that is it for me. I will turn it over to the researchers, um, who can talk in more in depth about the, their report.

[0:20:22](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1222s) Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, committee members, and thank you so kindly for the opportunity to come before Senate and Finance this afternoon and share some of our work with you. My name's Tommy Shepherd. I'm an economist in the Institute of Government at UGA and the lead researcher on the study that we're talking about this afternoon. Uh, first of all, the, the incentive that we're looking at is the one we all commonly know as sixty-eight point one sales tax exemption for the construction of new data centers. And it exempts a portion of construction materials used in the construction of new data centers, and by a portion, it doesn't cover or exempt all of the construction materials, but essentially the things that make the shell able to function as a data center.

[0:21:07](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1267s) So heavy-duty electrical systems, cooling systems, the raised floors that hold the racks, and all kinds of techy things that I'm not really qualified to speak to, but it is not one hundred percent of those materials. Also, the servers, racks, routers, all of the sort of equipment that goes into the data centers, and the software as well. In our research, we found that... Thank you, Matt. Uh, roughly forty-two percent of states across the US have some form of an exemption for data centers.

[0:21:43](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1303s) Generally, they revolve around, uh, a minimum investment, around some minimum employment objectives, and then beyond that, the devil's kind of in the details. Some allow exemptions for refurbishment of existing data centers, some exempt electricity, some have other unusual features built in, but they have basically the same goal in mind of attracting data center construction to a particular state. Thanks, Greg.

[0:22:15](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1335s) Uh, we estimated an econometric model of but for that Matt Taylor alluded to. But for, essentially, as he said, tries to answer the question, how much of this activity would have happened if there had been no incentive? We estimated an econometric model, so basically a, a series of statistical equations wrapped in some economic theory. We did this based on a comprehensive dataset that we were able to obtain from a third-party consultant that has detailed information on all data centers across the country, both operational, under construction, and announced.

[0:22:57](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1377s) And it gives us that both by geography and across time, so we were able to estimate, uh, a really significant econometric model. The results of that tell us that thirty percent of the data center activity that we realized in the state could be attributed to the presence of the sales tax incentive, which leaves the other seventy percent that would have happened anyway. Uh.

[0:23:29](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1409s) Okay, if we move to the, the next slide, and we look at net foregone revenue. So we see, uh, four hundred and thirty-two point six million, and I'll note that that is for twenty twenty-five, and our estimates for other years are included in the report. Out of that, uh, there were an estimated ten thousand one hundred and forty-six jobs created, and I'll note that that is adjusted by the but for number, so that is thirty percent of the, the total jobs related to that in the economy.

[0:24:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1444s) That works out, if you do the math, to a cost per job of forty-two thousand six hundred and thirty-eight dollars.

[0:24:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1454s) Okay. Also, if we take that, that same figure for twenty twenty-five, and we look at the value that was added to the economy because of the operation, construction and operation of those data centers, we come up with one point two five billion dollars. Now, e- I'll note that economic impacts come from basically three sources. Direct economic impacts would be those that are generated by the data center itself, either the construction or the operation.

[0:24:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1488s) We, uh, look at what we call indirect impacts, which you can think of as sort of an upstream impact as those data centers hire workers, they purchase materials in the local economy, things that, that flow into making that data center happen. And then the third category is what we would term induced impacts, and those are the impacts as those employees, either construction workers or permanent data center employees, spend their money on things in the economy, and they, by, by consequence, create jobs and generate tax revenue.

[0:25:25](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1525s) So that works out to, uh, a figure of two dollars and eighty-nine cents per dollar of tax, of foregone tax revenue or tax incentive given up. We could interpret that as an economic return on investment for that incentive. So you could think about simple example, if I invest a dollar today and I get a dollar and ten cents back at the end of the year, I have a ten percent return. In this case, if I invested a dollar and my investment was foregone tax revenue with the objective of getting economic impact, then my return would be two dollars and eighty-nine cen- would be a dollar and eighty-nine cents on top of the dollar I invested.

[0:26:10](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1570s) Okay, and then also because of that spending on data centers, as we noted, not everything is tax-exempt. There's additional tax revenue generated within the economy because of that spending, so some construction materials are taxed Other purchases are taxed. Employees spend their earnings in the economy, and they pay sales tax, they pay income tax. So that's an additional estimated $41.5 million of tax revenue generated by that spending, which works out to, uh, nine cents in additional tax revenue for each dollar of foregone tax revenue.

[0:26:57](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1617s) And I think if we were to, if we were to think about a takeaway, what are some summary points? Uh, one is that the BUT FOR estimate is highly dependent on and has really evolved with the growth of the industry in Georgia. I'd note that we did an initial study of data centers in 2022. At that time, no data centers had taken advantage of the incentive in Georgia. It had just been introduced in 2018. A couple had applied, but there was not data that we could release.

[0:27:29](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1649s) Since that time, we've seen significant growth of data centers in Georgia, particularly large scale or what the industry may term hyperscale data centers. Based on our estimates, the majority of that economic impact is tied to the construction of the data centers themselves. Um, and we also took a look at local, uh, property tax income from data centers and found that to be a rather significant, uh, income for local governments.

[0:28:06](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1686s) And mercifully, that's kind of what I have for you. I'll be happy to try to fill any, any questions that you might have.

