House Budget and Fiscal Affairs Oversight Committee, February 17, 2026 Video: https://vimeo.com/1165675761 (a timestamp t plays at https://vimeo.com/1165675761#t=s) Page: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-02-17/house-budget-and-fiscal-affairs-oversight 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. [0:14:16] Okay, it's, uh, 2:00. Uh, w- we're gonna have a hearing only on these two bills, so people will have opportunity to see the, the, uh, video and audio, uh, before we call the bills back up for a, uh, uh, vote on the bills later, I'm sure. And so, uh, I'm gonna open in a word of prayer. I think he needs paper. Yeah. Here. I, I can pass it down. Thank you. [0:14:51] Okay. Join, join us in a word of prayer. Lord, we thank you for this time we have here, and we pray that we would, uh, always do what's pleasing to you and w- is best for the people of Georgia. For it's in Christ's name I pray, amen. Amen. Uh, Representative Davis, uh, you've got the... Your mic is on, and I want to, uh- [0:15:12] Hello. Yes. [0:15:13] I want you to tell us your LC number and present your bill. [0:15:17] Thank you, Chairman, and to the honorable members. Um, my bill is House Bill 1068, and the LC number is LC280700. [0:15:34] I submit to you for consideration House Bill 1068, titled Georgia Constituent Services Improvement and Accountability Act. This legislation addresses a structural inequity in the current constituent services framework under which members must expend personal funds before seeking reimbursement. Because campaign funds cannot be reimbursed and documentation requirement create personal audit ex- exposure, constituent services may inadvertently depend on person liquidity. [0:16:17] House Bill 1068 establishes a strict $7,000 operational allowance, and you will see that on page three. And it also has $1,000 for delegation pooling mechanism, and that is for those especially delegations with high populations, particularly in Metro Atlanta. Uh, a centralized office for constituent services, which is on four and five, a mandatory public reporting and ethics commission audits. [0:16:55] The bill is structured with clear public purpose, adequate consideration, and accountability safeguards consistent with constitutional requirements. It does not alter salaries, and I wanna say that again. It is not going to alter the salaries. It modernize an operational governance to ensure equitable service statewide. I appreciate the committee's thoughtful review and stand ready to answer any physical or constitutional questions. [0:17:32] Now, before I move on, I want you to know that on February the 5th, I sent to all the committee members, uh, information, uh, presenting questions in, such as, "Is this constitutional?" Uh, explaining the fact that, yes, we have the initial cost of $7,000 to start with our operations for constituent services. But the fact that we have to pay out of our personal pockets first before we could be reimbursed, we saw it as basically, uh, each elected official giving a loan to the local government. [0:18:18] And if you do not have that money available, then you s- have an increased chance of not being able to serve your constituents until that money becomes available. And with today, the way the money market is and a lot of needs within communities, if you're in a high, uh, population where the needs are great and there's a lot of people who need services, you could find yourself at a disadvantage, uh, especially if you don't have $7,000 set aside. [0:18:52] Uh, I also sent to you the PowerPoint that is behind you, and if someone wants me to go through it, we'll... I gave you an overall view with three bullet points, basically that we're gonna focus on the fairness, technology, and accountability, uh, improve constituent services, and help the people, more than anything, helping our constituents. Uh, what the bill does is it creates a constituent services, particularly here in the House, and add funding with strong rules and accountability, allows delegations to work together, because we can get a lot more accomplished if we work together. [0:19:36] You have your th- your $7,000 member per diem that you start off with, then the $1,000 for those who wanna have a collective office. And of course, we have the audits, the records, and public reports, 'cause we wanna make sure the public is comfortable with what we're doing with the money, and it is for them. This is gonna provide statewide support, a foundation for us to c- deliver excellent excellent constituent services. [0:20:10] We could track the cases that we're dealing with with our constituents, 'cause right now, uh, I'ma tell you, I wanna say thank you to the Senate, particularly Ms. Denise Sims, the Director of Constituent Services in the Senate. She allowed me to follow along with her because they have a CRM, a cu- customer relations management software that would track a lot of the constituents that we have, and it would do it by category. [0:20:42] It would keep track of what problems they have, so if you have to go back and see if you solved their problem, at the end of the year, you could be able to show all the work that you've done in your district. You wouldn't have to search around through all the emails. And I'm to understand that the Senate already have this program, and I said if we had that program available for the House, hopefully we could end up decreasing the cost, overall cost, because more people would be using it. [0:21:13] So I guess what I'm trying to say here is this has been a four-year, four to five-year venture, trying to find a way in which we can truly improve constituent services and deliver a product that all of our constituents could take pride in, and we can show that we have resolved whatever problems they have. I have to also commend our speaker because I have to admit I probably was getting on his nerves constantly coming to his office, trying to say, uh, "Let's see what else we can do to improve constituent services." And at no time did he, um, chastise me. [0:21:58] So I wanna say thank you to him also. Um, I'm ready for any questions you may have. [0:22:04] I- I've got one, and I'm, I'm glad. I hope he doesn't ever chastise any of us. But, uh, di- di- di- is there a, is there a, a, di- is there a bill like this in the Senate, or did you say your bill had been added to a bill in the Senate, or this is not? [0:22:19] As far as I know- [0:22:20] But your bill has not been added into a bill in the Senate that- [0:22:24] I have not been informed if it has or hasn't [0:22:26] ... it wouldn't be then. [0:22:27] Okay. [0:22:27] Thank