House Technology and Infrastructure Innovation Committee, February 18, 2026

Transcript

311 turns. Select a time to play that moment of the video.

1. 0:18:05

   Good morning everybody, or in this case, good afternoon. Sorry, I was speaking to Asia. Uh, I apologize for being late. Um, first and foremost, I wanna thank, um, Chairman Crowe for asking his committee to join us. Uh, members of the committee, just to give you kind of, I guess, run of show, uh, we're going to go ahead and hit 12:30 so then we can let the Public Safety Committee, um, adjourn from our committee.

2. 0:18:45

   Right after that, we are going to revisit Chairwoman Camp's v- uh, bill that we sent to Rules. Uh, Rules sent it back to us to perfect it. Um, I will be anticipating that Representative Evans will be providing an amendment that the author has already agreed to, but it's the one that Rules believes will perfect the bill a bit more. So we're gonna revisit Chairwoman Camp's bill because of that. And then the third bill we're gonna hit is Representative Kendrick's House Bill 478.

3. 0:19:16

   So that'll be the run of show. We'll do 12:30 first. Uh, again, Chairman Crowe, thank you so much. We appreciate this. For those of you who have not been with our committee, um, when we did Chairman Thomas's deep fake bill, uh, we asked Judiciary to join us. Uh, typically no one wants Judiciary or wants to be in Judiciary, uh, but having those minds, I think Chairman Thomas would agree, it helped to perfect the bill, and we appreciate that. Chairman Crowe, we know that members of your committee will help us to perfect 1230.

4. 0:19:49

   Um, I can mention to the committee, uh, that PAC will be testifying to 1230, and, uh, hopefully you will be able to hear their thoughts in terms of some amendments. And then in addition, there should be an email from the Department of Corrections that was directed to Representative Cox and me, um, earlier this week, uh, which is basically titled Subject HB1230 Prohibitions on Unmanned Aircraft, and that was again directed to Representative Cox and to Representative...

5. 0:20:20

   and, and to me. So take a look at that. There was a question last week regarding, um, the unmanned, uh, vehicles being captured or being detained a- as contraband. It turns out the D- DOC has in fact been doing that. GSA has also given us information that they have also, uh, seized several of these drones. So it turns out we had more seizures of the drones than we actually anticipated or we knew about last week. So I wanna thank the Sheriff's Association and also thank the DOC for doing that.

6. 0:20:53

   And again, when you have a moment, take a look at that email. And again, I appreciate Representative Cox asking the question, and I appreciate the department being kind enough to give us an answer. Um, in terms of 1230, uh, I know the committee heard it last week for members of Chairman Crowe's committee. Uh, what I wanna be able to do here is basically lay out for you what we were trying to do here was effectively stop or try to give as many, I'll say, opportunities for us to stop the operation of drones for the purposes of delivering contraband into incarcerating facilities.

7. 0:21:31

   You'll see that the definition of those facilities are basically in lines fifteen through seventeen. But for the purposes of our discussion, we'll just generally use prison and jails. The meat of the bill, if you were to move, is in line sixty-four through line seventy-four, and that speaks to effectively not being able to land and launch from not just, I'll say, the area adjacent to the incarceration facility, but also all of the land that is owned.

8. 0:22:04

   So especially in our state prisons in the South. Good to hear the ChatGPT is summarizing what I'm saying. Um, but in terms of the land that is adjacent to our prisons, they cannot li... they cannot launch or land there either. I know that PAC has an opinion in terms of what we should do, uh, in terms of seventy-five through seventy-seven, but I don't wanna take their thunder. I'll allow them to testify to that effect. Um, that being stated, are there any questions on 1230 before we hear from a couple witnesses?

9. 0:22:39

   This is a f- this is a first. I didn't know you guys were capable of not hitting your buttons. Okay. Um, with that stated, I wanna ask PAC, uh, to come up please. If you can, introduce yourself. Uh, also, um... Hold on just one second.

10. 0:22:58

    If you can, everyone, inside of your folders, you're going to see a several page document titled 42-5-18. Uh, I won't read the rest of it, but you'll see it in bold. Uh, this was provided by PAC today. My apologies to legislative counsel. I thought I was gonna cause some type of coronary to her, uh, but PAC was kind enough to get this to us and, uh, we wanted to give them an opportunity, uh, to testify to the bill and then the improvements, uh, or the suggested improvements that they would like to make. So at this point, if you can, please introduce yourself, say who you're re- representing, and walk us through your recommended changes, please.

11. 0:23:34

    Pleasure to be here. I, I appreciate the opportunity to address this committee. Um, for those of you who don't know who I am, I'm Peter John Skandalakis. I'm the executive director for the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council. Uh, prior to that, I was a DA, elected DA for twenty-five years in the Coweta Circuit, and prior to that, I was an assistant DA. So I've got almost forty-one years in as a state prosecutor. And just to let you know, Monday was my seventieth birthday, so I'm still here, still kicking, aren't I? Um, with me is John Reagan.

12. 0:24:05

    John is one of the Prosecuting Attorney's Council's, uh, resource prosecutors. He specializes in gang prosecution. He's also been very active lately in the past year and a half, two years, um, trying to deal with the drone issues that we have in the state prison system. So he's very familiar with this. So I'll turn it over to John at this point.

13. 0:24:26

    Thank you, uh, Pete. Like I said, my name is John Reagan. Uh, for the last almost seven years, I've been with the Prosecuting Attorney's Council as the state gang resource prosecutor, focusing on complex gang and racketeering cases. Um, before that, I was a assistant district attorney in the Macon Judicial Circuit for 18 years. So I've have, uh, this year will be my 25th year as a prosecutor in the State of Georgia. That's all I've ever done. Um, so, a- as, uh, Pete was telling you, uh, for the last several years, working closely with the Georgia Department of Corrections, the FBI, and several other agencies, and local assistant dis- uh, local DAs, we've launched Operation Sky Hawk, um, which has, uh, launched at le- at present, we filed three racketeering indictments across the state against, uh, organizations, mainly gangs, that are flying drones into prison, uh, through contraband.

14. 0:25:16

    That is the new way to get contraband into prison. It used to be trying to smuggle it in through things, uh, throwing it over the fence. Now, they use drones. Um, and it is a, to be quite honest, it is a nightmare. Um, they are, uh, a daily event, uh, in Georgia, and we are fighting it. What we've proposed, and I thank the chairman for allowing us to make these, uh, amendments, we're, we, we are in complete favor of banning drones flying over prisons and launching them from, um, uh, fields.