[0:28:16](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1696s) All right. Thank you for the report and, um, and the thorough work on this. Um, one quick question before the, before theirs is I saw a University of Michigan study, I know y'all said 70%, and it gave a range, I wanna think it was, like, 75 to 98%. I don't know. I, I know it's, it's n- it's not a perfect science, but-

[0:28:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1718s) Mr. Chairman, it's not a perfect science. When we did the initial study in 2022, there were really no-- there were no comprehensive data sets to look at.

[0:28:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1728s) Mm-hmm.

[0:28:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1728s) We essentially looked at literature that had been, been done by others around the country. One of those was Virginia and their, their counterpart agency to, to Matt Taylor's. They had put out a number at the time that was around 90%. That was probably a good number at that time for a newly-- a, a new incentive.

[0:29:12](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1752s) Mm-hmm.

[0:29:13](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1753s) Over time, the, the industry has grown tremendously, and I think, um, BUT FOR is driven by that.

[0:29:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1759s) Right. And you look at the numbers of foregone state revenue, 2018 it was, uh, 18 million. In '19, 27 million. '20, 10 million, and then this last year it jumped up to 474 million. And for the year we're in, in right now that ends, uh, this June, I, I see we've got a number of 625 million going on out to 850 million in '29 and '30. And again, that is just the four cents of the state revenue.

[0:29:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1790s) Is that correct?

[0:29:51](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1791s) That, that is correct.

[0:29:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1792s) And so I think they-

[0:29:53](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1793s) That's the amount we show you

[0:29:53](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1793s) ... there's about three, on average, 3.49 cents for the locals. So you're talking about, you know, close to doubling that number when you put in all the, the local revenue that, that is given away. So it's, it's well over a billion dollars, uh, that, that is being foregone that the study says most of it would come without. But anyway, I'll, I'll turn it over to my vice chair, uh, chair, uh, Vice Chair Albers here.

[0:30:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1817s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for this very thorough analysis. Could you go back a few slides to where you were pointing out the job creation?

[0:30:27](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1827s) Maybe this one.

[0:30:28](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1828s) Uh, no. The, the... Yeah, okay, that's the right one.

[0:30:32](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1832s) Mm-hmm.

[0:30:32](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1832s) So I'm looking at the summary sheet that we have versus what you have up there, and I'm looking at jobs of 8,505 of construction and 1,641 in operations, and it's differing from your numbers. I'm trying to figure out what the difference of the summary sheet is versus your data.

[0:30:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1852s) Matt?

[0:30:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1852s) That wouldn't be that old summary sheet we might have... I don't know if we l- when you had to correct the summary sheet later on.

[0:30:58](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1858s) Oh, I think the summary sheet's something else. I, I would have to add those two numbers together. I mean, I, I assume you added the two numbers together and they are not 10,146.

[0:31:07](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1867s) Uh-

[0:31:07](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1867s) I did not catch the two that you said. 8,505?

[0:31:11](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1871s) Yeah, I'm just looking at, I mean, perhaps these numbers going down here, we're just summarizing differently. That's why I'm, I'm, I'm a little confused, so.

[0:31:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1877s) It's just that bottom row, that 10,146.

[0:31:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1879s) Okay.

[0:31:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1879s) And that should be construction and operations.

[0:31:21](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1881s) All right. So is it fair to say the construction jobs are obviously temporary for the time we're building that data center, will begin and have an ending in most, most likely?

[0:31:30](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1890s) Well, yeah. I think for an individual data center, maybe. But in our discussions with data center construct- construction companies and operators, uh, our takeaway is that once there's a skilled workforce in place and supply chains for raw materials in place, it's much more advantageous to continue to build where you are in that geographic area than to go and look for new territory. So I think as long as there is a consistent flow of construction, those workers probably just move from one data center to another.

[0:32:05](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1925s) Maybe this year you're in Douglasville, and next year you're in Fulton County somewhere, right? But I think those construction jobs persist as long as there's construction of new data centers.

[0:32:21](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1941s) Yeah. I say that I'm using this as a, as a balance of our film tax credit because when somebody else offered a bigger handout, they, they left town pretty quickly, so we can't always guarantee those jobs are there. But for $42,646 per job- Knowing that's not always a permanent job out of what appears to be 80-plus percent of that number, that's, that's pretty significant of what can't be gu- so much guaranteed as a real job going forward, where an operational job is probably more consistently gonna stay with the data centers for folks that are working there on a regular basis.

[0:32:54](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1974s) Is that accurate?

[0:32:56](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1976s) I think I'd have to fall back to, to the, the notion that as long as construction is ongoing, those construction jobs are, are stable.

[0:33:05](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1985s) But we know construction can't ever go on. I mean, you can't continue to build till you get to heaven. Eventually, we're gonna, we're gonna cap out at one point, so-

[0:33:12](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1992s) We might be somewhere else.

[0:33:12](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1992s) All right, let's, let's-

[0:33:13](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1993s) We can't fill the state boarded-

[0:33:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1994s) Keep order

[0:33:15](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=1995s) ... of data centers, but we didn't, we didn't make predictions around how long that construction trend is.

[0:33:21](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2001s) This is, and this is a great analysis. I appreciate it. Last question before I turn it back, Mr. Chairman, if I could. Uh, as it relates to the return on investment for the state, the way that I have looked at this, this is a great return on investment for our local communities because of the tax base they have. So if you're a city, a county, or a school district, so long as you didn't exempt everything, you're actually doing very well, helps offset property taxes. The problem is, as state revenue, we're basically losing our shirt on the return on investment for a dollar figure based on the numbers that I see. Is that accurate?