you. Number 17. [0:22:34] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you so much, um, Representative Davis, for bringing this bill, which I think I share with you, uh, is probably long overdue in terms of our need to use technology to, um, just be more effective legislators. [0:22:50] Mm-hmm. [0:22:50] Um, we've all seen how we are being the recipient of technology, right, with these automated emails and getting hundreds of calls, hundreds of emails, hundreds of texts, uh, and right now really, um, at a loss other than manually being able to field all of this information as it comes into our .gov addresses. So I love this bill in terms of the opportunity to, um, for us to modernize. [0:23:20] Mm-hmm. [0:23:20] Um, but I also think it adds, um, an opportunity for transparency- [0:23:24] Mm-hmm [0:23:24] ... so that, um, we can all see, um, the volume, that we'll have, um, an understanding of when we, when this information comes in. It also strengthens security potentially for the data that is shared, potentially. Um, and I can foresee that it would be really amazing to have at the end of a session or at the end of a term or end of a year a report that would allow us all to understand the volume of needs, the area of need, um, so that we could prioritize the problems [0:23:56] Mm-hmm [0:23:56] ... and then work collaboratively with data, informed data, to actually come up with solutions. So, um, I'm really excited and, um, and eager to continue to explore how do we, how we can improve constituent services. Thank you. [0:24:11] Thank you so much. And I wanna add to everyone, our constituents don't understand how our office work. A lot of them think that we get the same amount of money that they get in Congress. Um, I'm sure many of you have had people ask for a job, and you say, "I only have $7,000 a year, and 2,000 of that is usually gone before I even walk through the door." Um, and they don't understand that when we get emails, some of these emails are, like, the same email seven times, just flooding so that the, you don't even know who is in your district. [0:24:50] Mm-hmm. [0:24:50] This can cut down on that because a lot of my constituents are like, "Didn't you get my email?" And they don't understand I'm having to go through some emails where people are being unfriendly, and they flood your emails so that you can't talk to the people actually in your district. So this would cut through that also. It'll solve the problem. [0:25:14] Number 23. [0:25:16] Okay. Uh, thank you, Representative Davis. Um, did I misunderstand? Did you say the Senate was already doing this? [0:25:25] Um, the Senate has a program called Fireside. [0:25:30] Mm-hmm. [0:25:31] And I actually spoke to the people who does that program, and I think they've been doing it about two to three years already. And it's, it was an excellent program, and I was asking, "Well, is it possible for us to do it, or even can we buy into the program if we don't wanna have it for the entire house? Can you open it up so that we can?" [0:25:59] So they're not getting the $7,000 additional that you said, are they, at this point in time? [0:26:05] I don't, I did not ask exactly how they're financing it- [0:26:10] Okay [0:26:10] ... in the Senate, but, uh, no, to my understanding it's not a extra 7,000. [0:26:18] Okay. [0:26:18] $7,000 is being financed in a different way. I'm not- [0:26:21] So you're asking for an additional 7,000, uh- that we get, each representative would get to handle constituent services. Whether that means hiring part-time help or whatever it may be, this is what you're asking for. [0:26:38] And also take into account, um, when we go to a number of conferences, going to conferences helped us all because we get exposed to a number of different pieces of legislation that helps us. If we see something that's excellent that can work here in Georgia, you know, we don't have to reinvent the wheel. We get to bring that back. But a lot of people use up all their money because they have to spend, you have to spend your own personal funds first, and they don't have the extra money to pay even to go to conferences. [0:27:12] So I guess I'm trying to balance it because if you have to have... Think about it this way. Can you imagine a police officer going to work and they say, "Before you can go to work, you need to buy your weapon yourself, and then we'll, we'll reimburse you." Or me as a nurse, they say, "Oh, you need to get your equipment first, and then we'll reimburse you." No. This is part of our job as constituent services. [0:27:39] Who, who would oversee this, uh, $7,000 on how it's spent? Who would be, who would oversee the, the way it was used? [0:27:48] By creating a office of constituent services, we as a body will h- appoint people to be on that service, and they would lay out the rules and regulations. And really tell you the truth, we can pretty much look at what the Senate is doing and what is working. We can use that because they've already did it for about three, four years, and then we can tailor it for the House. [0:28:17] Okay. [0:28:18] So. [0:28:18] I think your bill's kinda heading in the right direction, I think. Um, what kinda teeth would be in the l- in the bill that would, uh, if the money was wasted or abused, what kinda teeth would be in the, the bill to oversee that? [0:28:35] That's the reason I went through the ethics, okay? I tried to do this in the, on the outside of government and found out that the number of hoops you have to jump through was, it was crazy, and the amount of money you have to spend is even more 'cause I presented to all of you a link, 'cause this was the first time a constituent services was actually done in a delegation like in DeKalb County. [0:29:06] So you could see it there. Um, [0:29:13] I'm sorry, what exactly did you want me to answer? Say it again. [0:29:17] Well, I was wondering where the teeth in the law would be for anyone who violated or wasted that $7,000, or would the teeth be in the law to, for discipline, so to speak? [0:29:28] Well, really, when, if we put it up under the same way we do now when we fill out our disclosure, right, it would be those same teeth pretty much. [0:29:37] Okay. [0:29:37] Because the disclosure would be in the same facility as where we fill out our campaign disclosure, our, you know, it would be that same. [0:29:48] Okay. [0:29:48] And it's a lot easier and cheaper. [0:29:50] Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. [0:29:53] Well- [0:29:53] The fiscal office. [0:29:54] The fiscal office. I'm sorry. Yeah. [0:29:56] Uh- [0:29:58] You're saying the s- senate hadn't already got a- [0:30:00] No [0:30:01] ... a advance of $7,000, does it? [0:30:03] No. [0:30:03] Okay. [0:30:03] No. [0:30:04] They're just getting- [0:30:04] Okay. I understand that. Are you talking- [0:30:07] Who? [0:30:08] Present, Ms.