House Regulated Industries Committee, February 23, 2026

Transcript

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

1. 0:11:17

   Thank, thank, thank you so much.

2. 0:11:22

   We'll get you out quick.

3. 0:11:23

   Thank you.

4. 0:11:23

   Yeah.

5. 0:11:24

   Thank you so much.

6. 0:12:19

   All right, ladies and gentlemen. Ladies and gentlemen, if you'll come to order. If that guy in the plaid lumberjack shirt would mind having a seat. You're interrupting the meeting. All right.

7. 0:12:38

   Come on up, Mr. Mitchell. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we now have a quorum, and I call this meeting of the House Regulated Industries to order. We have a number of bills on today, and the first bill up is gonna be 1197. It was properly vended in the, uh, subcommittee. I'm gonna turn the ta- I'm gonna turn the chair over to Vice Chairman Washburn, and I'll present this bill.

8. 0:13:26

   Chair recognizes Chairman Powell, uh, to present House Bill 1197. Thank you, Chairman Washburn. Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen of the committee, as usual, we have a COAM bill every year. You know, this is a gift that keeps on giving between the relationship between that industry and the Lottery Commission. This year, thankfully, it's a lot, uh, simpler. For those of y'all that remember all the discussion over the years, this is an industry that raises about $200 million for the state lottery for those games.

9. 0:13:57

   This is mostly an admin bill this year, and I'll go through the sections and what it does. Number one, this allows darts and billiards, something that could've been done by the lottery, but they've seen not to do it over the years for whatever reason. So if there's a dart tournament or a billiard tournament, that they can receive gift cards, non-cash redemption cards. Uh, if you'll look in section two, six, and seven, this establishes a method of progressive discipline.

10. 0:14:28

    Any administrative issues that have been dealt with with a retailer or a master, instead of, uh, instead of waiting or dropping the hammer on the first offense, treat it like alcohol. That if it's an offense, then they can pay a fine, be suspended or whatever, progressive through first, second, and third offenses, and that would be in section two, six, and seven. Clear notice of, of violations. One of the habits that the Lottery Commission has had is if they catch a retailer or somebody doing something, well, they don't always tell them about it, so they let the next one and the next one, so the violation, so they can just basically suspend them at one time.

11. 0:15:11

    They need to, if they have caught a retailer doing something wrong, then they need to be notified and held accountable on that spot, and this would basically s- uh, give clear notice of any violations. Uh, that's in section three. In section four, the Office of, uh, Hearings, the hearing officer, that appeal will go straight to the business court of Fulton County. Uh, in section five, a, a direct appeal of the hearing officer's decision w- to expedite the process to s- to avoid any unnecessary delays for small businesses, this goes to the business court.

12. 0:15:51

    That's in section five. Stops, to stop frivolous li- uh, litigation. We have a situation in the COAM that some of y'all's been around for a while, y'all understand, that if a master has a, uh, a contract with a retailer, there's a period of time that they have to go through before they can give that up. In a lot of cases, a master, some master may actually file litigation. Sometimes it's frivolous, sometimes it's not.

13. 0:16:22

    But if it's deemed to be frivolous, then any money that has been taken in in that 50/50 split, if it's deemed to be frivolous, no matter whether it's on the, uh, retailer side or on the master side, whoever is the loser that was perpetrating frivolous, frivolous litigation, then their money is then disgorged, and it goes in its entirety to the Lottery Commission. This is to stop frivolous, uh, litigation in that. And then la- and that's in section seven.

14. 0:16:52

    And then last but not least, one of the things that we've been trying to get the lottery to do for years, and that's to show how many tickets, how many lottery products are actually exchanged for winnings. Uh, and this is some kind of technology that they can probably do. And what we're doing is we're saying that the lottery in conjunction with the lottery adv- the COAM Advisory Board, that they'll perfect some way of showing what those tickets and how many tickets are actually being redeemed for COAM.

15. 0:17:24

    Uh, Mr. Chairman, that's, ladies and gentlemen, that's what this bill does. Like I said, it's a lot simpler than some in past years

16. 0:17:32

    Well, thank you Mr. Chairman. Uh, members of the committee, are there any questions of, of the chairman?

17. 0:17:40

    I see no questions. What's the pleasure of the committee? Move to pass. Second. Second. We have a motion and a second for a due pass recommendation. Is there any other discussion on that?

18. 0:17:54

    All in favor of a due pass recommendation on House Bill 1197, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, please say no. No. That passes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, me- uh, members of the committee.

19. 0:18:31

    Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. Now, we'll move on to some other... We got a few, um, smaller bills that we're gonna deal with, 'cause we've got some pretty heavy ones that's gonna come up, uh, later. Uh, House Bill 1392.

20. 0:18:50

    This would be by Representative Santos.

21. 0:18:55

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, for the hearing today. House Bill 1392, LC number 560601, relates to funeral establishments and the number of caskets that are required to be displayed on site. Under current law, funeral homes are required to maintain eight full-sized caskets. This legislation would require that requirement to be four. This changes reflects the way funeral services operate today. Most families make their selections from the general price list, catalogs, or digital options, while still having full access to every available casket.

22. 0:19:33

    Consumer choice and price transparency are not affected. For smaller funeral homes, this simply provides flexibility to use their limited space for serving families, visitations, and accessibility. This legislation comes with the input and support of Representative Stinson and Representative Griffin, both of whom are experienced funeral directors and understand the day-to-day operation of these establishments. And I myself have my funeral director from my district here with me today.

23. 0:20:05

    Mr. Chairman and committee, I respectfully ask for your favorable consideration, and I do have a few signed up to support us here today. Thank you. Thank you so much. And brevity gets extra points from this chair today given the number of bills that we have. Uh, this bill has not gone through the subcommittee, uh, so we are going to take just a brief minute of comments. And if it's helpful, ask your, uh, funeral home director- Yes ...

24. 0:20:36

    if he would step up and, uh- Ms., Ms. Lemon. Yes, ma'am. Call her to the- If you would.

25. 0:20:45

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, and I will be brief. My name is Dana Lemon. She is a, uh, currently serving as a president of W.D. Lemon and Sons Funeral Home, located in Henry County and Clayton County, Georgia. For 67 years, my family has served the Southern Crescent, beginning with my mother and father, and leading now to my nephew. We have three generations. I am a licensed funeral director and embalmer, and strongly support this bill.

26. 0:21:20

    As a professional, I know my community, I know the families that I serve, and for 67 years, we've been able to meet their needs during their s- some of the toughest times of their lives. Eight caskets is a requirement that I do not support. We know that sometimes families don't even wanna go in the selection room. They simply wanna look at a catalog, they wanna look on a digital screen, or they've already made up their minds from previous experiences.