[0:33:53](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2033s) I think we could say there's a trade-off between the two.

[0:33:57](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2037s) Yeah, nine, nine cents on the dollar, I think I saw-

[0:33:59](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2039s) Yeah

[0:33:59](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2039s) ... for the state return. S- um, Senator Still, go ahead.

[0:34:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2044s) Thank you, Chairman. Um, thank you for the presentation. Did I understand correctly when you were, um, answering one of Chairman Hufstetler's questions that you had said that the initial estimate was 90% of the data centers would not come?

[0:34:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2057s) When we did-

[0:34:18](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2058s) Years ago, yeah

[0:34:18](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2058s) ... the initial study-

[0:34:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2059s) Yeah

[0:34:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2059s) ... in 2022, we used 90% because we had no Georgia data to work with at that time. So we were looking at other published studies, both around data centers and around sort of the, the whole area of but-for research, and we used 90% at that time.

[0:34:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2078s) And then now it's 30%, so that's-

[0:34:41](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2081s) Now we're using 30%. The 30% is based on a far more robust estimate using real-world data that was not available three or four years ago.

[0:34:51](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2091s) Okay. Thank you.

[0:34:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2092s) Yeah, probably on that study, did it too soon before we had enough data to, to say, but I was interested in what it was doing. Uh, Senator Cowsert, I believe you were next.

[0:35:01](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2101s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, you, you might be answering this just in a different way, but I've always wondered why all these data centers are clustered in Northern Virginia and Georgia. I keep reading that we're the hotspot. Is there a reason for that other than tax incentives, a geographic reason? 'Cause I don't know where... I mean, if all this stuff hits the, the web or the grid or whatever, it doesn't matter to us if it's in Texas or Oklahoma or, you know, Montana, does it, where the actual data center is?

[0:35:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2135s) We did not do estimates around what attracts them to various parts of the country.

[0:35:44](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2144s) Thank you.

[0:35:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2145s) So we-

[0:35:46](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2146s) All right

[0:35:46](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2146s) ... we didn't do a, a competitive analysis among states is the best way to characterize that.

[0:35:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2152s) I'm just wondering if you have any estimates that's drawing them here or whether it's close to the, you know, the backbone of the fiber optic, uh, connections or, or any other specific reason other than just cheap land and big tax incentives.

[0:36:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2164s) In incidental conversations with people in the industry as a course of doing this study, proximity to infrastructure was a really important reason that they typically cited.

[0:36:20](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2180s) All right, and Senator Orrock?

[0:36:22](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2182s) Well, I didn't have a... No.

[0:36:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2184s) Oh, I, uh, the button looked like it was up okay. Oh, I'm sorry. Senator Tillery.

[0:36:28](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2188s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your report. I have a question. As you know, there's a, a lot of credits, and your report is just on 68.1, so 48, 83, 68.1?

[0:36:39](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2199s) That's correct.

[0:36:41](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2201s) You also have that credit that's in 68. How does that interplay with this one? And if we were to deal with the credit in 68.1, are those same companies able to just move into 68? Do, can, do you know anything about the interplay, or is that a fair question to ask you guys?

[0:36:58](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2218s) We were asked in... Three years ago, we looked at both, but we looked, we were asked to look at them independently. We did not look at the interplay between the two. 68 is for large scale computer equipment purchases by anyone is my understanding of that. So it could be by data centers or anyone else who uses that scale of computer equipment. And also, our understanding in doing those studies was if there, I suppose, if there were no 68, 168 would apply to large scale equipment, computer equipment purchases.

[0:37:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2258s) I, I think when we get to the fiscal notes, maybe Matt Taylor can speak to that because that is considered in the, in the fiscal notes. We didn't put that in this particular study, but I think we'll see that at that point when you-

[0:37:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2270s) That, uh, that's what I was gonna say. We, we, the, the fiscal note that was released a couple of days ago did, did point to that fact, um, that-

[0:37:56](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2276s) All right.

[0:37:57](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2277s) They just seem very related

[0:37:58](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2278s) ... they do, they do a lot until that-

[0:37:59](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2279s) Very related, you're right

[0:38:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2280s) ... until that expires, a lot do move to that.

[0:38:02](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2282s) Okay.

[0:38:03](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2283s) Okay. Um, I don't see any more questions, so, um, I know you guys have other places to go to. I'm hoping Matt doesn't, but, uh-

[0:38:12](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2292s) Should've brought that, those fiscal notes.

[0:38:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2294s) Yeah. I've got, we've got them.

[0:38:16](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2296s) I was gonna say, that would be very-

[0:38:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2297s) We've delivered them. I just do not have them.

[0:38:18](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2298s) All, all the committee members have a copy of it, and we can get you a copy of it as well.

[0:38:23](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2303s) Okay.

[0:38:23](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2303s) If, if that's gonna take away your excuse for leaving, but, uh Um, all right. Well, we appreciate you being here. Uh, thanks for the report, and we appreciate the work you do.

[0:38:34](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2314s) Thanks for having us.

[0:38:34](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2314s) Thank you.

[0:38:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2318s) So we'll shift now to our Rural Chairman, Senator Brass, if you wanna present. You can do it up front there, wherever you wanna do.

[0:39:08](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2348s) Why you think everybody's here?

[0:39:25](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2365s) All right. Um, Chairman Brass, you wanna give us your, uh... I guess you've got the bill there. You wanna give us your LC number?