- [0:30:09] I'm sorry [0:30:10] ... Tristan Davis. [0:30:10] Nobody here. [0:30:11] Are you, uh, are you talking about the, where the, you go on the Senate, and for them to send you a email, they have to put a ZIP code in? Is that s- But that's what they've got that you're talking about. So I put my ZIP code in so I know you're in my... Well, okay. [0:30:27] Okay. [0:30:29] That, that doesn't, I don't know what that... But that's what you're calling that program that they've got, is just, is that... You say they've already got it. Is that what you're talking about? [0:30:37] The, the, it's a customer relations management tool, and our customers, of course, would be the constituents, and that program is called Fireside, and- [0:30:49] Is that, is that the program that's got where you, when you email, you put the ZIP code in so you k- they know? Well, unless they fake the ZIP code, but that would tell them you were, that, they wouldn't know. That way you know they're in your district. [0:31:01] That way- [0:31:02] Okay [0:31:02] ... and you can keep track of all the people- [0:31:04] Sure [0:31:04] ... in your district. And not only that, that particular program has the people that are in your district in their database so that if they contacted you at any time on a given product, if you send out a email and it deals with something with, that your constituents contacted you prior, it'll automatically send them your update. [0:31:27] Okay. I got you. I understand. Number two. [0:31:33] Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for this amazing bill. I love, um, this idea. I love the objective of the idea, and I think that it is overdue. Um, and the only question I have is, um, you said right now the Senate is doing something, but this bill wouldn't just be for the House, it would be for the entire General Assembly. And so it seems to me like there should be buy-in on the Senate side, 'cause it kinda might help finance or fund what's going on here. [0:32:06] Um, but, uh, I guess that's my question is, like, on the Senate side, are they, like, yes to this? Um, how, how are they feeling about it? 'Cause I w- I would hope that this would be helpful, like it would be a value add. [0:32:22] Well, as I stated before, uh, I commend Ms. Denise because she allowed us to follow along with her. And so far from what we can see- going through her that this is working. And so that's why I said we don't need to reinvent the wheel. Mm-hmm. Uh, I know that people may be a little uncomfortable because when you see an extra 7,000, you say, "Ooh, they're gonna think that we, you know, inundating the elected officials with extra money." And I say to them, "We have a $10 billion surplus. [0:32:58] Do you think that we should have to spend our own money first before we can be reimbursed to do the work for the people?" And I have yet to meet a, m- meet a constituent that would say, "No, you need to spend your, your money first." [0:33:15] Uh, yeah, the thing she, the, the thing you've, the thing you followed along with her, it has nothing to do with the $7,000 though, does it? [0:33:26] I'm sorry? [0:33:27] I mean, it has nothing to do with the advancement of $7,000, does it? [0:33:32] It, it's part of it, and the reason I'm saying that it is part of it, because, uh, at the time, over the four years, uh, we looked at the CRM program and we said- [0:33:45] Okay [0:33:45] ... "Well, if we did go with that, which one is the best?" Okay. We also looked at, there's a number of people who have had difficulty with their administrative aides not properly doing, uh, letters and a number of other items. So we visited with the media department, the same way they put out all the press releases and e- And we asked them, "How many more people would you have to have in order to write the letters that we need and so forth?" And they said, "Well, we just need two, two more people," right? [0:34:18] And I, they'll be able to do our letters, and you don't have to have that conflict with admin... The, the number of problems we're having with administrative, uh, aides, because a lot of them are not trained to properly do a lot of this work anyway. So there's a number of things that we can change to improve the overall. And now you're saying the 7,000. With the 7,000, if we have to have... You may not need an, an extra administrative aide. You may wanna just buy into another part of what was set up. [0:34:49] Mm-hmm. [0:34:50] That would be on the decision of each elected official. [0:34:54] Okay. Thank you. Uh, any other questions from the committee? [0:35:03] Madam Chairman. [0:35:04] Thank you, Chairman. Just real fast. I think if we, if we... Correct me if I'm wrong. If we take funds upfront like that, that's a, it's gonna cause a gratuity issue with some of the, uh, ethics that we are bound by, and also w- we, to go to conferences and stuff, we can use our campaign funds, if I'm not mistaken. So that's- [0:35:20] Can't get reimbursed for it though, I don't think. [0:35:24] Well, why should we? Um, may I answer, please? Uh, when I met with the speaker, that was one of the main questions. And if you look in the materials that I gave to you, I sent the case studies that shows that if it is part of the overall budget of your office to c- to present an, um, a service, it is not considered gratuity. Uh, the constitutional analysis says a payment does not violate, violate the gratuity clause if it serves a public purpose, the state receives adequate consideration, and accountability safeguards exist. [0:36:09] Everything that i- is in this bill fulfills that because we, we stayed on it until we knew we could pass this measure and, and not violate the c- gratuity clause. [0:36:25] It's in the, the paperwork I, we gave. [0:36:28] Okay. Num- number 17. [0:36:30] Thank you. Mr. Chairman, just, uh, one more comment. Um, and thank you, Representative. I did wanna just say in the spirit of transparency and, um, and in keeping with, uh, an idea that I have, um, supported, which is thank you so much for sending the advance information, the rationale, the frequently asked questions, and the PowerPoint. I really appreciated a heads-up and an ability to kinda study and think through this before the committee. So thank you. [0:36:59] Thank you. Okay, we have a, uh... Someone wanna speak to the bill? Representative Schofield. [0:37:09] Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Um, I