15. 0:25:47

    That's what, how it's done. They, they don't launch them from public places. They launch them from private residences near prisons and fly them over the prison and make a drop. Um, and it's just a couple of minutes for them to do that. Um, we would, uh, respectfully ask that, uh, w- like I said, we, we a- appreciate the chairman's bill, but amend 42-5-18, where we have drone laws already in place in the State of Georgia, and they are very good laws. Make these amendments, um, that we recommend to strengthen these drone laws, um, to, to do what the chairman wants us to do, and that is to eradicate drones in Georgia.

16. 0:26:26

    I'll be glad to answer any questions you have.

17. 0:26:28

    So, um-

18. 0:26:28

    If you could- Oh, I'm sorry.

19. 0:26:30

    So, Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me apologize for getting this to you so late.

20. 0:26:35

    Yeah, I apologize.

21. 0:26:36

    I apologize for that, and I appreciate your willingness to listen to us. But if you'll go through the changes that, that you-

22. 0:26:42

    Yeah, that was gonna be my request for the pur- 'cause my hunch is you're gonna get a bunch of questions-

23. 0:26:45

    Sure

24. 0:26:45

    ... on the underlining. And what I'd like to alert the committee, and I guess both committees too, um, please, for the purposes of this c- discussion, it's a little unorthodox, please use the document they provided to us that is titled 42-dash-uh, 5-18, and please refer to the line numbers if you don't mind, sir.

25. 0:27:04

    Yeah.

26. 0:27:04

    So then that way, you, that would allow both committees to be able to follow your logic. But again, please don't refer to the bill right now. Please refer to the handout. Thank you.

27. 0:27:11

    Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I'll just start at our f- our first amendment, which is line 67 on page three, uh, which is what the chairman was saying, that it shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly or intentionally operate or to allow another to operate, uh, uh, an unmanned aircraft system above a place of incarceration from his or her property. That is a major problem that we face right now, um, that people are going to, uh, residences, uh, rental houses, property, farms near our, our prisons, and they're, they're being paid to launch a drone from that, uh, location.

28. 0:27:48

    The drone then takes off, flies over, flies to a couple waypoints, goes over a prison, is over a prison for just a few seconds, makes a drop, and comes back to that location or to another location where the drone is then picked up, and they're gone. That is a huge problem that we are facing. It is not just that they're launching from a public space. They're launching from private spaces. Um, so that is our, our first recommendation. Um, uh, line 75, um, uh, that this section shall not apply to law enforcement, uh, who is in compliance with federal a- regulations and who is a peace oper- operating such system for law enfor- enforcement p- public safety.

29. 0:28:25

    We use counter-drones. We use drones to look at drones. Um, and then we also, that would allow us systems that, uh, would be in place that we can put in to have counter-drone systems that can go up and actually intercept these drones. Uh, they, we don't have them yet, but we, uh, have talked to some companies that actually produce counter-drone systems so that they launch, uh, multiple drones and have, for all intents and purposes, a capture drone to come stop the, the new drone from coming in, and then actually uses a, it's almost a three-drone system, where you have one drone k- kind of running surveillance overall, one drone going after the offending drone, and one drone trying to go back and find where it launched from.

30. 0:29:06

    Um, so that's that. Um, line 84C, as we talked about, the seizure of drones, unmanned s- uh, drones operate in violation or declared contraband and may be seized. Uh, I can tell you in Operation Sky Hawk, we've seized well over 200 to 300 drones. Um, it is a huge problem, and we seize them. Um, and we have them right now. Uh, we're actually under a forfeiture order. Uh, we, we have a for- pending forfeiture case, uh, as a part of Operation Sky Hawk, but we would be asking that to be a part of the law that we'd forfeit them.

31. 0:29:41

    Um, line 87 through 90, uh, would allow us to take, like, the reasonable and necessary mitigation measures. Right now, we can't do anything, so we would like to be able to mitigate, and that is to stop the drones once they're overhead. They're detected, and we would be able to, uh, mitigate them, um, uh, from st- from making their drops. Uh, and then it goes f- further down lines 91 through

32. 0:30:09

    96, um, to ways to jam a drone, uh, because drone- drones can be jammed through electromagnetic pulse. They can be, as I said, we have interceptor drones, both kinetic and non-kinetic ways to take down a drone. Uh, then, um, uh, line 97 through 100, um, it says that a law enforcement officer or agency shall act pursuant to this only if there is a reasonable suspicion that the unmanned aircraft is involved in criminal activity, poses an imminent threat to public safety, is otherwise operating. I'm not gonna say...

33. 0:30:40

    We have, like, our, our prisons sometimes are in rural areas and, and sometimes people just fly a drone, and we're not trying to sh- you know, knock down some eight-year-old's, you know, toy drone. Uh, we have, uh... I, I know for a fact, uh, at a prison there's a... We know of a, a child that flies near. He's not a threat, so we're not gonna go after his drone. We're not going after the hobbyist, you know, drone that's up there that may accidentally fly over. That's not the goal of this. The goal is to go after, uh... The most common drone we see is the DJI Inspire 2, uh, which can carry five pounds of contraband.

34. 0:31:15

    And if you think about five pounds of contraband, that's a lot of contraband. It's... I can tell you for a fact, the, the, the number we use is, think of a can of tobacco that you see at any convenience store. Bugler is the most common brand. It's a six-ounce can of tobacco. It goes for anywhere from 30 to $50, uh, in the store. That goes for $2,500 in a prison. Cigarettes go for $100 a cigarette. And it's not just so much phones, it's now SIM cards. So they don't have to bring in the new phone, they just have to get in a SIM card or a charger.

35. 0:31:49

    And you think about how little those things weigh. Five pounds total is a lot of contraband, and drones are getting bigger, and they're getting bigger. The drones now we're seeing are carrying 20, 30 pound loads. In Operation Skyhawk, we intercepted a drone that can carry 232 pounds. So the, the amount of contraband here is massive. So I appreciate the chairman allowing us to make these recommendations. I said we have very strong drone laws under 42518. We'd just like to nestle them in with the rest of our drone laws, and these would be felonies.

36. 0:32:21

    Uh, and then al- this would also make them, uh, pursuant to be able to be used under our gang statute. Fort- Title 42 is a, uh, a subsection that we can use the gang statute on.

37. 0:32:33

    Thank you, sir. Pardon me. Thank you, sir. Appreciate the detail. Uh, Chairman Prince, you're recognized.