[0:39:33](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2373s) Sure. I've got, working off of Senate Bill 410, LC590263.

[0:39:39](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2379s) It's actually gonna be the last one in the folder. They, they listed them in numerical order, but-

[0:39:46](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2386s) But number one in heart

[0:39:46](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2386s) ... not the way we're actually doing them.

[0:39:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2390s) All right, I think we've, uh, all in agreement on that. The floor is yours.

[0:39:55](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2395s) All right. Uh, bill is simple. It's a, it, it takes a bill that the House and Senate passed a couple years ago, that the governor vetoed, and, um, with some little tweaks that essentially does do away with the, uh, the certificate of exemption from sales and use tax to the high technology data centers. And, um, but it does grandfather in any data center that has been approved by the time of this, or the certificate of exemption has been approved by the time this bill becomes law.

[0:40:36](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2436s) Uh, pretty simple. Uh, I did wanna say a few things. So, you know, we've got data centers kinda popping up or potential data center projects popping up all over the state. And, you know, I've got a very large one potentially in, in my district and, um, the intent is, is sitting really, I, I'm, I'm not trying to affect that in any way. Uh, and I'm, I'm in no way against data centers. We've gotta figure out, we need them.

[0:41:07](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2467s) Our s- our country needs them, our state needs them. Um, we've gotta figure out where they're gonna go. Um, you know, I know that President Trump came out with some directives on, uh, looking at brownfields, looking at, uh, at federal lands to potentially put data centers. Uh, what, what we don't want as a nation and as a state, and me as a citizen, I don't want my data being stored in a foreign country.

[0:41:39](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2499s) Um, so I do want it here, but again, what we're seeing is where they are trying to go in some cases is really tearing our communities apart. And I think we're seeing that a lot. Uh, a lot of it is this, this, the specula- speculative, uh, groups that are coming in and they're tying up land, they're putting in options and they're holding it there, uh, until potentially could get rezoning, and I think that's causing a, a real hysteria.

[0:42:12](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2532s) Um, to, uh, I, I wanna address, there were a couple comments, you know. I'll say this, when the, when the big project, and I'll call it Project Sail, uh, the proposed Project Sail in Coweta County, it caused a real stir in our community, and some for, some against, many just don't know. Um, you know, I think with data centers there's a, there's a large part of it we just don't understand, and it's human nature when we don't understand something, we fear it.

[0:42:46](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2566s) All right. Well, if we're gonna fear something, I, I don't necessarily think that we should be incentivizing it. Um, but at the same time, I, I recognize the fact that we do need them. But I, when all that came about, I decided to use one of my AI apps, which requires a data center-

[0:43:07](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2587s) Now it's

[0:43:07](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2587s) ... and I put in, "Why are data centers wanting to come to Georgia?" And what's interesting, what it put out was, number one, I think the number one thing was the overall business climate in Georgia is good. Uh, property values, relatively speaking, are low. Um, our overall energy cost compared to other states is very low. And the last thing it listed was tax incentives.

[0:43:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2618s) And so, and I think AI kind of agreed with that report that, yes, we, we would've got roughly 70%. I don't, you know, who knows that number, you can, that's debatable, but many would already be here. Um, and those that did come, according to that report, 30% of those that are here, um, you know, only came here because of the tax incentive. And so that to me is kind of the reason we're grandfathering those in, is for tho- it wouldn't be fair to those 30%, uh, to say, you know, to lure them here and then, uh, and then take it away midstream.

[0:44:21](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2661s) So that was the purpose for the, for the grandfather, not to mention the governor vetoed the last one anyway, so I knew we were gonna have to change something. Um, Chairman Cowsert, you had asked about Virginia. My understanding of Virginia, they did a, their tax credit Was more, uh, was more of a rural tax credit or at least part of it was, which is why that there's that one area they call... It's like they, they got more data centers per capita, uh, than anywhere else in the world.

[0:44:53](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2693s) And, and my understanding, it was 'cause of that theirs is more of a rural tax credit or maybe that was an additional tax credit. I, I don't know the ins and outs of Virginia's, uh, law there. But, um, and so and that local school system, uh, apparently is doing very well. Uh, again, that's just in who I've talked to. But, um, anyway, so that's pretty much the bill. That's my general thoughts on data centers. Um, and-

[0:45:22](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2722s) So this bill would go through the regular sunset of 2032 on everybody that's already in the pipeline.

[0:45:29](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2729s) Correct. The sunset stays in place for all those that are still here and all those that get, that get approved for their certificate of exemption prior to the signing of this bill.

[0:45:39](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2739s) Okay. If I could get everyone to look at the fiscal note, which I believe will be the, probably the last thing in your folder.

[0:45:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2745s) I don't

[0:45:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2745s) And then-

[0:45:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2745s) Where is the fiscal note?

[0:45:46](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2746s) There, um... It should be in there.

[0:45:49](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2749s) Mr. Chairman, do you have an extra copy of that? 'Cause I actually have not seen the fiscal note.

[0:45:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2752s) I'm sure we can get one to you. I apologize for that. Um, so to answer, um, Chairman Tillery's question earlier, um, when you look at, uh, the re- the report that says, you know, uh, going to year 2027, the first time this would have an effect, it shows that the exemption would be 761 million on this report out of the, the study.