27. 0:21:53

    Funeral directors should not be f- made to have eight caskets in their selection room as a law. Give us the option. Give us the preference of making those selections for ourselves, because we are professionals. We know our pr- our communities, and we know our families. Thank you for the opportunity to speak, sir. Thank you so much. Uh, Representative Griffin. And remember, Representative, brevity gets extra points.

28. 0:22:24

    Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Chair and committee. Uh, and I know most of you up there all back when I was in the Senate. But my family has... The, the funeral home that we own has been around over 100 years. My family owned it for about 60 years, and I am a licensed, uh, funeral director and embalmer. I understand the business very well, and I agree with this, uh, this bill.

29. 0:22:58

    We need to resu- reduce it from eight to four. We should have something in the, for the, for the, for the family to come in and, and look at. Although, as, uh, Senator Williams, and we in the same, we in Millersville, and we know and we've been in the business with my, my family for a long, working with the family. So I ask, uh, please, uh, do pass this bill. Your word is- Was that short enough? Your, your... Well, actually, a little bit too long.

30. 0:23:30

    All right. I have represent- I have Senator Williams down here on this one, too. But since- And vote for the bill. Since... That's, now that's what I call brevity.

31. 0:23:41

    I, I see a light down here. Representative Williams, are you, uh, wanting to ask a question as usual, or you wanting to make a motion?

32. 0:23:48

    Let me do the usual first, and then I'll, at the appropriate time, I want to say I, I don't even know why you need four. I buy off Amazon, and I have never touched an item I purchased. Uh, I don't see the difference in me picking ... I saw a whole bunch that Representative Vitter had, and I was ready to pick one, do a little pre-planning, so. Nope. I don't even see the necessity for four, but, uh-

33. 0:24:12

    I'll make that motion.

34. 0:24:14

    And I'll second.

35. 0:24:16

    We have a motion and we have a second. And it wouldn't surprise me that a man that likes to get his hair cut from a mobile hair- ... uh, barbershop. We have a motion and we have a second. Do we have any further questions? Any amendments?

36. 0:24:29

    Yeah, I-

37. 0:24:29

    Any concerns?

38. 0:24:30

    I would like to make that amendment to move the-

39. 0:24:32

    You're recognized to make an amendment.

40. 0:24:34

    I would. I'd like to make the amendment that we change, that we change it from four to one. Uh, I don't, I don't see why you need more than one if, if people are buying ... I mean, you can buy a car online now.

41. 0:24:48

    Yeah.

42. 0:24:48

    You can buy, you, you, you ... I don't know why we're regulating it to, where you have to have four.

43. 0:24:54

    Well, I advise you not to use, uh, buying cars online as an example, but, uh-

44. 0:24:58

    I know you're ... I know you get a little nervous when you say that, but, uh, at the end of the day, people, the, the habits of consumers are changing, and this is just saying that consumers are much more comfortable sitting in an office looking at something online. It's such a difficult time in this day and age than they, than they have been in the past, and I think, I think it would be a, a, a, make, make a sense to me.

45. 0:25:22

    All right. We have a motion that we strike four to one.

46. 0:25:29

    I want to discuss that as a commission.

47. 0:25:32

    I see. And that would be on line 26. All right. Any discussion on that?

48. 0:25:38

    Yes, sir, please.

49. 0:25:39

    All right. Sir, you're recognized, Chairman DeLoach.

50. 0:25:43

    As I understand it, the current, the current bill says four. That doesn't mean you have to have four in a showroom, but you ought to be able to have at least four on the premises if you're operating and open for the public. I mean, some mothers happen to be unfortunate enough to have several deaths at the same time in a community, so you need to have a little something to operate your business. That's my comment.

51. 0:26:09

    Well, thank you for your comment. We have a motion. Is anybody seconding Chairman Carpenter's?

52. 0:26:18

    I'll second.

53. 0:26:21

    All right. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any amendments to the amendment?

54. 0:26:29

    No amendments to the amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Opposed? No.

55. 0:26:38

    All right. Show of hands. All in favor, say aye. One, two, three, four, five. Opposed? One, two, three- ... four. Ah. Uh, the amendment-

56. 0:26:57

    Passes

57. 0:26:57

    ... passes. All right. Now, back to the, back to the bill itself proper. You have in front of you, uh, HB1392 as amended. Any further amendments? Any further discussion? Further comments? If not, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed?

58. 0:27:18

    No.

59. 0:27:19

    And the ayes clearly have it. Thank you, Representative. If you'll hang around just a little bit, we'll get you a, uh, notice that you can take to the Rules Committee. Matter of fact, yeah.

60. 0:27:33

    Mr. Chairman.

61. 0:27:36

    Wouldn't the amendment been one?

62. 0:27:40

    Yeah.

63. 0:27:40

    Isn't that?

64. 0:27:41

    Let me go back and see. That's what I remember. Was it one? One. It was one.

65. 0:27:48

    Pat?

66. 0:27:48

    One.

67. 0:27:49

    Uh-

68. 0:27:49

    No, it should be two. It's probably two.

69. 0:27:52

    We ,...

70. 0:27:55

    Hey, honey.

71. 0:27:55

    How you doing?

72. 0:27:57

    Good to see you.

73. 0:27:58

    We need you to sit on back down.

74. 0:28:00

    I got a bill I gotta talk about.

75. 0:28:04

    No.

76. 0:28:04

    Good seeing you.

77. 0:28:05

    You too. Don't be a stranger.

78. 0:28:06

    All right.

79. 0:28:07

    Oh, sorry.

80. 0:28:09

    What was the amendment from? One?

81. 0:28:11

    Next up, next up we have a couple of easy, we have a couple of easy resolutions.

82. 0:28:19

    So it was passed from one. It has to ... They have to vote on that.

83. 0:28:26

    Can we have a little order?

84. 0:28:28

    Do it.

85. 0:28:33

    Gentlemen, gentlemen.

86. 0:28:39

    We have up now H-, uh, HR 752. Representative Barnes.

87. 0:28:59

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Committee. I am going to present to you HR 752, which creates a study committee for your favorite cosmetology and barbering education , not that you guys haven't heard enough about cosmetology and barbering. So to clear it up, I just would like to create a study committee so we can understand what they bring to the state, how many billions they bring to the state, what, uh, roadblocks they have in licensing, and, um, trying to s- understand if we can help them with their workforce pipeline.

88. 0:29:40

    Um, they don't fall under TCSG As other colleges do. So I would like to create a joint study committee. I would have to get a substitute for this because the date has expired.

89. 0:29:59

    Line 73 would, um, be changed.

90. 0:30:04

    You'd need to get a substitute would you?

91. 0:30:06

    Own substitute.

92. 0:30:08

    Awesome.