really appreciate this bill, um, from a legislative perspective and from a personal note. And to answer Representative Cam- Campbell's, we get a lot of emails. Um, 80% of the work that I am doing is administrative function because I don't have the adequate staff to do a basic memo, a basic letter, uh, a basic response. I don't even get telephone calls that have, people that have called my office. [0:37:39] I don't even get messages that they're calling me. And so this has put a great burden on me trying to be effective, as effective as I can. Now, prior to be, me being elected, one of the challenges that I had as a constituent is when I called here, the phone was never answered. I, either, when it was answered, I was left on hold. I didn't get a response on my email. So as an elected official, I pride myself, and my colleagues can tell you, that I answer those emails. I answer the coined ones that say, and I don't send you back a, a letter just like everybody else sends me. [0:38:12] I take my time to really respond to everybody, whether you're in my district or not. [0:38:18] Sure. [0:38:18] I make a point that if you're not in my district, I will contact the legislator and say, "Hey, this person contacted me. Can you follow up?" [0:38:26] Okay. [0:38:27] That's part of what we were elected to do. [0:38:30] Sure. [0:38:31] And the fact that we don't have the support to do that, and I'm not saying the Senate stuff was budgeted in their budget, so they're, uh, not being charged on anything for this. But the fact that we don't have the tools that we need as w- we're growing and needs are changing- really concerns me. Now, I do go to the conferences every year since I've been here, because I see the value of not just the relationships, but the bills that will work for the state can possibly work for the State of Georgia, and I follow up with legislators. [0:39:02] I lost $2,500 this year of my personal money, not just campaign money, my personal money, just to do the job that I'm supposed to do. Because of all of the administrative functions that are on my thing, I can't even get back to my day job because I'm so busy trying to do and keep up with everything here. So something that can help us do what we need to do more effectively is a step in not just the right direction, it's an overdue ask. [0:39:34] We have asked for four years, "Get us some help." And unfortunately, I can, I'll put myself out there, I'm being made the bad guy all the time. There's nobody else that's asking for this. Why do you need more s- Uh, you know, and I'm just trying to do the job I was elected to. So please, let's find a way to get us some more help. There are gonna be s- some people that don't wanna use this type of, uh, of equipment, that's fine. But if this system can write a letter for me and kind of, uh, separate the needs of the constituents, whether you're, they're yours, mine, they'll be able to send, "Hey, that's not yours, but you can send it to Representative, um, uh, Scroggins. [0:40:14] That's his." And I won't have to sit there and start looking it up and going through the website and go all... I thank you, Representative Davis, for hearing the cries of your legislative friends. [0:40:25] Yeah. [0:40:26] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [0:40:27] Thank you. Thank you, Madam. And I will say, uh, we all have the same number of people- ... but they, some of the people who live closer together, we got more miles to go see our 60,000. [0:40:41] Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. [0:40:41] So it's, uh, it's expensive. I too, uh, my, my office phone in the s- the big city of Chickamauga is my cell phone- ... and I take every call or return every call. [0:40:52] Mm-hmm. [0:40:52] Uh, I don't return every email, especially the ones that are, I get 100 that are exactly alike, and the ones that say, "Y- put your name here," that they forgot to put their name there. [0:41:02] Yeah. [0:41:02] I get, I get a, k- someone in Columbus wanting me to write a letter for them to get in the, uh, uh, uh, uh, some- something in the military, and I tell them to, uh, Columbus, I think, I tell them call, uh, Representative Hugley, and that's what I do also. And, uh, I think it's something that we all, uh, have, uh, have, have, uh... It's very expensive, and, uh, anybody that thinks we're down here for the money- ... as, as, uh, Representative, uh, Davis said, I have people who are elected officials in my county tell me that they were in Washington last week, and they were wondering if I was there. [0:41:42] They, there are a lo- a lot of people think we're in Washington. [0:41:45] Right. [0:41:46] And so I do appreciate you bringing the bill. Um, I'm gonna, I'm gonna encourage everyone to watch these videos of, for today and the last time we had hearings, and we'll see what we can, uh, bring in for a vote. And I thank you very much for the... And I understand what you're talking about. [0:42:05] Okay. [0:42:05] So f- no other questions from the committee, we'll move on to Representative Horner. [0:42:10] Thank you so much. [0:42:11] Thank you, ma'am, very much. [0:42:42] Vice Chairman Horner, we, uh, ready to hear your bill. Uh, tell us the bill number and LC number, and present the bill, please. [0:42:49] Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Chairman. Uh, before you is LC 443347, House Bill 1178. So previously under state law, there was two committees that by state law was in state law, which is House Appropriations and House Budget and Fiscal Affairs Oversight Committee. In 2008, it was stripped of on- almost all requirement under the law. So this committee, by law, it still stands, but it is no longer have any type of legislative or, or legal value to it under, under the code section. [0:43:25] And so what this bill does is it puts it back in the code section almost as is. I did add a few points, which I'll go through today. Um, but it adds back in to what it was back in 2006 to 2008. And so first, um, we do a committee of 18. We're a little high at this point. We're at, like, 20, but it waxes and wanes between 16 and 20, uh, year by year. Um, and so this just sets a fixed number. It sets the, um, committee to be appointed by the speaker just as it is now. And what it mainly does is it puts into code what the chairman has wanted to do, but also what members of this house has wanted to do, which gives us the power back to not tell... [0:44:02] HAJC is responsible for setting the appropriations. Our job is to make sure that those appropriations and those checks are written in the way HAJC decides to, and