38. 0:32:38

    Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, uh, thank you for your, uh, amendment here. Uh, a lot of good stuff here. Uh, but you mentioned about, uh, not trying to, uh, uh, disturb, say, a child or something flying. How do you know the difference? I mean, I would think that regardless of who's flying it or what type, if it's flying in this area in and over a, uh, a, a place of incarceration-

39. 0:33:03

    Mm-hmm

40. 0:33:03

    ... we, we want it, we want it down anyway, regardless, because-

41. 0:33:06

    Absolutely, we do want it down. It, it would be an accidental incursion, for the lack of a better term. Like, we can see drones that can't carry... The, the drone that you could buy at, you know... It would obviously be, we would be alerted to any drone.

42. 0:33:20

    Thank you. That's better.

43. 0:33:20

    And, and that's what I-

44. 0:33:21

    That's better

45. 0:33:21

    ... I wanna stop every drone.

46. 0:33:23

    Thank you.

47. 0:33:23

    Okay? But obviously there's discretion and, and we're not gonna go shoot down a little teeny $20 drone that can't be carrying a contraband. Now, we would be looking at it, we wanna stop it. We absolutely wanna stop it. So yes, we wanna stop every drone.

48. 0:33:36

    Thank you. Just wanna make sure we're clear.

49. 0:33:39

    Yes, Chairman. Representative Neal.

50. 0:33:44

    Thank you to the chair. Um, so I think my first question, you referenced 87 through 90. Uh, you said mitigate. What is your definition of mitigate? What does that look like?

51. 0:33:55

    Mitigate means we can, uh, interfere with its ability to fly.

52. 0:33:59

    And what does that mean?

53. 0:34:00

    Uh, it means we can use, like, electromagnetic pulse to take the drone out of the air, um, to stop it.

54. 0:34:06

    Is that the only mitigation?

55. 0:34:08

    Yeah, we can... There are multiple ways of, of taking out. Like I said, there's anti-drone systems where we actually launch a counter-drone, um, that-

56. 0:34:15

    Do you, like, run into it? Like, what are the options? Like, what does that mean?

57. 0:34:17

    There, there, there are several options. I mean, I'm not just talking about, uh, using electromagnetic or, or, or, or a conventional tool. I'm talking about this drone actually flies up. Actually, I think it deploys a net and grabs the drone and brings it back to the earth.

58. 0:34:30

    Okay. Um, follow-up. So, um, and this, uh, just out of curiosity, um, has this been crafted in a way to avoid any constitutional challenges related to airspace we can regulate in comparison to, like, the FAA and what they can regulate as far as airspace?

59. 0:34:50

    So, uh, all, all prisons all are, are no-fly zones by, by rule. We, we are, we are in control of them. And so, uh, I believe this is in compliance with all of that.

60. 0:34:59

    Okay. All right. Thank you.

61. 0:35:02

    Representative Neal, are you done?

62. 0:35:03

    Yeah.

63. 0:35:04

    Okay. Thank you.

64. 0:35:04

    Mm-hmm.

65. 0:35:06

    Representative Kendrick.

66. 0:35:08

    Thank you.

67. 0:35:09

    Hello.

68. 0:35:09

    I had a question about line 97, um, that says a law enforcement officer or agency shall. Is there a reason, uh, you put shall instead of may?

69. 0:35:20

    Well, I think it goes back to the chairman. We want to stop every drone.

70. 0:35:24

    Okay.

71. 0:35:24

    Uh, we wanna stop every drone. There, there should be no drones over Georgia prisons or any prison, jail, sheriff's office, local. We, we want to stop them all.

72. 0:35:33

    Mm-hmm.

73. 0:35:33

    So it's a shall. And, and we are in a shall right now. I- if we detect a drone, we go after it. The, the, I think the, what I was talking about, and excuse my, uh... Is that we, we have a discretion. Obviously, I'm not gonna prosecute the, the 12-year-old. But shall, we want to stop every drone. There's no business for anybody to have a drone over any law enforcement facility to, I believe the chairman's point, to have a drone over a facility, period, end of line.

74. 0:36:03

    So, so can I ask clarifying questions?

75. 0:36:05

    Yes.

76. 0:36:05

    So, um, so the reason I, I ask that is, um- If there is a law enforcement agency that maybe they have reasonable suspicion, but for whatever reason they decide not to intercept this drone, is, is your statement that you want them to be obligated to shut it down, not to have the discretion with changing-

77. 0:36:28

    I w- I wa- I want the drone to be stopped no matter what. And if they have the... It, it's also being able to have the tool. I mean, there'll be different tools for every different agency, but to be able to deploy those, because this is a huge threat in law enforcement. This contraband delivery doesn't just happen at Georgia Department of Corrections, it happens at local jails, it happens at county municipalities, it happens at city jails. Um, so that's... W- we want it stopped, period.

78. 0:36:54

    Okay. Thank you.

79. 0:36:56

    Thank you, Representative. Chairman Crowe.

80. 0:37:01

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, thank y'all for being here. I, um, on line 67, where, uh, paragraph B is inserted there, I'm trying to find, and I apologize, I just got a chance to look at this, and the, and the spacing of this is a little different where your offsets are in there, so I'm trying to figure out which, which subparagraph goes with which part, and where we're following along. Um, but can you tell me what the penalty for that would be? Because I see down below, um, on line 80 it says, "A person convicted in violation of paragraph one of this subsection shall be in prison for not less than one nor more than 10 years." But one, it seems like it's referring back up to C-1 maybe, 'cause that's 3A, if I'm looking at the spacing right.

81. 0:37:47

    And so I'm just trying to figure out what the penalty is.

82. 0:37:49

    I, I, I-

83. 0:37:50

    And if it's not a felony, uh, it should be.

84. 0:37:53

    Right.

85. 0:37:53

    Um, but I just wanted to make sure what the penalty was.

86. 0:37:56

    I think, Mr. Chairman, you are correct. I think that's a, a typographical. It should be a 1 to 10 felony.

87. 0:38:01

    Okay. Thank you.

88. 0:38:02

    Because that's, all our drone violations are felonies. Um, and, uh, because it's a serious matter. So, but it would be a 1 to 10.

89. 0:38:15

    Representative Cummings.

90. 0:38:18

    Thank you, Chair. I think I have two questions. The first one, on line 68 and 69 where they talk about you can't fly a unmanned aircraft above a place of incarceration from his or her property. So, uh, uh, that to me seems very limiting. So if I take my equipment to the library or coffee shop, I'm okay 'cause I'm now on my property?