93. 0:30:09

    All right.

94. 0:30:09

    Be great. Thank you.

95. 0:30:11

    All right, to the committee-

96. 0:30:11

    Ask for your favorable consideration

97. 0:30:13

    ... you have been appointed to the joint study committee. And if you will look on here, ladies and gentlemen, to be composed of 12 members. All right.

98. 0:30:36

    Five, five, and... Five from the Senate, five from the House, and one picked by the governor from each side. A non- A, a community member from each side. An expert.

99. 0:30:50

    Well, I only have one comment to make from this. Well, that's a pretty high number of members, especially given the, uh, composure in the Senate this year that over half of them are running for higher office.

100. 0:31:02

     Well, we can amend that, too.

101. 0:31:03

     I don't know that you'll, I don't know that you'll get five out of the Senate, but, uh, what's the will of the committee?

102. 0:31:10

     Move to pass, Mr. Chairman.

103. 0:31:14

     We have a motion to pass. Do we have a second?

104. 0:31:19

     Second.

105. 0:31:20

     All right.

106. 0:31:23

     Yeah, William.

107. 0:31:23

     Yes, ma'am, Madam Chairman.

108. 0:31:24

     Uh, I think I would like to make an amendment. Instead of, it was five-

109. 0:31:28

     Five

110. 0:31:28

     ... on each side, three-

111. 0:31:30

     Yeah

112. 0:31:30

     ... and then, uh, one appoi- one from each side appointed by the governor.

113. 0:31:37

     All right.

114. 0:31:39

     We'd have to change the line 21.

115. 0:31:41

     So we have an amendment from, we would, on line 21, strike that to 7. Um-

116. 0:31:53

     A bit clarification on that. We-

117. 0:31:55

     Ch- change it to eight.

118. 0:31:56

     That would be-

119. 0:31:57

     To eight?

120. 0:31:58

     Yeah. We should go do three-

121. 0:31:59

     Three on each side and one community member.

122. 0:32:01

     Three, one. Three, one.

123. 0:32:02

     Yeah.

124. 0:32:03

     Give me the numbers. You already looked at-

125. 0:32:04

     Yeah. 21, change it to eight.

126. 0:32:06

     All right.

127. 0:32:09

     22 to three.

128. 0:32:12

     All right.

129. 0:32:12

     And on 27 to three.

130. 0:32:13

     Okay. Hold on. Only one. Okay. That's fine. Go ahead.

131. 0:32:20

     Community member.

132. 0:32:21

     Now, okay. Mr. Chairman?

133. 0:32:23

     Where, where is that?

134. 0:32:24

     Down at, uh, on line 25 and line 21.

135. 0:32:29

     She's asking for a community member appointed by the governor.

136. 0:32:32

     Mr. Chairman?

137. 0:32:32

     There's nothing in there for the governor. Sorry, Governor. I know he's got people here. So that's seven members.

138. 0:32:38

     I can't get-

139. 0:32:39

     That's seven, not eight.

140. 0:32:41

     No, there's-

141. 0:32:41

     Seven

142. 0:32:41

     ... the president of the Senate adds somebody.

143. 0:32:44

     There is a community member from each side appointed-

144. 0:32:46

     And the Speaker adds

145. 0:32:46

     ... from President and Speaker, but if you want to do one community member, I'm good with that as well.

146. 0:32:50

     And the governor appoints one.

147. 0:32:52

     Make it 11.

148. 0:32:52

     All right, Sheila. Seven.

149. 0:32:54

     I have one here and then down here, one additional.

150. 0:32:57

     Oh, all right. All right.

151. 0:33:02

     Can we make it loosey-goosey?

152. 0:33:03

     One, yes. The non-legislative member. Let's go with eight.

153. 0:33:07

     All right. So the amendment should probably read, on line 21, 8, and on line 22, strike 5, add 3. Uh, you leave the one on line 25. On line 27, strike 5 and go to 3, and then you also have one by the President of the Senate on line 29, leave that at 1.

154. 0:33:29

     Um-

155. 0:33:31

     That's eight, if you'd like-

156. 0:33:33

     Uh, Mr. Chairman?

157. 0:33:34

     Yes, ma'am.

158. 0:33:34

     If I might, uh, it has been suggested as we talked among ourselves that it might be better to have, um, an odd number, and that would be fine with me if we can amend it and drop one of those. And at your will, sir.

159. 0:33:59

     Three from the House, three from the Senate.

160. 0:34:25

     Makes a big impact.

161. 0:34:29

     What's the will of the committee on-

162. 0:34:30

     Striking an extra number here. We've got eight right now. To strike one, you could either, if you got three from the Senate, three from the House. One is, uh, by the Speaker.

163. 0:34:44

     So I think-

164. 0:34:45

     I would recommend-

165. 0:34:47

     The amendment, as I understood what you said, Mr. Chairman, is that correct?

166. 0:34:51

     Pardon?

167. 0:34:52

     Madam Chair, three, three, and one?

168. 0:34:54

     Three, three, and one.

169. 0:34:55

     That's all.

170. 0:34:56

     I mean, we have three from the House and three from the Senate. Should we let the governor appoint Mike?

171. 0:35:00

     Have the same thing and make it to nine.

172. 0:35:05

     Yeah. All right. Then I would recommend we strike on line 24, the Speaker of the House shall appoint one additional, one non-legislative. If we strike that, that gets rid of one, and then down here in which it says the President of the Senate, let the governor appoint that.

173. 0:35:19

     That's it.

174. 0:35:21

     All right.

175. 0:35:25

     Now, does everybody understand that motion?

176. 0:35:27

     So you change eight to seven.

177. 0:35:28

     We're gonna change the, uh, line 21 from eight to seven. On line 22, we strike five, go to three. Uh, we strike line 24 after the Speaker of the House. We strike that to the end of that section at 26. On line 27, we go from five to three, and then on line- 29, President of the s- of the Senate, the Governor of the State of Georgia. All right. And one other thing, if I might say, that if you don't mind, we wanna add one other amendment to that.

178. 0:36:03

     On line 73, we changed the, uh, the, the abolish this, that it would stand abolished on December the 1st, and change that to 27. 26, I'm sorry.

179. 0:36:17

     So moved.

180. 0:36:17

     All right.

181. 0:36:18

     So moved. Thank you.

182. 0:36:20

     All right, that should make it all proper. All right. Do we have an am- we have a proposed amendment, if everybody understands the amendment?

183. 0:36:27

     Yep. Yep.

184. 0:36:28

     Do we have a... Did we have a second on this?

185. 0:36:31

     Second.

186. 0:36:32

     We did have a second. All in favor of the amendment say aye.

187. 0:36:35

     Aye.