the way the speakers, and the way the vote of the house and the people's body has decided to. And so that's the responsibility of this committee. And so under code section, we want to put that responsibility back to make sure that the lacks of the past couple of years does not happen again. And so we wanna make sure that we have a very fixed responsibility every year to come back and look at every single, not only our budget and how we spend the money, but our liabilities and our assets. [0:44:36] A lot of times in this job, we f- we fail to also look at the liabilities we have accrued over the years, and we have liabilities in this state. We do not go line item by line item like we do in the budget, and we should. And so that, that is one thing I added in this bill, is one central location, one place where... Everybody that has a liability that we have written over the past decades to come into one central location and repre- and face the representatives of the people. And so that is our job, and that is what I s- I seek to do with this bill. Then lines 50 to 56 is also something that we have strengthened, which means that the committee, wherever state money falls, we can set and go for an audit. [0:45:16] Um, and that audit will be appropriated by the House of, uh, by the House, and it will be s- an audit that can be called by the chairman. Um, that way that we have any way, shape, or form, if there's money falling from the taxpayer of the State of Georgia, we can follow it down, and we can ask questions of where it has fallen. And so that's what this bill does, and I look forward to any questions. [0:45:40] Number two. Representative Clark. [0:45:43] Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, my first question, um, in this, uh, idea for this, um, committee that is meeting outside of legislative session, um, is there anything written in the bill that requires that all the members or the members of this, uh, committee be bipartisan, or is there just an assumption that it will be a bipartisan committee? Um, I just... Maybe I, I didn't see that. [0:46:12] Uh, so, so it's just called by the chairman, and all members are allowed to be there, of course, and I hope all members are there. Um, it is our responsibility. And the, the reason why I said it outside session and why there's at least nine, I'm open to suggestions on those parts. This isn't, you know, a fi- that's the point of this process is to ask questions and to refine the product. And so on that, our responsibility is outside session, too. We have almost 52 departments that have liabilities in this state that we have not addressed in the past couple of years that we need to know what are our liabilities as a state. [0:46:42] That is a lot of time and a lot of process that we can't fit into our very busy 40-day schedules. And so the whole point is just to make sure that there is at least time set aside outside session for us to call these departments in and just get the questions that the committee here wants and wants answered. [0:46:58] All right. So y- actually, your answer just made me have another question. [0:47:02] Absolutely. [0:47:02] So is this an extension of this committee? [0:47:05] Yes, this is this committee. [0:47:06] Or... Okay. [0:47:07] This is putting back this committee under law, which it was before, and so it will be this committee. [0:47:12] Got it. So in lines 18 through 21 where it says, "The speaker shall appoint a member of the committee to serve as chairperson," are we just gonna... assuming that the speaker would just keep everything as is and not- [0:47:27] Correct [0:47:27] ... appoint someone else to be the chair? [0:47:29] Cor- correct. It's just the appointment. It's the same thing as our House rules. So our House rules, they'll just be put under statute. [0:47:35] Got it. Um- [0:47:36] For this one committee. [0:47:37] For this, just- [0:47:38] And, and that's exactly how the Appropriations Committee is set up as well. [0:47:42] So the Appropriations Committee right now is in law as having to meet outside of session. [0:47:48] No, not meet outside session, but- [0:47:50] But this one would require it. [0:47:50] But this one would be, to where we have nine meetings at least. That way, again, we... And again, I'm willing to talk about not having to do that outside session, but I believe that this is a year-round legislative position and that it is our responsibility to make sure. And I mean, again, 52 departments, I mean, even if we did one a week, um, it would be a lot of information, and it would be once a, once a week at least for a whole year. And I'm not saying we do that. I'm just simply saying long term, I think we should at least start, you know, piece by piecemeal looking at it, and that's why we set at least a limited amount of numbers to be able to do that and make sure we keep to it. [0:48:24] All right. Um, thank you. [0:48:26] The, m- m- the chairman of the, this committee would be the, the chairman of this committee, and he would be appointed just like it is every two years. [0:48:34] Correct. [0:48:34] And he could change that at any time, but it would, it would be this committee as a whole. [0:48:39] Yes, sir. Yes, Chairman. [0:48:42] Representative Sanchez. [0:48:45] Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for bringing this bill. Um, on line 50, you talk about determination of necessity, right? Is there a standard for what exactly that means to prevent it from being used by the m- any party for political purposes? [0:48:59] Um, I've spoken with, um, members of b- both sides. It is up to the speak- up to the chairman's discretion. So the chairman is decided by the speaker and held in check, and it is our responsibility to be the oversight committee. So if we create an oversight committee for the oversight committee , then you're just kinda get- you know, you're just kind of building up more, more levels. So that's why I just wanted to keep it to this committee, to where you are right. It is our responsibility to keep in check, and that's why, going back to our question, we need to make sure that everybody comes to the committee. That's why this committee is set very closely, 11, um, uh, to 10. [0:49:33] And so we want open dialogue. [0:49:35] Mm-hmm. [0:49:35] And it is the res- but at the same time, we, we need to make sure we are doing our jobs and making sure we are looking at the questions that need to be answered, and that's why everybody is welcome to ask those questions of whoever shows up at this table. [0:49:46] Right. And just to follow up, if I may, um, so do you think there's any way to sort of talk about