91. 0:38:45

    Well, we're, we're trying to stop all drones, um, Representative, and what the biggest problem we're having right now is people literally leasing, paying for p- p- people very near correctional facilities. They're not launching from the library. They're not launching from the coffee shop. They're launching from a residence that's a mile or two from a prison. I can give you an example in Telfair County where I just got done prosecuting part of Operation Sky Hawk Two. They're, they're using houses that are rural that are near these prisons, and they're going in the dead of night, going to these locations for the sole purpose of launching the drone to get it over the prison.

92. 0:39:27

    'Cause the drone has to be within a mile.

93. 0:39:29

    But I think to answer your question, if you launch a drone from a public property, and we can prove it's with criminal intent, we can still prosecute.

94. 0:39:38

    Okay. 'Cause in my mind-

95. 0:39:40

    No

96. 0:39:40

    ... technology is ever evolving.

97. 0:39:42

    Right. Absolutely.

98. 0:39:42

    So it may be two or three miles today, it may be 20 miles next year.

99. 0:39:47

    Yeah.

100. 0:39:47

     And so why limit yourself? That's why I was getting, uh-

101. 0:39:50

     No, no ma'am

102. 0:39:50

     ... trying to help. No.

103. 0:39:51

     Yeah. No, we, it would be anywhere that they're launched, but the biggest problem we're having is people using private land a- and, and launching from, so we wanna put that penalty in there as well.

104. 0:40:02

     But if you just put a period and take out from his or her property, you don't think you would be covered? I mean, it should be a crime no matter where you're sitting.

105. 0:40:16

     That might be a question for Mr. Smith in the back there.

106. 0:40:20

     Right. I may defer to the general counsel.

107. 0:40:24

     Um, 68 and 69 on-

108. 0:40:28

     Mr. Smith, do you wanna comment on this?

109. 0:40:29

     On this. This portion.

110. 0:40:33

     I mean, while we have you guys, yeah, I'll, I'll, I'll open that up. Representative Cummings, you, you present a good question.

111. 0:40:40

     And I think to answer the, um, Representative Cummings' question, the intent, his or her land, was to reach people who intentionally no- or letting others use their land. It was also to make sure to protect when someone, y- you're asleep at night, and some no good people come onto your property and launch a d- drone to the prisons. Obviously that's not an intentional act, and that landowner shouldn't be held responsible. So I think that was the, his or her property was trying to chain back to the intentional, intentionally allowing someone to use it.

112. 0:41:11

     And I think this is some, just like the, uh, the reference to the penalty that, um, the chairman picked up on, I think there's a couple, and I apologize, there's a couple tweaks that legislative council's gonna need to clean up on this, but I think that that's a very good point you make. I just wanna make sure that we can prosecute the people who are letting others come onto their land, but also we're protecting the people who don't know the land's being misused that way.

113. 0:41:35

     Right. A- and, and, and I think, Mr. Smith, that the example, just a house, but it could be a several hundred acre farm. You may not know that somebody's out on your, your land doing it. So it would be that, that intentional act and still protect the landowner.

114. 0:41:50

     Thank you.

115. 0:41:53

     Chairman LaHood.

116. 0:41:54

     Thank you, Chairman. Uh, I'm in support. I like the concept here. Just curious, um, is there a certain altitude above the, the, the jail or the prison that you're most concerned about? Or is there an altitude that would be too high to be a threat?

117. 0:42:11

     With technology, Mr. Chairman- Every day it changes. They used to be, you know, low-flying drones. Now these drones, some of these bigger drones that we're seeing, they have altitudes of, uh, they can go up to a, you know, 1,000 feet. They're, they're not flown by even a remote control anymore. They're now flown via computer, via, um, WiFi on board. Um, and they can be flown remotely. They don't have to be line of sight. They can be f- flown from miles and miles away, um, over the internet. So these drones are more powerful.

118. 0:42:41

     They're flying, they're flying so high that we can't sometimes hear them. Um, they're taping over the lights so you can't see them. Um, and then, uh, you know, that's also an area of concern with regard to aircraft, so.

119. 0:42:56

     Thank you.

120. 0:42:56

     Thank you.

121. 0:42:58

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Ehrhart.

122. 0:43:02

     Yeah.

123. 0:43:02

     Secretary.

124. 0:43:02

     Quick question, just really a logistical question. Um, uh, the drones that are dropping contraband into the prisons, h- how is the ty- how are they typically caught? Uh, is it the prison guards or folks working at the prison that observe the, the drone coming in? They then, what? They report it to the police? The police are the ones that go investigate? How difficult is it to catch the people that are flying? 'Cause I assume they can fly very fast, and then you said they often fly at night. Mm-hmm.

125. 0:43:31

     So they're in and out probably very quickly.

126. 0:43:33

     Yes, ma'am.

127. 0:43:34

     How do you ... How easy it is to catch them?

128. 0:43:36

     It's a, it's a concerted effort. It takes all parts. We're, we have people that are, you know, looking for the drone, hearing it. We do have detection systems. I know Ge- Department of Corrections is actually looking at putting ... We had radio frequency detection systems, but now these drones aren't flown via radio waves like a remote control. So we're looking at radar, conventional radar, just like you would have in an air traffic control or anything that would detect anything in the air. And then you're using ground teams. Uh, I know Operation Skyhawk, we ran a Title III or a wire tap.

129. 0:44:07

     You ran a ... I'm sorry, you ran a what?

130. 0:44:08

     A wire tap.

131. 0:44:09

     Okay.

132. 0:44:09

     So we were actually listening in, so when we knew a drop would be coming, we would deploy the teams, and we're deploying all over the state. Um, so it, it's a, it's a con- a combined effort.

133. 0:44:20

     Yeah. Thank you.

134. 0:44:21

     I think y'all can see already, this is a lucrative business.

135. 0:44:25

     Yes.

136. 0:44:26

     Uh, and unfortunately inmates have time on their hands, and quite frankly, they're, they're very clever. They're very smart. Um, Department of Corrections is understaffed. Um, sometimes you only have, uh, you know, four or five guards there that w- that are working. So it takes a concerted effort to try and intercept the drones.

137. 0:44:46

     And, and even upon what Mr. Skandala said, I could tell you a pilot who's flying these drones, who's making these drop, can average $10,000 a flight, and he can make three, four, five, six flights a night, and that's what he's-- that's just what he's being paid. So imagine the money going up the chain.