188. 0:36:35

     Opposed. All right, now going back to the body of the bill, HR 752 as a committee substitute. Any further questions? Any further amendments? If not, all in favor say aye.

189. 0:36:50

     Aye.

190. 0:36:50

     Opposed. And the ayes have it. Representative.

191. 0:36:53

     Thank you, Committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

192. 0:36:55

     You're more than welcome.

193. 0:36:58

     All right.

194. 0:36:58

     All right. Let's see here. Now we have another little jewel, HR 952. Representative Willis. Representative Willis here?

195. 0:37:15

     No.

196. 0:37:15

     Well, we have another study committee, and this is creating the House Study Committee of Risk Associated With Hair Straightening Products. All right.

197. 0:37:26

     Yeah. Yeah. That one's for the record.

198. 0:37:30

     Hey, I think, uh, how long we got?

199. 0:37:33

     How many members of this we got?

200. 0:37:37

     It's just a House one.

201. 0:37:39

     House resolution. Uh, this one has eight members. All right. This'll be easy to change. What's the will of the committee on it? Do I have a motion on this bill?

202. 0:37:50

     Yes.

203. 0:37:53

     Three.

204. 0:37:54

     Yes.

205. 0:37:55

     Mr. Chair, being an expert in this, uh, field , uh, I move do pass.

206. 0:38:00

     All right, we have a motion. Do we have a second?

207. 0:38:03

     You're here. You need to do it.

208. 0:38:05

     Yeah.

209. 0:38:06

     You're impacting Representative Mitchell.

210. 0:38:10

     Do we have a second?

211. 0:38:11

     Second.

212. 0:38:12

     We have a second. Any, um, any discussion? Any amendments?

213. 0:38:18

     Yes. I think we need to change the, uh, line 19 to be composed of, say, five members of the House of Representatives. This is just a House-only committee.

214. 0:38:27

     That sounds lovely. All right.

215. 0:38:29

     And then on line 55 to change it to December 1st of 2026. And I believe that will

216. 0:38:39

     solve that.

217. 0:38:40

     Second.

218. 0:38:41

     Very good.

219. 0:38:43

     All right.

220. 0:38:43

     All right. We have a motion. We have a- an amendment. Do we have a second to this amendment?

221. 0:38:52

     Yes. He seconded it.

222. 0:38:54

     We have a second to the amendment. Any further discussion? All right. All in favor of the amendment say aye.

223. 0:39:01

     Aye.

224. 0:39:02

     Opposed. The ayes have it. Any further discussion before we take a vote on the body of the bill? HR 952 as amended by committee substitute, all in favor say aye.

225. 0:39:14

     Aye.

226. 0:39:15

     Opposed. The ayes have it. Representative. Representative, you're... Oh, she's not here. I'm sorry.

227. 0:39:22

     Okay.

228. 0:39:22

     All right.

229. 0:39:23

     Moving right along.

230. 0:39:24

     Tell them she's just done something no one's ever done in this committee. They just got a bill moved and they wasn't here to talk about it.

231. 0:39:31

     Wait, what?

232. 0:39:31

     Changed a committee.

233. 0:39:32

     Oh, yeah. We did change a committee.

234. 0:39:36

     You got it. We're-

235. 0:39:38

     Repre- Representative Crowe.

236. 0:39:40

     Sad day. Sad day for the state, and I move to turn it over.

237. 0:39:46

     Welcome.

238. 0:39:48

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the committee, uh, House Bill 1305. This is the Home Inspector Licensing Act of Georgia, and very simply, uh, it establishes mandatory state licensure for home inspectors. Home inspection companies in Georgia, uh, are regulated by the State License Board for Residential and General Contractors. Um,

239. 0:40:11

     is that brief enough, Mr. Chairman?

240. 0:40:12

     That's brief enough.

241. 0:40:14

     I like that.

242. 0:40:16

     Go ahead.

243. 0:40:17

     I did.

244. 0:40:19

     Oh.

245. 0:40:20

     I was so brief you missed it. It just establishes mandatory state licensure for home inspectors and home inspection companies. It sets out the, um, requirements, uh, for them to be licensed. It defines a home inspector, home inspection, ancillary services, standards of practice. Uh, it requires them to provide or maintain some general liability and errors in admissions insurance. Um, it talks about, uh, the investigations, uh, and discipline that can be administered by the board.

246. 0:40:51

     And then it has some exclusions of folks that it does not impact, uh, to include licensed appraisers, brokers or salespersons, and residential contractors or government employees conducting official duties. Um, Georgia is one of the few states that doesn't have, um, mandatory licensure for home inspectors, and home buyers and sellers rely on these inspections, often the largest financial attrac- uh, transaction of their lives, and there's no state consumer protection backstop, and this would add that.

247. 0:41:25

     And I'm happy to answer any questions if there are any.

248. 0:41:28

     You have some questions.

249. 0:41:29

     Okay.

250. 0:41:30

     Dr. Williams.

251. 0:41:32

     Thank you, Chairman. Have you grandfathered it all? Will everybody have to now step up? Will there be any grandfather clauses?

252. 0:41:40

     There will be, yes, sir. If, uh, starting, uh, July 1st of 2027, those already in the business-

253. 0:41:46

     Okay

254. 0:41:46

     ... uh, will be able to apply-

255. 0:41:47

     Okay

256. 0:41:47

     ... to be grandfathered in, so.

257. 0:41:49

     Okay. Thank you.

258. 0:41:52

     All right

259. 0:41:54

     Let's see. Chair McCollum.

260. 0:41:56

     Thank you so much. Uh, but they would, of course, apply underneath if they become faulty. If they makes, do a poor job, then you guys could revoke those license at that point?

261. 0:42:07

     Correct. Yes.

262. 0:42:08

     Okay. And then my other question is how stiff is this pass a criminal background check on line 62? Are we talking what they've done 20 years ago? Are we talking what they did 10 years ago? What is the... Is there any kind of clarity on, uh, what crimes wouldn't allow you to receive this license?

263. 0:42:29

     I think that would be determined by the board. That's the way the Real Estate, uh, Commission does now.

264. 0:42:34

     Okay.

265. 0:42:34

     They can determine, you have to have a background check, but then they can take some things into account-

266. 0:42:39

     Sure

267. 0:42:39

     ... as to whether or not, uh, the severity of it.

268. 0:42:41

     And, and do we have the APA on this board as it, as it is now? Do we have that? She's shaking her head yes.

269. 0:42:50

     Yeah.

270. 0:42:50

     Okay. So just wanna make sure. Obviously not trying to... It's important for home buyers, uh, there's no doubt, um, keeping this industry clean's important, so thank you for those questions.

271. 0:42:59

     Yep, thanks.

272. 0:43:00

     Very good. Number 18, that would be Representative Jackson.