[0:46:26](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2786s) But in 2027, we would only realize 77 million, and that's for two reasons. One is that everybody in the pipeline still gets it, and the second reason would be we've got that, as, as Chairman Tillery pointed out, we've got that computer equipment credit that says, "If you buy $15 million worth of computers in Georgia, you don't pay sales tax on it." So they would simply shift-

[0:46:51](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2811s) Right

[0:46:51](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2811s) ... to that other credit, u- unless that's dealt with. Now, if you look at the note, that one it, that one sunsets in, uh, 2028, and so if you look at the fiscal note, there's half a year in there of, uh, in other words, in 2029, um, it's estimated it's gonna be 850 million. The fiscal note says that we would save 321 million of that 850 million because that credit would have sunsetted it.

[0:47:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2844s) It assumes it doesn't continue because they have to assume what the law is. And if you go to 2030, you've got the full year of that credit, uh, not being in there, and so 2030, it's estimated that it would be 866 million. You would realize 555 million of it. Is that making sense to everybody? Um, so there's, there's two things in play with the fiscal note: one, the grandfathering in of everybody, and two, that they're just gonna shift another credit unless we deal with that other credit in some form or fashion as well.

[0:48:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2880s) Um,

[0:48:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2884s) is that, uh, is that good to the committee? I, I, I know the Appropriations Chairman understands it, and I think probably most everybody else does, too. Um,

[0:48:16](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2896s) any, uh, other question? I know we've got some people that wanna speak. I'm not having any action on these bills today. I've got one bill I've gotta have action on that I'm gonna have to stop in about 10 minutes and go to that bill. I know we've got another bill on here. So any other questions we've got on this bill, um, Senator Orrock?

[0:48:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2915s) Well, I may be eating up my own time, but, uh, I, I wanted to ask, I wanted to ask the author. You know, you, you, you, you said that, uh, pulling, pulling that back before they got the full benefit all the way through the, uh, uh, 2032, isn't that, that's... If we applied that to the COLAs for our retirees, we pulled them all the way back, uh, and, uh, left them high and dry without a COLA 17 years ago. So we do have a record of do- of pulling things back when we choose to, don't we?

[0:49:09](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2949s) Um, you already have your time, I'm afraid.

[0:49:11](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2951s) I'm sure the gentle lady knows of what she speaks. I wasn't here 17 years ago.

[0:49:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2954s) You got that right.

[0:49:16](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2956s) Okay. I know we've got some people that wanna speak. Um, I can try. It's g- it's gotta be a hard, fast two minutes. Kenny Mullins.

[0:49:31](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=2971s) How y'all doing? Thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman, Committee, for letting me speak today. I'm Kenny Mullins. I'm the business manager for Atlanta North Georgia Building Trades. We represent about 20,000 skilled craftsmens from all trades: plumbers, pipe fitters, iron workers, operators, everybody across... We got 92 counties that we cover, from Stewart County all the way to Dade County and everything in between. I'm here in opposition to this, to the Senate Bills 408 and 410 simply because of the amount of jobs that will be lost.

[0:50:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3004s) You were talking earlier about construction jobs. Um, in construction last year, we had about 47 million man-hours that we did across building trades. 25 million of those were in data centers. Uh, you can probably remember back in the '80s, '70s and '80s, we had your car plants here, and you'd do retools, and the new construction would happen. And then annually, you'd have retools. Well, that's kinda what it's like with these data centers. You have reoccurring jobs. We call it the modern-day retools.

[0:50:34](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3034s) One example would be your Facebook data center and your Meta project that happened out in Social Circle Six buildings on that campus. We started that construction. We worked about 2,800 craftspeople. When we got finished with that sixth building, it was already time to rotate back to building one and change out all the internal components and equipment and everything it takes to run those data centers. With maintenance, network technicians, office, security personnel, there's about 150 to 200 full-time permanent jobs at each data center, depending on the size of that data center.

[0:51:11](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3071s) Continuous jobs for Georgians. They're, they're able to go to work every day, get that 40-hour check.

[0:51:16](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3076s) I got 15 seconds left.

[0:51:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3077s) All right. Just in Metro Atlanta, there's 138 data centers employing between 20 to 25,000 permanent full-time Georgians. We need to keep the successful tax credits in place and not change the sunset. We can continue to grow the Georgia jobs together.

[0:51:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3095s) All right. I appreciate your comments. I apologize.

[0:51:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3098s) You're good.

[0:51:38](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3098s) We're just short on time today.

[0:51:39](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3099s) Thank you, sir. I appreciate the opportunity-

[0:51:41](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3101s) I'm trying to get everybody in

[0:51:41](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3101s) ... and thank you for what y'all do.

[0:51:42](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3102s) All right. We've got Trey Cain, um, to speak as well, and try not to repeat anything that was said. Gi- give us- ... new, new in- new information. And I do wanna say that-

[0:51:53](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3113s) Change it on the fly

[0:51:53](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3113s) ... the, the, the, the jobs are considered in this study. We, we realize there's a lot of construction jobs, and the, the study considered it, but go ahead.

[0:52:01](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3121s) Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the committee for, uh, allowing me to speak today. I'm Trey Cain. I'm here on behalf of IBEW Local 613. Uh, we represent around 6,000 members across 59 counties, um, throughout the state of Georgia. I'm here to oppose, uh, Senate Bill 408 and 410. Um, data center construction operation currently account for 75% of our members' employment right now. So these projects, they don't just provide a short-term constr- construction job, and that short term could be five years, 10 years.