138. 0:45:07

     Understood. I'm certainly not-- this is not my area of expertise, but I'm imagining how incredible some sort of invisible fencing. You know the kind you put around your yard-

139. 0:45:15

     Yeah

140. 0:45:15

     ... to zap your dog if they try to go out? Something that would disable maybe the electronic system of the drone, if they, if they pass, that would ...

141. 0:45:21

     W- we, we are, uh, the, the United States, uh, Congress passed a, a law, uh, late last year to allow some, some technology to come in through the FCC, but that's in its infancy. So we're still going to have this problem. And again, like I talked about, these drones still are gonna be able to be flown remotely over WiFi, and that's gonna, that ... We're ... So a jamming per se is not gonna work. We need to be able to hard intercept them.

142. 0:45:49

     Thank you. Thank you. Representative Cox.

143. 0:45:54

     Thank you, Chair. Um, thank y'all for kind of this update. Um, my, my concern is, as technology evolves and by the time we get this done, AI's gonna be the one controlling the drones, and it won't actually be people that we're gonna prosecute and throw them in prison for a felony 'cause it's a AI. So I don't know how we're gonna get around that. Um, we had mentioned geo-fencing in the, the last, it was in the last meeting, something similar to what you're saying.

144. 0:46:24

     To me, the strategy that I see, would it not be more effective to play defense and make sure that we're picking these off, whether it's through EMP, you said netting, I believe, uh, geo-fencing. The other one is, 'cause I'm more concerned how do we stop it from getting in. I don't know that we'll get to a place of prosecuting. I don't know if we'll catch them. If we do, great. Um, but even the concept of, like, Iron Beam, which is a detection system that's used to pick off drones that's coming in and, I mean, these, these drones are g- they're very small too, right?

145. 0:47:04

     Is there, like, a mini Iron Beam technology that's out there or something like that? Like, where are we heading to keep this stuff from getting into the prisons?

146. 0:47:13

     And that's a very good question. Technology is always advancing as, as you yourself have mentioned, and this is the, the, the first step to allowing us to, uh, as we put in there, uh, under 87 through 90, to take reasonable and necessary mitigation methods to continue to, uh, improve our technologies to do that. Um, the problem I can tell you with regard to geo-fencing, that was a, what we thought we were protected because our, our prisons, GDC and our prisons were already geo-fenced to not allow drones to fly into them.

147. 0:47:45

     However, every drone can be programmed to delete the geo-fencing, and that was a huge problem we found with the drone suppliers. In fact, they sell that as an advantage to them. "I'll be glad to take off your no-fly zone." And so it doesn't just affect a prison, it affects a, an airport. So a drone that's sold that has no-fly zone software installed that can't fly over Hartsfield, for a couple hundred bucks a guy can reprogram the drone and it could fly right through Hartsfield's airspace or Dobbins airspace or Robins airspace or any military facility.

148. 0:48:19

     Um, and, and that's the problem we have. And, uh, the, the drone companies, in fact, have just pretty much disabled that now because they've gone to a new system to identify drones, kind of almost like a plane squawks its, its IFF, its identification. Drones now are supposed to do that. But of course our bad guys, our, and girls are not, our bad actors are not registering their drones. Uh, so but, uh, to your question, yes, technology is always changing. Iron beam, mini iron beam. It... And we want that ability, and that's why we put in 87 through 90.

149. 0:48:52

     Great. Can I follow up? Um, so, so I think as we're moving down this path, this is making sure we're not outdating before we get started, and I think we've had that conversation before. Um, in the drones that had been taken down, and, and thank y'all for this, for this email that we received, how many ha- people have you actually caught from those drones?

150. 0:49:20

     Uh, arrested in, in, uh, SkyHawk, close to 200.

151. 0:49:28

     Okay. And they've been prosecuted at this point?

152. 0:49:30

     They're being prosecuted right now. I've, I've got three indictments going. Not everybody was in those indictments. They'd be maybe be handled in separate indictments, not the racketeering indictments. I have two more that I'll be filing this year.

153. 0:49:41

     Thank you.

154. 0:49:42

     Wonderful.

155. 0:49:44

     Amazing.

156. 0:49:45

     Wow. Thumbs up.

157. 0:49:47

     Hey.

158. 0:49:50

     What was that?

159. 0:49:51

     It's somebody... The computer said thumbs up, so I'm-

160. 0:49:53

     Hey, I knew TII had a Yelp of 5-0. Yeah. Yeah, all right.

161. 0:49:59

     We can come back here more. This is-

162. 0:50:00

     If we get it. This is from Erin

163. 0:50:02

     ... I believe there's a lot of them

164. 0:50:03

     ... right in the back.

165. 0:50:05

     And I, I do want to make clear, those are just cases that are being handled by myself. There are several other prosecutors, and I can't thank my fellow prosecutors across the state and the district attorneys offices across the state who are doing this as well, that are going after the drones. It is not just this case. It is ev- I could go to any district attorney's office, and they are inundated with drone cases.

166. 0:50:25

     If I may, last night I contacted Louis Lim, uh, one of the district attorneys who has state prisons, I think two or three state prisons in his system, in his circuit. Um, I asked him to count the number of drone cases that are being... that has inundated his office. Um, he text- he emailed me back this morning. He goes, "I've got too many to count right now. I can't do it."

167. 0:50:47

     And, and we're trying to incorporate as many into SkyHawk, but it by no means am I saying I'm the only person out there. There are several hundred prosecutors across the state fighting this battle.

168. 0:50:58

     Thank you for the clarification. Representative Evans?

169. 0:51:01

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I apologize, I was late coming over, so this may have been answered. But I'm trying to understand House Bill 1230. Are we trying to put the handout into it, or are we trying to do it instead of?

170. 0:51:13

     Oh, that's a great question.

171. 0:51:15

     Okay.

172. 0:51:15

     So I appreciated Pat coming to me today. We came a little on the late side, not to give our witnesses a hard time. So we did not have time to get with leg counsel to put this in as a potential sub. So you are correct. W- uh, the 1230 is in Title VI. This is in Title LII. So we're effectively talking nearly about potentially a quasi new bill. I think what I'm gonna do is I'd like to finish up the four more questions that are here, Representative Evans, and hold this and not take action on it today, 'cause I think we need to sit down with PAC, legislative council, and make sure we just get this thing right.