273. 0:43:04

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple question. On line number 60, 10 years of experience?

274. 0:43:11

     Yes.

275. 0:43:12

     What is it today?

276. 0:43:14

     Well, there's none.

277. 0:43:15

     You can just walk up .

278. 0:43:16

     You can just put a ladder in a truck and say, "I'm a home inspector."

279. 0:43:20

     That's all. That's all you need to.

280. 0:43:23

     There are no licensure requirements right now. Anybody, you could be a home inspector as of right now by saying, "I'm a home inspector."

281. 0:43:29

     That's right.

282. 0:43:30

     And you could set your services out and charge people to inspect their home.

283. 0:43:34

     Really?

284. 0:43:34

     Yes, sir.

285. 0:43:35

     No, no schooling? No qualification requirements?

286. 0:43:38

     Not a lick.

287. 0:43:39

     Just show up.

288. 0:43:39

     Okay.

289. 0:43:40

     You can do that.

290. 0:43:40

     A follow-up, Mr. Chairman.

291. 0:43:42

     Yes, sir.

292. 0:43:42

     Um, on line 68 and 70, um, what's the minimum today? Uh, uh, you have a quarter million here, but what's any minimum today?

293. 0:43:51

     There, there are no standards for home inspectors in Georgia at all.

294. 0:43:55

     Huh?

295. 0:43:58

     That's right.

296. 0:44:00

     You can home inspect quicker than you can cut hair in this state, I can tell you that.

297. 0:44:02

     Yeah. Yeah. You can't cut hair, but you can go out and inspect somebody's half-a-million-dollar home.

298. 0:44:07

     A home where you, where you can inspect a half-million-dollar house.

299. 0:44:10

     Okay.

300. 0:44:13

     It's a big old mess. Do you mind if I m- in my mobile pa- park-

301. 0:44:18

     All right

302. 0:44:19

     ... over there?

303. 0:44:22

     All right. Do we have any other questions from any of the committee members?

304. 0:44:27

     Is there any other questions that the, uh, the chairman can, uh, answer for you about home inspectors in the wild, wild west? Well, I do see some folks that opened up. Number 23.

305. 0:44:38

     When it's appropriate, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion.

306. 0:44:40

     Well, let's get to this next question. This would be-

307. 0:44:44

     Yeah. And, and Mr. Chair-

308. 0:44:45

     Yes, sir

309. 0:44:45

     ... when it's appropriate, I'll second, uh, his motion.

310. 0:44:47

     All right. We have a motion and we have a second.

311. 0:44:50

     All right.

312. 0:44:50

     All right. Do we have any further questions from any of the committee members?

313. 0:44:54

     Quorum, your honor.

314. 0:44:55

     Well, this might be an easier one than the others. All right. No amendments, no discussion. All in favor say aye.

315. 0:45:02

     Aye.

316. 0:45:03

     Any opposed?

317. 0:45:05

     Thank you very much.

318. 0:45:06

     Thank you. I hope we were able to accommodate. All right. Let's see here. Jeff Ledford wanted to speak, but I guess it's, uh-

319. 0:45:15

     I'll wait. I'll wait my turn.

320. 0:45:17

     That's, that, that is an excellent-

321. 0:45:19

     That's the way. That's the way

322. 0:45:19

     ... that's an excellent idea, Jeff. Thank you so much.

323. 0:45:22

     You know how to get out of here, don't you?

324. 0:45:23

     All right, folks. Now we're getting down into the-

325. 0:45:26

     The nitty-gritty

326. 0:45:27

     ... we're in the nitty-gritty. All right. Mr. Holcomb, House Bill 892.

327. 0:45:32

     It's on there.

328. 0:45:38

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. This is my first time ever here, um, so I appreciate it. This bill is really pretty simple, uh, but it has an important purpose. The district that I represent in the latest iteration, it was changed to include, um, at least two spas that are open 24 hours a day. Um, I've talked to my neighbors in the community, and there's a general sense as to what is taking place in those places, which if you are, um, obtaining services for a legitimate massage, um, I, I think a fair argument is that you don't need 24 hours of availability.

329. 0:46:18

     So what the, what the bill does is it would change it to 10:00 PM to 6:00 PM. And I checked, I used to represent Buford Highway, I don't anymore, but they have a number of massage parlors that are legitimate. The latest that I've found of any being open is about 9:30. And the idea behind this is primarily to try to attract hu- uh, attack human trafficking by going after the profit aspect of it. With these places being open 24 hours, and many of those who are working there not in fact doing it of free will, uh, it's to try to address that by putting some, some boundaries in terms of, of what is allowed.

330. 0:47:03

     And, and I'll also share with you, because I've done some homework on this, there are active investigations by law enforcement. In fact, just three days ago in Sandy Springs, um, several parlors were shut down for expected prostitution and human trafficking. But I've talked to people that work in law enforcement, and while one might have, um, a- Ah, ah, a thought of, of making it humorous in terms of what this is about. Law enforcement officers really don't like these cases.

331. 0:47:35

     I mean, one, they have lots of other things that are priorities that they're focusing their time on in terms of murders and rapes and sexual assaults, but secondly, it's, it's massively embarrassing to be put into these situations and then to have to go into court to testify about it as well. So is this a, a cure-all? No, absolutely not. But the idea behind it is to try to use the lever that we have in terms of regulation to address this very real and significant problem. And this bill was dropped last year, so if the committee, uh, were interested in moving it forward, there are a couple things to highlight just quickly, is the date would need to be changed because it has 2025, and I don't know if you'd also wanna make it July 1st.

332. 0:48:17

     Um, there will still be some World Cup activities post July 1st, so it could impact, um, some behavior for that. And then 10:00 PM to 6:00 PM, the idea behind that was anybody that wants legitimate services, whether you work for a second, third shift, you should still be able to have access to that with those hours. But if you wanted to potentially extend it to, like, 11:00 PM, I think that's still reasonable. But what we're trying to get at, though, is these 24-hour places which all of us know what's going on there.

333. 0:48:48

     Thank you.

334. 0:48:50

     Good. All right. Reverend Williams.

335. 0:48:56

     Thank you, Chairman. Uh, quickly, at the appropriate time, I offer the motion. You've served with Third ID at Fort Stewart, biggest in the state. We've never had a 24-hour, and I think it's pretty obvious what a 24-hour massage parlor does, at the appropriate time.

336. 0:49:14

     Well, this isn't the appropriate time. I got a couple of comments I wanna make about this, and I, I understand what you're wanting to get to. But, you know, we do have legitimate masseuses in this state. I, for one, have one, and she's a certified medical masseuse from an accident that I had putting up campaign signs four years ago that stripped all the muscles in my back. And I go to her on a regular basis that she does this Thai massage to keep those muscles stretched out.