[0:52:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3155s) It's not just short term. Um, it can, uh, directly lead to long-term, full-time maintenance and operation that ke- keeps skilled Georgians employed after, year after year. So when you look at the full picture, it's not just our 6,000 members, it's their families, so roughly around 20,000 people who are depending on these jobs, who have been depending on these jobs in the, in, in the past, and they're co- depending on these jobs in the future. And da- data centers are keeping Georgians working. I worked at a data center when I was in the field.

[0:53:06](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3186s) Uh, they're good jobs. They're clean jobs. They're safe jobs. Uh, they're supporting local economies, uh, small businesses, and providing stable careers that don't require people to leave the state to find good work. And so that's a big thing for, for me individually and for a lot of our members, is they're able to go to work during the day, uh, do a, a full day's work, and then come back home to their, their house, to their family, a- and sleep in their own bed. They're not having to leave the state of Georgia to go work-

[0:53:33](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3213s) You got 15 seconds

[0:53:34](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3214s) ... because the jobs are here. What?

[0:53:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3215s) 15 seconds.

[0:53:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3215s) 15 seconds? All right. Uh, so our position is simple, straightforward. We urge, uh, the committee to keep the existing tax credits in place and to continue supporting policies and to continue to keep Georgians working. Thank you.

[0:53:47](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3227s) Thank you very much for your comments. We've got Dan DiOrio, um, with the Data Center Coalition.

[0:54:03](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3243s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Dan DiOrio. I'm Vice President of State Policy for the Data Center Coalition, national association representing leading data center owners and operators, including those that have invested billions of dollars in the state of Georgia. Uh, testifying in opposition to 408 and 410. Uh, predictability is the most important factor for large-scale capital projects. Developments take time, and regulatory certainty into the future is key for those developments. Abruptly repealing the incentive mid-cycle creates regulatory whiplash. It signals to all industries, not just data centers, that Georgia's long-term economic promises are subject to change without notice, damaging Georgia's number one state in the country to do business reputation.

[0:54:43](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3283s) As many have mentioned, data centers support thousands of jobs across the state, and it's more than just IT. It's all the many, uh, trade professionals that are working, that are building and operating, um, and maintaining Georgia's data centers. These are high-paying, stable careers. They provide a massive, stable property tax base for local schools and infrastructure without burden on local services. Data center tax revenue can also be used to provide tax relief for citizens, which has been proposed in Georgia and successfully implemented in Loudoun County, Virginia. More than 35 states offer other incentives.

[0:55:13](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3313s) These projects will move to those other 35 states. Lastly, I'll conclude with the Virginia Economic Development Partnership, as well as the Department of Taxation. Um, January 2nd, 2026 report released. The Joint Legislative Audit Review Commission found in its 2019 review of the exemption that it has a sizable influence on data center behavior, because interstate competition to attract data centers has increased over the past decade. Specifically, JLARC estimated that 90% of the data center investment made by the companies that benefit would not have-

[0:55:42](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3342s) 15 seconds again

[0:55:42](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3342s) ... come to Virginia without the exemption. This but-for percentage has been as high as 100%, but the more consistently used 90% is here, is used in this report. This is from a report not, um, uh, not even a month ago. So I just wanna comment on the, the but-for percentage. I think 90% is the standard, and I think it still holds, and it holds in the world's largest data center market.

[0:56:01](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3361s) All right. We, we appreciate it, and-

[0:56:02](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3362s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman

[0:56:02](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3362s) ... and that's the time, and appreciate your comment.

[0:56:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3364s) Yes.

[0:56:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3364s) And we do understand industry has reports, and that's why I try to get somebody independent to, to do a, a report to, you know, to try to look at it from a open, independent mind. Our last person, uh, is Julian... I don't know if you say Ben or Benay.

[0:56:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3379s) Benay.

[0:56:20](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3380s) Benay, yeah. Uh, I think you've been on a development authority or something in the metro area, haven't you?

[0:56:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3384s) Yes, Atlanta for, uh, eight years. Yes.

[0:56:26](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3386s) Yeah.

[0:56:27](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3387s) Um, uh, Chairman Hufstetler and, uh, senators, thank you for having me. I'll, I'll try and keep it really fast. Uh, I, I'm coming to talk about the, uh, uh, the assumption that everyone seems to make that there's huge amounts of local property tax gonna be flowing as a result of these data centers. I'm gonna say, "Show us I think we're being taken for fools here, because if you look at the facts, the, y- you're not gonna see anything. The, the report that, uh, uh, that the, uh, uh, institute did very well, uh, correctly said that if these data centers were being taxed normally, they would get 20...

[0:57:08](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3428s) Even after an abatement, they'd get $28 million for a $2.2 billion data center. Okay, well, Fulton may be in the leading edge of this. We've got three that are complete now. Um, one is a phase that's complete, but... And we can see what's actually happening. What's actually happening is there's $2 billion of fair market value in those three data centers, and I've got this. If anyone's interested, I'm happy to share. Um, they are appraised at 132 million, which means we're getting, between them, we're getting two million.

[0:57:44](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3464s) We should be getting something like 28 million. We're getting two.

[0:57:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3468s) Mm.

[0:57:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3468s) That's before abatement, by the way. That's before abatement. This is just the appraised value. Now, Fulton's special, but in some ways Fulton is, uh, cleaner because Fulton hasn't been doing PILOTs, payment in lieu of taxes, which many of the other counties have done. They're very secretive usually, but not all of them, and the, the massive Meta data center in Stanton Springs, even more-

[0:58:12](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3492s) And we're down to 15 seconds again.