173. 0:51:49

     Right now we've gotten some great questions from public safety, which I've appreciated, great questions from TII, and according to Representative, uh, Tran's email, we've got thumbs up. So I think we should basically, um, you know, uh, I think we should take it in due course. So why don't you... If you have a question, by all means, please do. But our apologies for the confusion. We're asking everyone to follow 42-5-18 as opposed to 1230.

174. 0:52:11

     Okay.

175. 0:52:11

     Does that help, Representative Evans?

176. 0:52:12

     It does.

177. 0:52:13

     Okay.

178. 0:52:13

     And the only thing I would say just for a comment as you're moving forward with leg council is that if, if it does end up that 42-5-8-18 somehow combines with 1230, I think the, um, line 75 in 1230 needs a knowingly violates in there. But if 42-5-18 may already have an intent, um, but if, if we travel with 1230, I think we just need that somewhere. But that, that was it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

179. 0:52:39

     Representative Evans, you said line 75, so after who, before violates?

180. 0:52:46

     Correct?

181. 0:52:46

     Yeah. Who, who... A person who knowingly violates.

182. 0:52:48

     Knowingly violates. Okay.

183. 0:52:48

     Yeah. Yeah.

184. 0:52:49

     Thank you very much, Representative Evans. Chairman Thomas?

185. 0:52:53

     It's funny, uh, the knowingly is something that caught my eye. I guess my inner Stacey Evans came out there. Um, no, I... So actually I just kind of tell you a story that I think's interesting. Um, so me and the kids, one of them's sitting back there right now, um, we were at... We actually went to a park, and we had a, an unmanned device that was just a toy. And for whatever reason, that toy went crazy and picked up and just flew off. And we had no control over the toy. There was no...

186. 0:53:24

     It was just, it had a little radar device underneath it, it malfunctioned. And that's why I'm like I, I, I worry about the word or. I know it sounds crazy, but knowingly I, I guess you could say I flew it over knowingly that the ti- point that flew over I now know that I'm flying a drone over it. Uh, and maybe that's maybe parsing words a little bit, but, but I definitely didn't intentionally, so I don't meet both criteria. But we maybe argue that, um, we might have met one a- assuming that it had flown over a prison, which it didn't, but...

187. 0:53:56

     I, I think that's also where prosecutorial discretion comes in.

188. 0:54:00

     Mm.

189. 0:54:00

     Because obviously a, a, a misfault like that i- in technology, that wouldn't be a prosecutable. I'm going after the ones that are knowingly, intentionally flying over a drone.

190. 0:54:10

     Yeah, a- a- and I feel that. It, it... And I understand the prosecutorial discretion. I just, you know, I f- I always worry that sometimes if we get a overzealous prosecutor that, you know, might be... If there was just some way maybe we can clean that up just a little bit to make sure that somebody that Really didn't. Somehow their device malfunctioned or something. And again, I don't wanna create a loophole either.

191. 0:54:33

     Sure.

192. 0:54:34

     So I- I'm just asking, maybe think about it.

193. 0:54:36

     Yes, sir.

194. 0:54:36

     Thanks.

195. 0:54:38

     Representative Barnes.

196. 0:54:40

     Thank you. Um, my colleagues pretty much read my mind. I was trying to see how many, um, cases have accidentally flown over a restricted area and you had to, uh, you could drop the case because they explained that it was an accident. Um, and I also support my colleagues by adding knowingly.

197. 0:55:01

     Um, as far as I know, the ones that I've prosecuted are absolutely knowingly flying over. I, I haven't dealt with one per se where it's an accidental flyover. Um, it's the ones we're going after are the ones that are absolutely flying contraband or flying a... Th- they, they work in tandem. You fly one drone in to try and alert the system, and you fly it over here, and it may not have anything on it, but the, the, the drone carrying the package is coming in here.

198. 0:55:28

     Yeah.

199. 0:55:29

     That's the ones-

200. 0:55:29

     It's pretty intricate.

201. 0:55:30

     Oh, it's very-

202. 0:55:31

     Yeah

203. 0:55:31

     ... the, the, as, as, uh, Director, Director Skandalakis said, these, these organizations are quite intricate and quite elaborate.

204. 0:55:40

     Well, thank you. As to not, um, criminalize, uh, those who aren't purposefully doing it, I would, um, support adding knowingly in there. Thank you.

205. 0:55:50

     Thank you, Representative Barnes. Uh, Chairman Thomas needs a follow-up question real quick.

206. 0:55:56

     I- I mean, isn't, aren't we really going... I'm sorry this is gonna sound a little counterintuitive to what you just said, but, I mean, aren't we really going after someone who's intentionally trying to break something? I, I don't know, maybe, uh, but I know it sounds weird, but I don't know if knowingly, I don't, I don't... I guess why does it have, have to... Why does knowingly but not intentionally? I mean, aren't you always intentionally doing it? If you're, you're intentionally doing it with the idea of committing a crime, then you're intentionally doing it. Like, I, I guess the knowingly is where I kinda get hung up.

207. 0:56:28

     So, I mean, it's okay. We can, we can have a little back and forth, and I'm always open for some education on the issue, but, um, uh, can you... Do, do you follow where I'm going with that at all? Um, I mean, they're-

208. 0:56:41

     I can

209. 0:56:41

     ... doing it intentionally to drop something.

210. 0:56:43

     I can, but-

211. 0:56:44

     Yeah

212. 0:56:44

     ... this is a Robert Smith question, and you-

213. 0:56:46

     Yeah.

214. 0:56:46

     Right.

215. 0:56:46

     Come on. Mr. Chairman.

216. 0:56:48

     Mr. Smith, if you could take the podium again, please. And I'd really, guys, I really would like to wrap this up-

217. 0:56:54

     I know

218. 0:56:54

     ... in five minutes. I wanna be respectful to, uh, Chairman Crowe's committee, who've already been in, in process since 1:30 today, so.

219. 0:57:02

     I was w- eating lunch and typing this in 15 minutes. That should've been knowingly and intentionally.

220. 0:57:08

     And, there you go.

221. 0:57:09

     Yes.

222. 0:57:09

     It was the order-

223. 0:57:10

     Yes

224. 0:57:10

     ... was the thing that wa- bothered me.

225. 0:57:12

     And for the, and for the, the, the lawyers and non-lawyers in the room, that's something we actually do in the criminal code is we usually say knowingly and intentionally.

226. 0:57:19

     And intentionally. See, that was the or was what was hanging me up on-

227. 0:57:22

     That's-

228. 0:57:22

     ... this whole thing.