337. 0:49:45

     Now, sometimes I go whenever it's available. During the legislative session, I have been known to go at 6:00 or 7:00 o'clock in the evening to her, to her place of business. I have concerns that in trying to clean up an area of these less reputable places, that we're gonna get into the professional masseuses, the ones that actually do massage therapy. Would you consider putting some language in here?

338. 0:50:17

     I know you're a pretty bright guy. Can you consider some language that would give a differentiate, differential between the places that you're talking about and a legitimate masseuse? Given the fact that we don't, our mas- masseuse laws in this state, they don't recognize medical masseuses in Georgia, which is a shame. It is a true shame. Is there some language that you could get to give some differential about this so that these establishes you, these establishments you're talking about?

339. 0:50:49

     I don't have a problem with trying to go after these guys that are, these folks that are doing things that are for pleasure only, for no better term that I could give, as opposed to folks who use massage therapy and practice those arts. Is there any way that you can come up with some specific language?

340. 0:51:09

     I think this addresses your concern, um, Mr. Chairman, in, in a couple respects. One is that the code only defines those that provide massage services as being legitimate. So that's already within the code, is for one to have a license to practice. You're already regulated, and you're already presumably only doing what's allowed under the law. And there are things which are specifically excluded under the law, which would include soliciting.

341. 0:51:40

     Secondly, f- just using your example, 6:00 or 7:00 PM would be fine. It's difficult for me to imagine a circumstance where somebody would need it at 1:00, 2:00, 3:00 in the morning. A- and so, um, as proposed, it's from 10:00 to 6:00. As I stated, I, I would certainly consider friendly going to 11:00 PM. But regardless of what your work cycle is, you'd be able to access legitimate, real services either before the start of your workday or at the end of the start of your workday.

342. 0:52:16

     And, and so, it, the... Any legitimate-- I can't think of any legitimate business place that this will even impact. It would only be the places that are conducting illegitimate business. And I'll also share with the committee, this was dropped last year, so it's not like it was just dropped recently. I haven't heard anything in any way, shape, or form by anybody with legitima- legitimate business suggesting that this will harm them in any way, shape, or form.

343. 0:52:48

     I'm not sure that that answers my question about legitimate masseuses, and I'm talking about people that have credentials such as a medical certificate. Georgia doesn't recognize like, like other states. We have a lady that, she is, uh, from Michigan. She still goes back every year to do her continuing education to keep her medical license intact. So is there something in here that we could put... 'Cause I'm sure the folks, the places you're talking about, they don't have certified medical masseuses.

344. 0:53:24

     Uh, I don't think Georgia Code uses the term certified medical masseuses. It's just one does need a massage license, and that is licensed by- The state.

345. 0:53:38

     So if we had a term in there to exempt someone that has a medical certification,

346. 0:53:47

     would that remedy the problem? A licensed medical certification from another state.

347. 0:53:56

     I wouldn't object to that because that is not the class of, or category of, of establishment that we're seeking to, um, to limit. Uh, and, and so I, I don't know that it's required and I don't know if you have, um, a lawyer for the committee, Ben.

348. 0:54:17

     Uh, as best I understand it, we only have one classification of licensed massage therapist, and that's for a massage therapist. So this applies to all licensed massage therapists in the state. If there's a second classification that you'd like this to apply to, we would need to create that classification before we could use it as an exemption.

349. 0:54:38

     And the current existing is only legitimate.

350. 0:54:45

     Correct?

351. 0:54:45

     Only licensed. If you are a licensed massage therapist, then you are a licensed massage therapist.

352. 0:54:50

     I think that's right.

353. 0:54:50

     That's what I would say.

354. 0:54:51

     Yep.

355. 0:54:52

     That's right.

356. 0:54:53

     This law applies to licensed massage therapists.

357. 0:54:57

     Yeah, which is the point I'm making, that we have a problem in this state that the Massage Therapy Board, that they have never created anything other than. You're just all lumped in, as opposed to what, what I consider the real professionals.

358. 0:55:12

     Yes.

359. 0:55:12

     Not that I'm dis- not that I'm saying anything negative toward anybody else, but I am familiar with medically certified masseuse, and those are the concerns that I would have if we're throwing them all into the same, into the same bathtub, so to say. If I might ask, Ben, what would be... Can you draft some language somewhere that would, uh, recognize a medically certified masseuse?

360. 0:55:46

     With some significant policy guidance, uh, I could be- but I can't... I, as the lawyer, am not allowed to draw a line between massage therapists and this class of individual. I would need some guidance on where that line should be drawn. But yeah, I can, I'd be happy to work with you to help draft that language if we have some guidance.

361. 0:56:10

     Let me get to some of these questions on here. Chairman Carpenter.

362. 0:56:14

     Nope.

363. 0:56:17

     No. Chairman Washburn, I'm sorry.

364. 0:56:19

     Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, to address the chairman's concerns, but also would it be a, a reasonable thought to change those hours from 10:00 AM to 10:00 PM? And did Representative Holcomb indicate that you wouldn't mind some change to expand those hours a little bit to address the chairman's concerns?

365. 0:56:41

     Right, right now they're 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM.

366. 0:56:43

     I'm sorry, 6:00 to 10:00 is what you had? I, I'm, I apologize. I just misunderstood.

367. 0:56:48

     6:00.

368. 0:56:48

     10:00 AM to 6:00.

369. 0:56:48

     10:00 AM to 6:00 AM.

370. 0:56:48

     10:00 AM to 6:00 AM.

371. 0:56:51

     That's right.

372. 0:56:52

     It's just closed. Just closed from 10:00 PM.

373. 0:56:54

     Closed from 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM.

374. 0:56:57

     Correct.

375. 0:56:58

     Okay. I apologize. I thought you were closing at 6:00.

376. 0:57:00

     All right. I'm sorry, I misread that, so-

377. 0:57:04

     Me too.

378. 0:57:05

     I withdraw my concerns at this point because she ain't gonna be, she ain't gonna be stretching my big back out no time after then, between them hours, I can assure you of that.

379. 0:57:15

     Let's hope not, Mr. Chairman.

380. 0:57:16

     All right.

381. 0:57:17

     Me either.

382. 0:57:18

     All right. Number, number 26.

383. 0:57:21

     Me either.

384. 0:57:23

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I got a question to the author, a kind of s- scenario more than anything. So you have a massage therapist, as the chairman had suggested, and she has, she or he has a place of business, and they have a clientele and, and they're obviously not open during these hours, but they're only open for, for, uh, appointment only, a standing appointment. Um, what, what's to say that they can't have an appointment with the chairman, uh, their business is closed during these hours and y- you have emergency, um, just like at any other clinic p- per se, and they make appointment and open just for that one customer, w- what, what happens then?