[0:58:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3494s) Uh, th- they are capped at 5 million. Their taxes on that massive thing are capped at 5 million. So I just say please be skeptical of the, uh, of the claim that there's a lot of property taxes.

[0:58:27](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3507s) All right, thank you for your comments. Um, we're, uh, we're gonna need to move to, uh, Senate Bill 382. Uh, I'm the presenter of it, so I'm gonna swap places with my vice chair and let him preside over the meeting. If you wanna bring your copy over there. I think you've got one person signed up.

[0:58:44](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3524s) All right.

[0:58:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3525s) Speak before you.

[0:58:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3530s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Everybody look in their folders. Senate Bill 382. I believe we're working off of LC44-390S. Is that correct, uh, Mr. Chairman?

[0:59:03](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3543s) That is correct.

[0:59:05](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3545s) The floor is yours.

[0:59:06](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3546s) Thank you. Uh, Senate Bill 382. A couple of years ago, we passed House Bill 581. The committee had, um, passed out a bill and the Senate passed out 42 to 7, a bill that did not have an opt-out in it. Um, we had our friends on the other side that for, for various reasons felt like there needed to be an opt-out in there, unlike what had gone on in Florida when DeSantis did it or when Democrats did it in Washington State. Nobody else had an opt-out in their bill.

[0:59:40](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3580s) Um, so it was really the way to get it passed was to get it out. Since then, we found out that I think about 20% of the cities opted out, but about 70% of the school boards opted out, and in many cases we're still seeing double-digit property tax increases. Um, so this bill would return to the original mandatory opt-in that would limit just the homeowner part of the bill to, uh, the rate of inflation, the consumer price index.

[1:00:11](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3611s) And, um, as I would remind everybody, we've m- many people have stronger-

[1:00:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3617s) Yeah

[1:00:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3617s) ... uh, freezes in place. And, and on the Floyd County Commission in 2002, we put a total freeze in place. It's been there 23 years. The millage rate is fine. We pay our bills. Some of the horror stories you hear are not true, and, um, this bill would do that. There's a second part of the bill that is added there, um, that would, um... Let me flip back to that. So it's gonna be Section 4 w-

[1:00:42](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3642s) And this is on the sub, right?

[1:00:44](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3644s) Yeah. A- and, and, and Section 4, um, the House had put in the FLOS part of the tax that said anybody that opted in would be eligible for the FLOS, and if this bill passes, then everybody will be eligible for the FLOS. But one thing, and it, and 39 counties I think had it out for a vote. It passed in 90% of the counties. The 10% that didn't pass it, one of the arguments was that I'm paying sales tax in January of this year, but I'm not gonna see any benefit from it until November of the following year.

[1:01:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3679s) That's like almost two years on my money. And, um, so what this would change it would be that any money collected through June 30th of this year would be applied to the property tax bills coming out in November of this year. And that would be for, for everybody that's eligible for it so that we would see the benefit, uh, much quicker and not, not hang on to the, the taxpayers' money, but go ahead and get them. And, you know, the, the city of Calhoun is one, and the estimate on the FLOS was that I know that two-thirds of the cities would no longer have a property tax with this penny tax.

[1:01:55](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3715s) I know Calhoun city in my district in Gordon County said that with the penny tax, which they passed, that they could eliminate the property tax. Now, if they only apply six months revenue as this would do this year, I don't think they would eliminate it this year, but next year they should. But we wanna get the money to them quicker. Um, it was probably an oversight on some of us part that it took so long for the money to get there. Um, but that's the bill, and I'll certainly entertain any questions.

[1:02:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3744s) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, we did this eight years ago in North Fulton, uh, for our city's county and school, and they've had no problems since then. Um, quick, uh, two questions from me first. Uh, first one is I believe this is what we had passed out of the Senate to begin with-

[1:02:37](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3757s) Correct

[1:02:37](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3757s) ... and our friends, uh, in the House have made that change. That'd be the first question. And then my, uh, my second question is, isn't it true that any city, uh- County or state can still adjust their millage rate at any time

[1:02:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3770s) That's correct. You always have the millage rate to adjust it. And we did pass it out, as I stated earlier, 42 to 7, um, this, this language that then got changed in the House.

[1:03:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3780s) Thank you. Got a question from Senator Dolezal.

[1:03:04](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3784s) Thank you, Chairman. I have two questions, actually. So i- if this passes, what's the base year th- that they revert to for the calculation?

[1:03:10](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3790s) This one, this one would have everybody that's opting in now, the base year is this year. And, uh, some people would like to make it next year. There's some thought it should've been last year like everybody else. But this particular version, it would be this year it would go into effect on the, on the property values for this current year.

[1:03:29](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3809s) Okay. And for the counties that opted in, the base year remains last year.

[1:03:35](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3815s) Correct.

[1:03:36](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3816s) Okay. For counties or school districts that have adopted, for example, Cherokee County, we just had a bill move through the floor I think today or yesterday-

[1:03:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3825s) Yes

[1:03:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3825s) ... that would put them at a 4% cap on the-

[1:03:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3828s) Mm-hmm

[1:03:48](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3828s) ... annualized. Essentially, they would cap the... It would be a floating homestead such that the property taxes could not increase by more than 4%. What would happen to a bill like that that was then above the CPI?