229. 0:57:23

     I was-

230. 0:57:23

     I've never gone to Judy, but I did learn a couple things from the punishments I've had going through it.

231. 0:57:29

     So. And apologies once again. I was typing as fast as I could to get this to you in, in due time. I'm gonna-

232. 0:57:35

     No, thank you. That actually, that, that takes care of all my-

233. 0:57:38

     The chairman has been very gracious to us.

234. 0:57:40

     We-

235. 0:57:40

     We, we got this to him literally, I talked to him literally less than two hours ago, and he said, "Get me something as quick as you can."

236. 0:57:47

     Yeah.

237. 0:57:47

     And that's our fault-

238. 0:57:48

     Yeah

239. 0:57:48

     ... not his fault.

240. 0:57:50

     Well, we appreciate you all doing it. Thank you. Thank, thank you.

241. 0:57:53

     Thank you.

242. 0:57:53

     Representative Holcomb. And Chairman Thomas, thank you for having a keen eye that a Georgia Bulldog could not have. Um, Whip Park.

243. 0:58:02

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, likewise, um, I, I appreciate the clarification in terms of what we are working off of. I think just, you know, upon review of 1230, there seems to be another component of the bill with respect to ticketed events, uh, um, which may have been from a, from last year. Um, I think one point of clarification that would be helpful would be, I know 1230, uh, makes, uh, both components, uh, the ticket event component along with, um, the, uh, the, um, contraband component a misdemeanor, whereas what you're having here is a felony between five to 10 years.

244. 0:58:40

     Uh, so perhaps for legislative council to parse out the two components in which, you know, if we're talking a civil issue, that could be certainly treated as a misdemeanor with respect to a ticketed event. With respect to contraband, uh, y'all would want to see a, a five to 10-year felony moving forward. Is that correct?

245. 0:58:55

     A one to 10 or five dep- depending on, yes. But th- because the rest of our drone laws when it comes to bringing contraband and flying towards prisons are felonies. That's why we wanted to put it under 42518. With regard to the ticketed events, that's why we kind of broke it out into a separate section and me- and meant to. The ticketed events are a completely different thing. Uh, and, and that's not what the aim of... I want the contraband to be consistent with being a felony.

246. 0:59:20

     Yeah. Thank you.

247. 0:59:21

     Hope that addresses your question.

248. 0:59:22

     Thank you for the clarification. I, I look forward to... I think there's bipartisan support, um, you know, for, for y'all's concerns specifically, not the ticketed event component. Um, look forward to reading legislation that clearly effectuates that intent.

249. 0:59:34

     So do I.

250. 0:59:35

     Thank you.

251. 0:59:36

     Yeah. Re- re- Representative Neal.

252. 0:59:39

     Thank you to the chair. Um, so just following up, um, the first question I have, 51, lines 51 through 55 on the packed document, I'm not quite sure how that fits. If you can enlighten me on what that is in reference to.

253. 0:59:54

     I believe that's-

254. 0:59:54

     Representative, that's ex- oh, I'm so sorry.

255. 0:59:56

     I'm-

256. 0:59:56

     I apologize.

257. 0:59:57

     Sorry. That, that's already in 42518.

258. 1:00:00

     Gotcha. Okay.

259. 1:00:00

     Yeah.

260. 1:00:00

     Follow up. Um, so actually, funny enough, I was working on this same initiative a couple years ago with, uh, some sheriff's, sheriff's entities. One was able to make it, one of the majors, um, from one of our sheriff's departments. I think another sheriff or two are trying to come. Um, but pardon me because I told them too late. Um, but working through some of the concerns we had a couple years ago when we were trying to- uh, examine this is, um, one aspect is exceptions. So I know we're trying to go after criminal activity. Um, and we've also, uh, when I was working with Legislative Council in the past, when we were working through constitutional challenges, one thing that did come up was not having certain exceptions.

261. 1:00:39

     Um, like for instance, journalists, researchers, utility companies. I'm assuming that we're capturing those people 'cause if we just say criminal activity.

262. 1:00:47

     Correct.

263. 1:00:48

     Um, but even when it comes to, like, photography and press and that kind of thing. So we do have some, um, precedents from the courts, um, such as National Press Photography Association v. McGraw from 2023, that held, um, that banning, you know, this type of coverage was an issue essentially. But what I'm trying to work through is, uh, supporting the bill, do we guard against these types of constitutional challenges?

264. 1:01:19

     I, I, I, I think yes, we, we, we are guarded because the, again, we're going after a criminal intention act. I mean, obviously if somebody is, you know, GDC is authorizing, uh, photos of their prison being taken, we're not gonna go after them. If, if a utility company is doing surveys and they're over the area, we're not gonna be prosecuting them. That's, that's a non-criminal intent.

265. 1:01:40

     Okay. Um, and for, uh, the purposes of the chair, if y'all are open, we do have people that were trying to work on this a few years ago. If we're gonna hold, they would love to be a part of your process of-

266. 1:01:51

     Oh

267. 1:01:51

     ... complaining what this looks like.

268. 1:01:52

     We'd love to hear from them as soon as possible-

269. 1:01:55

     Okay

270. 1:01:55

     ... if that's helpful Rep- Rep- Representative Neal.

271. 1:01:57

     Yes. Yeah.

272. 1:01:57

     You know, but thank you so much.

273. 1:01:58

     Thank you.

274. 1:01:59

     Uh, to Representative Neal's question, if I could a- alert you to line 76 of, I'm just calling it 42518. Yeah. Um, industry, which would include some of the folks that Representative Neal just listed out, has asked that the and become an or, and I would ask, and I don't know, know if that's a Mr. Smith question or is that to you, but is there objection to making the and an or? On line 76? Line 76 of 42518. I, I don't think we would have a problem with that.

275. 1:02:30

     The federal compliance, I mean, again, that, I think we're talking about things like surveying companies- Yeah ... utility companies. Yeah, I, I don't think we have an issue there. As to down, as you, as you mentioned, we have several prisons down towards our ag world, and we do have more and more legitimate drones doing ag tech work, and we clearly, we, you know, there's, there's no intent obviously- Right ... to your point, but also they are FAA certified, but, but they're not peace officers. Right. So they wanna make sure that they're just kind of moving along and doing their job and making sure it's watered or insect or whatever it may be.