385. 0:58:06

     Um, is that... Obviously, that's not captured in this law, if I'm not mistaken. Is that gonna be something that, that can be done? I mean, y- do you understand what I'm saying?

386. 0:58:17

     I'm not sure. One, I'm, I, I find it difficult to imagine an emergency that would necessitate a massage. Um, but secondly, um, sorry.

387. 0:58:32

     He can't believe that we're laughing.

388. 0:58:36

     Secondly-

389. 0:58:37

     How familiar, how familiar are you with the state senate?

390. 0:58:41

     This is going off the rails. Um, secondly, you could do your business between 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM. Like, and so if you're... Th- those are the hours that, as a state, we're saying legitimate business would be operated. And, and so, like, an appointment at 1:00 AM or 2:00 AM would not be allowed if this were to move forward.

391. 0:59:08

     So, so you're saying that they, if, if they did have some sort of emergency, I mean, if they fell or something, I, I'm just being the devil's advocate, how is that gonna capture if you have a business and you make an appointment with them or, and then you come in, the door's locked, the business is closed. I guess you can get around any law, right? But i- is that gonna capture if, if you made an appointment and went in and they did a massage at-

392. 0:59:34

     What's the-

393. 0:59:35

     ... from 10:00 P- A- at, at 8:00 in the morning?

394. 0:59:38

     Eight in the morning's fine.

395. 0:59:39

     Sure.

396. 0:59:39

     This would allow businesses-

397. 0:59:40

     So-

398. 0:59:40

     ... to be open from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM.

399. 0:59:43

     Oh, 6:00. So if they, so if they came in at 10:30 or whatever, I mean, I'm just saying, you know, they didn't get off work or whatever. I'm just being kind of a devil's advocate. Is that, is that gonna be... How are you gonna know or how, how are we capturing this bill that if they have appointment, they're not open for business, 'cause it says open for business, they wouldn't be open for business, they would just be making an appointment and they would go in and take that appointment and that'd be it. Is that-

400. 1:00:09

     If you have-

401. 1:00:09

     ... is that captured in this bill?

402. 1:00:11

     If you have a, if you have an appointment, I think most judges and most individuals who would interpret a statute would say that if you have an appointment within the hours of 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM, then you are open for business and you're fine.

403. 1:00:27

     Okay.

404. 1:00:28

     All right. Let's see. We have a number of questions. I should have kept my mouth shut. I should have read the bill a little bit clearer. Number 27. Who had that?

405. 1:00:38

     Ehrhart.

406. 1:00:39

     Is it Chairman Ehrhart.

407. 1:00:41

     Two questions. Um, one for the bill's author, and actually a, a, a question for the chairman, a comment for the chairman. Um, just on your point that you can't imagine a scenario where a, an, a, a massage might be an emergency, I think that maybe what we're focused here is sort of on that nefarious side of this business, um, where less than questionable activities may be taking place. But if you've ever known anybody that suffers from chronic back pain or ever have anyone who's suffered as a result of an accident, you can understand why medically, uh, treating a, um, a medical condition by way of, of massage therapy can be enormously helpful.

408. 1:01:15

     Um, there are chiropractic offices that have... I have family members who would, who go for a chiropractic treatment, and they ha- they have an on-site masseuse as well. So that is part of a medical regimen. Um, and if you're, if you're in pain, you know, uh, sometimes, you know, you might need after hours, after hours care. That, that would just be my thought on that point. And then, Mr. Chairman, if I could, I am reminded of a bill that this body, that this committee passed last year. It's currently over in, over in the Senate. You may recall we did the dietician's and, and, uh, nutritionist bill.

409. 1:01:47

     And it r- I'm reminded of that because in, in that bill originally, right now we have a very generic nutrition licensing here in Georgia, but what that bill, as soon as it's hopefully passed, um, out of the Senate, will do is it carves out medical nutrition therapists. In other words, it, it, it creates a higher level of licensing for individuals who are practicing medical nutrition therapy. That's very different. That is treating a medical condition. Very different than, let's say, a personal coach giving you, um, um, you know, nutrition advice. I'm wonder- I'm, I'm wondering if something similar might be helpful in this situation, maybe carving...

410. 1:02:21

     And I'm not sure. That would be re- require, I'm sure, a more detailed conversation with legislative council, but to, um, I don't know whether you go from one license to two or not or what your thought is on that, but, um, that's something I think that we could certainly entertain.

411. 1:02:35

     Yeah.

412. 1:02:35

     It might solve, solve some, some issues.

413. 1:02:38

     Well, I think by looking at the hours, by taking a close, now that the correct hours in the bill has been pointed out to me, that takes care of my issue. 'Cause if I had to see her between 10 and, uh, 6:00 in the morning, I'd just have to have a drink.

414. 1:02:54

     All right? All right. Representative DeLoach, the illustrious ethics commission.

415. 1:03:00

     Mr. Chair, I think I've learned all I'm gonna be able to learn about this bill with this discussion, and I'm, I'm, I'm pleading with you to please let me make a motion.

416. 1:03:12

     Let us get one more question out of the way. Number, uh, McDonald.

417. 1:03:18

     I'll just-

418. 1:03:18

     Are you passing?

419. 1:03:19

     I'll, I'll pass.

420. 1:03:20

     All right. Thank you.

421. 1:03:22

     That's all right.

422. 1:03:23

     Chairman DeLoach, you're recognized.

423. 1:03:26

     Mr. Chairman, I move do pass.

424. 1:03:28

     We have a motion do pass and a second.

425. 1:03:33

     Representative McCollum.

426. 1:03:35

     Last question, I promise, Mr. Chairman. So one last question. It says, "Otherwise operate a massage therapy business," on 37. So does this mean if I'm a massage therapist and I'm, uh, I go, say for instance I work for a hotel or, or something, and you're your own entity, but you work for the hotel and you do massages for that hotel, and does this capture hotels? So I mean, you know, a lot of massage therapists travel, and they go to people's homes.

427. 1:04:06

     If, if that says, "Otherwise operate a massage therapy business," does that mean that they would be included in this as well?

428. 1:04:14

     You could, you could perform the services between 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM lawfully, as currently written, which should capture-

429. 1:04:23

     So we're gonna-

430. 1:04:23

     ... just about anybody

431. 1:04:24

     ... so we're gonna limit massage therapists that, that travel. And then also, a- are there any hotels that, that offer, I mean, legitimate, nice, high-end hotels that offer massage therapy?

432. 1:04:38

     I am unaware of any that offer massage therapy at 1:00 AM, 2:00 AM, 3:00 AM, 4:00 AM. So the, the basic working hours are what legitimate people work.