ensuring that there's some sort of language or some sort of standard so that we don't have, like, what ends up happening in federal Congress where you have these political theater things going on? [0:50:04] Yeah, we have theater. Absolutely. And that's where I believe in the discretion of the chair, but I do agree that there has to be some discretion of the chair. [0:50:11] Right. [0:50:12] Um, and that's where procedure and, and process of law should play into effect. Um, that being said, I'm open up to discussion, but again, we don't wanna create additional bureaucracy just to make sure we're maintaining- [0:50:24] Mm-hmm [0:50:24] ... the authority that we do have, that each of us have to represent our people. [0:50:28] Right. Thank you. [0:50:32] Representative Campbell. [0:50:35] And thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Representative, for bringing the bill. Um, it is interesting because when, um, I received the committee assignment of Budget and Fiscal Affairs Oversight, you know, most people will say that sounds super substantive in terms of the work. Um, and I was not really familiar with the history of the legislation. Um, so, um- I'd be curious to go back and study a little bit more to understand the flow from that time period to get a better sense of kind of what was the standard operating procedure, what types of issues might have been brought forward. [0:51:08] I- I'm curious to know more about that. Um, I like the idea of oversight. I, I really like the idea of, you know, being able to request and review strategic plans at the state level. Um, I welcome the opportunity to rev- to review those, and also a requirement to have them. [0:51:29] Abs- No, exactly. [0:51:30] I think... [0:51:32] Yeah, I completely agree. I mean, I think there are... We are in a very good time right now economically, but there could absolutely come a quick time where we are not prepared economically, and we need to have strategic plans to where all liabilities are known, and we are looking forward to how to address those even if our balance books change. [0:51:50] Yeah. And I would kind of further, and I have a couple questions that, not just liabilities, but also goals. So understanding strategically what the, what the needs are for the agencies, what goals we're seeking to meet. Are we meeting those goals? [0:52:04] Exactly. [0:52:05] Um, a- as well as financial, uh, performance. And so a couple questions. Um, [0:52:14] on lines 37 through 42 talk about an annual report, um, within one week. That seems like a heavy lift, um, but with the right resources, maybe that's doable. [0:52:25] Correct. [0:52:25] Um, but the committee shall not be required to distribute copies of the report. I might offer up, you know, a friendly amendment where the, um, the reports are provided publicly- [0:52:36] Uh-huh [0:52:36] ... on the website that, to really further transparency so that we could all have a chance to understand the, uh, the work and the results. Um, I also have a similar question around the, um, the audits. Um, again, another idea to possibly strengthen this could be that we, uh, include wording around, um, a standardized report or template or specify the requirements, um, so that that would not be vague or subject to interpretation and completed differently by each and every agency. [0:53:09] Well, and agreed, but that's why we did a performance audit and why we have a third party doing it. Now, um, I wasn't contact, um... And we... I just wanted to draft some piece so that we could see and start playing around with the- [0:53:21] Yeah [0:53:21] ... again, making sure that there's some legal foundation for us to be able to do this and to finally have the ability to do this. Um, so I'm open to either third party or DOAA doing some type of blanket audit type of p- platform, but it is a performance audit. So the performance audit would be something s- very specific to what you're talking about. [0:53:39] Yeah. And, and that might be, even be one of the first projects that we look at, is a standardized template for, for, for our performance audits that- [0:53:48] Absolutely [0:53:48] ... in my view, often vary in terms of, um, the components that are viewed, the data that, sources that are used, et cetera. Um- [0:53:57] That last question. [0:53:58] The last question is... Um, [0:54:06] I, I also, while I am a, a, an proponent of the oversight function of this committee, I am concerned that 52 departments, this suddenly becomes truly a full-time, year-round job. That is a tremendous amount of work. And so would, would you be open to, um, different schedules of when agencies or the number of times agencies are called forth? Or what is your vision as you think about building pace into a piece of legislation like this? [0:54:38] How would that kind of come- [0:54:39] Absolutely. And that's why I did have to call the chairman. That way it's not set in specific code, but he has to do it at least an amount of time to, to be able to do it. And nine is doable for, for us as a part-time legislature. I do believe that, yes, we have 52 departments, and that will, is a tough job for a t- 18-person committee. Um, that being said, it is our job. And some- if we're not gonna do it, no one's gonna do it. And so that's why I believe that we want to make sure that somebody is at least doing it, and somebody that is responsible to the people, not some bureaucrat on, you know, in, on the other side of the street trying to figure out and send us a report that s- some people in this, in all, in both chambers don't look at. [0:55:18] So I wanna make sure that it is being brought forth of someone that is responsible to the people directly. [0:55:26] If, uh, you'll remember, if you'll remember, uh, w- when I first met last year, I told you how this committee used to be, and nothing's changed, and what I'm talking about is nothing new. And, well, it's not. And this has been this way... This is the way this committee started, and every year we've heard this is what we're gonna do. And in fact, I told, I made a statement it would probably end up being a year-round committee even last year. Uh, we would not make any decisions in those meetings in the, as far as votes of any type. [0:55:58] But if, if, if we had, if we had those committee meetings, I'm sure that all members would get a, a, a, a, a, a, a, uh, record of what was talked about and, uh, uh, maybe a letter of, of, of just what we heard and might not always have the ability to see it online, but we would hope it would, it would all be here and would be, have video of it. And so, uh, I think it's something that needs