[1:03:56](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3836s) The, the, the original language of 581 says that whichever, um, is the, is the more, I guess you would say, stringent measure. So like my county's got a freeze, they've stayed in a freeze. Um, if the CPI was less than 4%, then it would go with the CPI in that case.

[1:04:13](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3853s) But the, they would live concurrently alongside of each other, and if you had a year where CPI was 7%-

[1:04:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3859s) It would, it would-

[1:04:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3859s) ... then actually the 4% would-

[1:04:20](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3860s) It would limit it to a 4% that you got, yes

[1:04:22](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3862s) ... would kick in in that scenario. Okay. Thank you.

[1:04:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3864s) Um, and, you know, we've, uh... I know some people have said, "Well, you're having to keep up with all these calculations." We did it this year in Floyd County. The schools had not opted in before to the freeze. They had to opt in. They're going by the CPI this last year. We sent the bills out. The city and the county governments were under the freeze. It's, it's not a big deal. I know that's one of the red herrings that gets thrown out there on it.

[1:04:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3890s) Questions from other committee members?

[1:04:54](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3894s) I have a late-arriving question from the majority leader.

[1:04:58](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3898s) At the appropriate time, make a motion.

[1:04:59](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3899s) Uh, we've got someone to talk. Hold onto that motion. All right, we've got, uh, Justin from GSBA. Why don't you come down here, introduce yourself and who you're with.

[1:05:18](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3918s) Thank you, Chairman, Committee. Um, I appreciate the opportunity to talk about Senate Bill 382. My name's Justin Pauly. I'm here on behalf of the Georgia School Boards Association. Um, Georgia's 180 school districts vary significantly in property wealth, enrollment growth, and operational costs. As a result, changes in property tax policy impact school districts in different ways, depending on the composition of their digest. Local property taxes remain a primary source of funding for school operations, and school districts are capped at 20 mills.

[1:05:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3950s) One of the recommendations that we continue to hear from our members and that we also have a member position on is to allow the school districts the ability to level, levy a FLOST, um, similar to what's authorized under House Bill 581 from the 2024 session for cities and counties. Um, and this would just be strictly for the purpose of offsetting the millage rates. So thank you just for the opportunity to speak. Just wanted to, uh, share that recommendation, um, and provide this information, and just look forward to continuing to working with y'all on this.

[1:06:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3984s) Thank you.

[1:06:24](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=3984s) And, and if I could respond, I appreciate you being here. I know the House has been talking about some legislation. I hear it dropped today. I haven't seen a copy of it yet. It may be online. You know, I think this is gonna be a process we look at down the line between us and their version and try to come to something that we can all agree on.

[1:06:42](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4002s) Great. Thank you, sir.

[1:06:43](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4003s) Thank you, Justin.

[1:06:44](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4004s) Can I ask him a question?

[1:06:45](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4005s) Uh, you may ask a question, Senator Orrock.

[1:06:47](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4007s) Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, thank you for your, uh, presentation. And you're speaking on behalf of, uh, this is the, the will of the school boards of Atlanta, I mean, school, school boards of the state?

[1:06:59](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4019s) School Boards Association, yes, ma'am-

[1:07:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4020s) School Boards Association

[1:07:00](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4020s) ... of the, of the State of Georgia. We currently have 100% membership, and that's really important to us. It's a voluntary membership.

[1:07:08](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4028s) Uh, and s- schools, uh, uh, isn't it true, are highly burdened these days with, uh, meeting the high needs of students, uh, and, uh,

[1:07:22](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4042s) coming up with the money for transportation is a, uh, I- I know been a, been a huge challenge. Uh, and we've, we've, uh, w- w- wouldn't it be, uh, important for us to be mindful of the needs of our schools all across our state that are serving, uh, students of, uh, in, with high needs and, and, uh, where we're, we're, we're not fully funding the, the, the needs that the schools have, and we're pushing more burden onto the school systems?

[1:07:55](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4075s) Uh, would you agree with that?

[1:07:57](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4077s) We are seeing rising costs, just like, just like every business. Um, school districts are seeing rising costs as well, so.

[1:08:06](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4086s) All right. Sure glad we have fully funded education yet again.

[1:08:09](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4089s) We appreciate that.

[1:08:09](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4089s) With that in mind, uh, I'm gonna go back to the majority leader.

[1:08:14](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4094s) I want to have a question.

[1:08:15](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4095s) Do you have a motion?

[1:08:17](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4097s) I do have a motion. Thanks, Justin, for being here.

[1:08:19](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4099s) Thank you.

[1:08:21](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4101s) Um, Mr. Chairman, uh, make a motion to do pass Senate Bill 382, and make sure we all have the correct LC number, 443390S.

[1:08:32](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4112s) Got a motion. Do I have a second? Got a second from Senator Still. Any further discussion or amendments? Seeing none, all those in favor, please raise your hand.

[1:08:44](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4124s) All opposed, please raise your hand. Three opposed. This is a mo- this passes. Best of luck in Rules, uh, Mr. Chairman.

[1:08:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4130s) Thanks.

[1:08:50](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4130s) Turn it back over to you.

[1:08:51](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4131s) You can go ahead and adjourn the meeting if you'd like.

[1:08:52](https://vimeo.com/1139347686#t=4132s) All right. Well, if there's no more, uh, discussion before the committee, we're hereby adjourned.