276. 1:03:02

     Right. But we wanna make sure that's happening. So, okay, great. At this point, uh, I believe we have exhausted all of the questions and we can, uh, relieve you from the, the, the hot seat. So I sure do appreciate it so much- Well, and again, I thank you. I apologize for getting this to you so late, but I appreciate the, uh, committees, I appreciate all the questions, and I thank you for your willingness to address this and move forward. No, thank you so much. We appreciate your, your time, and thank you for making this a better bill. So thank you. Uh, at this time, uh, I wanna thank public safety. Um, thank you so much for the questions and the insights.

277. 1:03:34

     You're absolutely more than welcome to stay for the next two bills. Uh, but at this point, um, feel free to depart when you feel it's necessary. To TII, um, we're gonna work with General Counsel and PAC to get back to you as sub. Don't be surprised if we have a meeting before Wednesday, uh, to basically take up what is 1230. Uh, and Whip Park, uh, we'll make sure that that bifurcation is clear, uh, in terms of what we're doing there from the misdemeanor standpoint and the felony standpoint. I don't know if that means we're gonna have to be in two separate titles, which could mean two separate bills.

278. 1:04:06

     Um, but again, I'll let Legislative Council and PAC have that conversation, okay? Okay, thank you Whip Park, I appreciate it. Um, what I'd like to do now, um, were we able to get... Oh, thank you. This is copies being handed out right now of Chair-

279. 1:04:22

     Yeah. Of Chairwoman Parks, um, Chairwoman Kamps, pardon me, uh, bill.

280. 1:04:34

     Oh, you have the correct one? Okay. Hey, everyone. Sorry. Re- re- reverse out what you just received. Representative Evans has the proper copy. Thank you. Our apologies. This is all happening real time. Representative Evans, do you wanna stay in your seat or do you wanna go to the hot seat?

281. 1:04:53

     Stay here if that's-

282. 1:04:54

     No, that's, that's fine.

283. 1:04:57

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And-

284. 1:04:58

     If you, if you could for the purposes of the committee, Representative Evans, if you could just explain, since I believe you're on rules, why it got sent back and what it is that we're trying to accomplish, and then the amendment, is that okay?

285. 1:05:09

     Yes, absolutely.

286. 1:05:10

     Okay, thank you.

287. 1:05:10

     So House Bill 949 is a bill that this committee passed out, um, either earlier this week or last week. It was Representative Beth Kamps' bill about, um, drones, uh, trying to keep drones away from agricultural land, interfering with agricultural land. And, um, after we adjourned, um, I heard from some constituents who had some concern that one of the prohibited activities that we had added was, um, taking videos or pictures of videos, because there are a lot of, um, artists that make, you know, flyover pictures and footage.

288. 1:05:43

     We also, um, Representative Kamp also heard from some film industry folks that were concerned about this, and that was, since it was not her intent, she said she did not mind if I, um, attempted a rule sub that made, um, made that change. And then there was no objection to it from anyone in rules, but they are trying, at least at this point, not to do rule subs. And so they sent the bill back here, um, so that we could, um, add this language if we wanted to. And so the, the proposed substitute is, uh, working from LC560593S, and the relevant change is, um-

289. 1:06:28

     If you look at the bottom of page three, starting at line 65, the subsection E, um, you'll see it, it has three sections, one, two, three, instead of four, and the video photography is out. Um, but you still cannot harass livestock, so if you are using a, a drone with a camera on it to harass, you can't. That... You're, you're still gonna be caught up in this, but it has to be, um, a knowing violation starting on line 71. So Representative Camp had another committee she had to present in, and so, um, she shares that she is fine with this, and, um, and I would just ask that this committee pass out this substitute.

290. 1:07:12

     Thank you, Representative Evans, and, ah, I appreciate you working with Chairwoman Camp, uh, to get this perfected and get this across the line. W- Park, you have a question of Representative Evans?

291. 1:07:22

     Uh, no, Mr. Chairman. I, at the appropriate time, wanna make a motion do pass.

292. 1:07:25

     I believe you are at the appropriate time.

293. 1:07:27

     Uh, at this time, I'd like to make a motion do pass substitute, uh, for HB 949.

294. 1:07:33

     I have a motion. I have a second. Do I have any discussion? Hearing no discussion, all in favor say aye.

295. 1:07:40

     Aye.

296. 1:07:41

     All opposed? Congratulations, Chairwoman Camp, you weren't here, and you're moving back to rules. All right. Okay. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Representative Evans. Uh, sure do appreciate you working with the chairwoman to get this done. Uh, now, um, and Representative Kemi- Kendrick, would you like to sit there or go to the hot seat? It's completely up to you. Then I'm gonna go ahead and open it up for you, and if you can just go through the LC.

297. 1:08:11

     I believe we have the right one, but if you can just confirm it.

298. 1:08:13

     Okay.

299. 1:08:14

     And, uh, please go right ahead. Thank you.

300. 1:08:16

     Okay, this is the s- we have a substitute to HB 478, and it is LC 640063F, so that is the latest substitute.

301. 1:08:27

     Hold on. We don't-

302. 1:08:28

     Still

303. 1:08:31

     going.

304. 1:08:31

     This is why it's important to name out the LC. Hold on just one second. We don't have the substitute. We have the, the bill bill, not the substitute.

305. 1:08:41

     Yep.

306. 1:08:42

     My apologies. You sent it to our... Okay. All right.

307. 1:08:55

     Can I just see... Give us just one second everybody. My apologies.

308. 1:09:09

     Yeah, exactly.

309. 1:09:21

     I don't mean to hold you up, but what I'd like to do is this. We're going to definitely have a meeting either tomorrow or Tuesday. Would you be okay if we get this straight, do it tomorrow or Tuesday, and you're first to go? Okay, and I'll come behind you with what I think is 1230, or it could be two separate bills. Is that okay with you, Representative Kendrick? Okay. All right. Um, hey, everyone. Uh, my apologies. Uh, we definitely-- the I men- mistake is on us. Uh, we didn't have the sub in your packet.

310. 1:09:51

     We need the sub to be in your packet. Here's the two things I'm gonna ask Stacey to do. I'm gonna ask her to email you the sub so you have it in your hands today, so you can be taking a look at it. We're gonna see if we can get a room tomorrow. If we can, we'll convene tomorrow. Worst case scenario, we'll, we'll convene Monday or Tuesday. Monday's a committee day. Tuesday is a full session day. But I'm not gonna wait until Wednesday to hear Representative Kendrick's bill. Is that fair? Okay. Uh, is there any other business that the committee needs to hit?

311. 1:10:22

     We're adjourned. Thank you