to be done, and, uh, w- we're gonna try to move forward with it. [0:56:30] But, you know, a- as any other piece of legislation, we can, uh, the, the, the author can take amendments or reject them and let it go like it is. And as long as we got them 24 hours ahead of time- ... according to the Campbell-Tarvin rule, uh, unsigned and undocumented, we're gonna stick to it. [0:56:49] And, and on that note, I'm open up to discussion, thank you, Chairman, um, to where, uh, going to y'all's concern, I completely agree. This committee is oversight. We're not trying to pass laws or, or to do things outside session. [0:57:00] Mm-hmm. [0:57:00] It's to, just to make sure the government is functioning the way we were pro- we, we have promised our people, but after the 40 days is over. So I'm fine with even putting into statute a nine and nine rule, or some type of where the chairman is, you know, it's n- uh, 19, you know, so you have nine, nine, and then the chairman. [0:57:17] Right. [0:57:17] So that way there's even... Both parties are responsible for the, um, for the purse of the people. [0:57:23] Sure. [0:57:23] And so I'm fine with even that type of language being placed in there. [0:57:26] Well, our, our vision also, uh, should be, let's talk to the departments and see if we're doing something to harm them. [0:57:33] Mm-hmm. [0:57:34] So this is a, this is a two-way street, and this is, we wanna build a, we wanna build a relationship with all the departments to know we're on the, we're on the same team and we're just trying to make each other better. Thank you so much. Representative Scoggins. [0:57:47] Thank you, uh, Representative Horner, for this bill. I like the intent of this bill, I really do, and I thought all along when I got put on this committee, like Chairman Tarvin said, that's what we were here for. Um, this bill, explain to me how it would actually work if any of our 180 members re- sent a request to Chairman Tarvin asking for a audit of a specific state, county, local- [0:58:15] Correct [0:58:16] ... government- [0:58:16] Anywhere state money touches. Uh, that is public, yes, public money. [0:58:19] Okay. And so it would be up to Chairman Tarvin to, to decide whether he wanted to grant a hearing or not. [0:58:26] Correct. [0:58:26] Okay. And how many people would have to be here for a quorum? You said there were nine and nine- [0:58:34] We- [0:58:34] ... and the chairman is 11 and 10, so how many people would you need to be, be here for a quorum to be able to hear and, uh, evidence about the audit? [0:58:44] It... Well, we're not making a decision. [0:58:46] Yeah. [0:58:46] And, and, and it would be, it would be handled as a subcommittee, but it would be the full committee would be involved. But it would be handled as a subcommittee, and we would have a hearing and then report to the full committee. But we, we could never get, uh, we could never adjust on how many people from each party or how- [0:59:04] Right [0:59:04] ... many people we had there. We'd- [0:59:05] Yeah [0:59:05] ... we'd be... There's no way we could operate u- during an off-season being part-time, uh, legislators. [0:59:11] And the findings of the fact would be reported to who? [0:59:15] Would be reported, that is on lines 37 to 46, which is the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Chairman of Committee on Appropriations. [0:59:27] Okay. That's all I have. Thank you for the bill. [0:59:29] Absolutely. Thank you, sir. [0:59:34] Any further questions? W- we have some, uh, people who want to speak to the bill? Uh, Christine Lawson. [0:59:48] Let's see where she's gonna sit. She wants to sit there. [0:59:59] Tell, tell us your name and who you're with, and thank you. [1:00:03] Absolutely, sir. Uh, good afternoon, Chairman. Good afternoon, um, committee. My name is Christine Lawson. I'm a resident of Catoosa County, Georgia. Uh, Mitchell Horner is my representative, and I'm here to speak on behalf of this bill. And now in order for citizens, it's my view that in order for citizens, um, to trust the government with the expenditure of public funds, there needs to be a means of oversight as to how those funds are spent. Now, all of us have to run our own personal budgets in a very frugal and efficient fashion, and it's becoming more important every day it seems, and we deserve to know that our government is being held to those same standards of efficiency and frugality with our tax dollars. [1:00:42] Now currently, at least as, as someone on the outside looking in, once my tax dollars, once our public funds are collected and they go to certain agencies or, or government entities, I really have no understanding at all of how those are spent. I don't know if they're being well spent, I don't know if they're being well directed, and I don't know if they could be used more efficiently. And I like this bill because it provides a means for my elected representative to be involved in financial oversight of government agencies to know how public funds are being spent, and that they're being spent in a re- a responsible fashion. [1:01:18] And one thing I also like about this is the subpoena power that it provides, where if there is a concern about how funds are being spent, then, um, this committee can subpoena in elected officials or even just employees of various government organizations and say, "We need you to explain to us what's going on. Where, how's this money being spent? We wanna make sure that it's being used in the best pass, uh, best fashion possible for the people." And so I would urge you to, to... It sounds like there's some good ideas about how we can make this a better bill, but I would urge the committee to put forth a bill that will actually give some teeth and make constituents like myself, um, feel rest assured that my, my tax dollars are being well spent. [1:02:03] So thank you, everyone. [1:02:06] Thank you. We got, we've got some, three, we got four, three more people signed up, and we've a couple have been added. So Brad Thomas is not gonna be here. Uh, we've got, uh, we've got about, uh, 12 minutes, and we've gotta get out at 3:00, so, uh, speak, say what you gotta say. And I mean, I don't wanna cut you short, but, uh, just hurry if you can. Uh, Viola Davis, did you want to speak to this? [1:02:34] Go ahead and tell us who you are and who you're with. [1:02:37] Representative Viola Davis, and I serve Georgia House District 87, great county of DeKalb, Stone Mountain. Uh, it's strange because just this morning I spoke with the representative, and I wanna thank him for the bill because I said, "This is exactly what we need." And in doing my research for constituent services, I noticed that when it came to looking at the different budgets that go through, um, that we deal with when we doing our own budgeting through the session, there were times that we were getting gigged because they were not keeping the proper paperwork. [1:03:19] And I said, "Well, then who's doing the oversight to make sure these departments are doing the proper paperwork?" And I was having a hard time trying to find that. And then the federal government was at times getting ready to punish us for not having the proper paperwork. So I said, "Well, you know what? We were just discussing this, and you have a bill that's gonna address it." So I wanna thank him and everyone that wants to give this power back to this committee and say it is really needed. [1:03:56] Thank you. [1:03:56] Well, and I appre- appreciate that. But let me do, let me state that we, the audit departments do look at these departments, but i- i- as far as some of them are more in depth and some of them don't, uh, some of them are... Let me, I should say, uh, we have some cap- compatibility problems that we need to fix between departments, between audit and department. But now audits are looking at it. We, we just need to be the arm that says, "This, this department has got a unfunded mandate of $20 million, or they're, they, they could crash in two months if, if, if in a downturn," and that type thing. [1:04:34] So, but they are being looked at. I'm, the, I don't wanna make it seem like- [1:04:37] But I, I didn't, uh, maybe I need to straighten out the, the... I was looking at the federal. [1:04:43] Okay. [1:04:43] There was some federal documentation- [1:04:45] Yeah [1:04:45] ... that was, that's, I'm referencing. I wasn't- [1:04:48] We might, we might get into the- [1:04:50] ... wasn't doing the- [1:04:50] We might get into- [1:04:50] ... state. [1:04:51] We might get into that later on, uh, Representative, uh, Hugley's bill. [1:05:00] Um, Matt Taylor. Oh, speaking of. I didn't recognize the name. [1:05:08] Yes, sir. So yeah, I'm, I'm, uh, Matt Taylor. I'm with the Georgia Department of Audits. I'm a deputy director in the performance audit division. So, uh, this legislation caught our eye. We're always looking for good government, uh, legislation. But specifically, the mention of performance audits is what I wanted to, to speak to. Um, so I, I just wanted, I just wanted to point out that we do performance audits, uh, every year. We, we, we get requests from the appropriations committees in the House and the Senate. We have some of our own audits, and we have some that are in statute, a, a small number that are in statute that we have to do periodically. [1:05:44] And we would just wanna make sure that we coordinate, um, you know, any performance audits chosen by this committee, that we're not three months into an audit, and then we need to stop. Or, or we've just completed one, and I, as the point made earlier about all the emails, I don't know that, that you see every email, every performance audit that we release. And so if you've missed it and we've already done one in the last year, things don't change a lot in a year or two a lo- a lot of times, unless there's a s- specific issue that you're concerned about. [1:06:11] Right. [1:06:11] Uh, and, and to the point made earlier about performance audits, you know, being, being different one to the next, I, I'd, I would wanna point out that if you are picking just a particular agency or a particular program you want looked at, you're probably gonna want a slightly different objective than the next audit you do. Because if you're, if you're picking it because there's something you see, then your objectives might be different. Um, so that's something to keep in mind. So if you, if you think about the ones we do for the appropriations, there's like a list of questions, like, "For this program, we're thinking about this." [1:06:42] Mm-hmm. [1:06:42] And there's, there's also a mechanism of having the same objectives every time, it's just they won't be tailored to a particular issue you may be concerned about. [1:06:50] Thank you, sir. [1:06:51] Yeah. All right. [1:06:51] I will, I will state that, uh, I, I get in trouble, you know, I talk way too much. But, uh, we very much have a good relationship with the audit department. They've been most helpful. Uh, the thing I've noticed over the years, and I will go ahead and say it, this goes back to when I was, uh, in, in economic development appropriations, I would see audits year after year that had the same suggestions in them. And I, and I want, I, I, I don't want this to be a policing arm, I told you that from the beginning. [1:07:22] But I wanna be able to, when these people do an audit and suggest, "This doesn't look good. This is what we need to do," and if you, not anything nefarious, just small things, uh, if we're gonna pay for an audit, then we as a d- as a state should do what the audit says. And that's what I want this department to do, is, is to back these people up and, and maybe find something they're not doing right. I mean, this is, this is, we're all in this together. And I mean that, I mean, I mean that sincerely. And I thank you, sir, very much. [1:07:53] Uh, Kim Schofield. Scho- yeah. [1:07:55] Yep. [1:07:56] Schofield. [1:07:57] Schofield. Representative Kim Schofield, District, uh, 63, which is the best district. I don't care what Rep Davis says. But, uh, in any event, thank you for bringing this bill. This was something I, we worked on in 2021. I had a bill, and we did start talking to some of the other agencies. And to your point, Matt, nobody was really excited about us wanting to do any changing in audits. So I wanna thank you and thank this committee, because I served on this committee maybe for two sessions, and we never met. [1:08:27] So uh, I'm so glad that you're doing a bang-up job as the chairman in moving things forward, and just look forward to kinda strengthening the bill and putting some teeth to it. But thank you very much. [1:08:39] Well, I certainly appreciate what you said, but I'm, I'm, I'm, uh, we might find more we're doing wrong than they are. And, uh, so, uh, uh, uh, um, they very much have our support and the support of the, the speaker, the departments do, but we have, we have that responsibility. [1:08:55] Yes. [1:08:55] And we, we intend to do it. And, uh, some of us might not be back next time, and it may, I may be one of them. So, uh, if there's no other, uh, anything else from the committee or anybody in the audience, uh, we're gonna stand adjourned, and we'll be in touch. [1:09:10] Thank you, Chairman.