433. 1:04:52

     Okay.

434. 1:04:52

     All right.

435. 1:04:57

     I'll make it quick, but I, I do see a world where like, especially having Mercedes-Benz Stadium right there and being a hotel next door, as athletes may be staying at the Signia after they play soccer, if there's a late football game, there may be a wor- there may be a world where there is legitis- legitimacy in that. Not to say that these one-offs would, would keep you from passing this legislation, but I do think there's a world where this occurs and it's not illicit behavior.

436. 1:05:25

     Correct. And just as a reminder, Mr. Chairman, the dates would need to be changed.

437. 1:05:29

     Yes. Uh-

438. 1:05:33

     Representative Williams

439. 1:05:34

     ... Representative Williams.

440. 1:05:34

     I think I'm gonna follow Representative DeLoach 'cause I've stayed in some high-end hotels all over the world, and my wife ain't letting nobody give me a massage 1:00 in the morning under any circumstance.

441. 1:05:48

     All right, number 24, that would be, is that,

442. 1:05:55

     ah, Chairman McDonald. I'm just trying to clear up some of, uh, Representative McCollum's question on like the emergency therapy. Um, as, as, uh, as a fireman for 23 years, um, I was on the engine one night, and we were called to a, a gas station/massage therapy place for a fire alarm. Date. Went in and, of course, went in and, and tried to tour the place, and , and they, they, they said there was no fire. No fire, no fire. So I went out.

443. 1:06:26

     They would not let us inspect the building, so I went out and I told my crew, I said, "Watch this." I turned on the, the siren and blew the horn. I cured about 10 men running out the back door about 11:30 at night. And, uh, so that was, that's the best way I could heal, heal somebody in a massage therapy. So it, nothing was good happening after 10:00 PM. All right. All right. Any other discussion? We have, uh, we have, uh, Representative Draper is going to make a motion to change the date.

444. 1:07:00

     Yes, I am, Chairman. I'd like to move to amend line 36. Instead of 2025, change that to 2026. All right, very good. Now, we have a motion to amend. Second. And we have a, and a second. Any further discussion on changing the date? All right, now we're back to the, uh, the original bill, uh, House Bill 892 as amended as a committee substitute. All in favor say aye.

445. 1:07:30

     Aye. Opposed?

446. 1:07:34

     Nay. And we have one no, and the ayes clearly have it. Thank you. And for a couple of members, if you're at a hotel and they're calling in a masseuse, I recommend you disinfect it. Disinfect that room before you go in. My mama told me nothing good happens after midnight. Very good. Now, now let's get to something a little bit, uh, more in depth. Uh, House Bill 1254.

447. 1:08:06

     What's up?

448. 1:08:10

     Well, I, I, I think we, I think we had so much fun with that last bill that, uh,

449. 1:08:20

     I think we had so much fun with that last bill that, uh, Representative Reeves just went out to call his masseuse.

450. 1:08:29

     All right, if you would, uh, tell us- This is not entertaining ... which substitute you're working from, please. LC560622S. All members have that in front of you. Chairman, members of the Regulated Industries Committee, since we had an ex- exhaustive, uh, subcommittee hearing, I'm going to streamline this quite a bit since this is a bill about government streamlining and regulatory reform. This bill follows up from House Bill 579 last year, which was the product of the Joint Blue Ribbon Professional Licensing Study Committee, uh, chaired by Chairman, uh, Matt Hatchett on the House side.

451. 1:09:07

     Um, at the subcommittee hearing a while ago, we had Diana Brooks from Secretary of State's office, and she testified that your work last year on House Bill 579 had, uh, uh, expedited licensing issues and had, uh, uh, reduced delays, and it made a significant impact already. And s- this bill follows up with four licensees, auctioneers, geologists, hearing aid dispensers, and cemeterians. And, uh, let me just skip through to the changes that are being made.

452. 1:09:37

     I'd be glad to address any more detailed, uh, issues in response to questions. For hearing aid dealers, what it does is it moves, uh, the regulation from the, from a standalone hearing aid dispensers board to a joint board of audiologists, uh, uh, hearing and speech pathologists, uh, or speech and language pathologists, and then two board seats will be added for hearing aid dispensers. The hearing aid dealer's license is removed because very few states have that anymore.

453. 1:10:12

     The FTC deregula- or, uh, placed over the counter a lot of hearing aid products. And, uh, this, this movement from the board, a freestanding board to a joint board, uh, will come into conformity with a lot of other states. And for example, Virginia has a combined licensing board. Ohio does as well. Uh, Arizona and Texas do not have, uh, agency licensing or a board, and then Pennsylvania has a combined licensing board. So this brings it into the practice of a significant part of the US.

454. 1:10:45

     I do want to point out both for hearing aid dispensers as well as the other three licensees, the regulations stay in place. They are merely being moved from freestanding boards to somewhere else, in this case, the audiologist and speech and language pathology board. Secondly, on professional geologists, uh, currently they have a board, uh, but the Secretary of State has handled licensing for quite some time. And what this will do is it will move, uh, regulation and licensing from the board to the Professional Licensing Division of the Secretary of State.

455. 1:11:21

     Uh, there are a few reasons for this. One is there is a very detailed national exam. Uh, you have educational requirements and accreditation, um, requirements of the degrees for these geologists and required experiences, the national exam, and other criteria in their application. The Secretary of State Professional Licensing, uh, Division can verify those objective standards. Also, there's been a low level-

456. 1:11:48

     of, uh, rulemaking as well as discipline for geologists. And so the Professional Licensing Division will be able to handle those efficiently. Uh, it makes these objective documentary issues, uh, one that the Secretary of State can handle. Number three, auctioneers. It moves the Auctioneers Commission to the Secretary of State Professional Licensing Division. Uh, it retains individual licensure. Currently, you have both an individual license and a company license. Uh, you will continue to have individual auctioneer licensure.

457. 1:12:21

     And, um, there is a recovery fund that fortunately has never been tapped. Uh, so that fund, some changes are being made now. The re- the contributions will no longer be required to that, uh, Auctioneer Recovery Bond Fund because fortunately through the sound regulation that we've had, no auctioneers have had claims on that. Uh, the fund will remain to pay valid claims. It will be administered by the Secretary of State's office. Interest on that fund can fund continuing education for auctioneers.

458. 1:12:52

     And when the fund, when and if the fund balance, uh, drops below 10,000, the funds will be transferred to the general fund and there'll be a sun setting. And, um, again, it, it clarifies the definition of online auctions and digital licenses. It preserves esco- escrow requirements and it codifies educational approval. There were some questions about agricultural auctions like, uh, cattle auctions and, uh, the, the Department of Agriculture has regulation over cattle auctions and a lot of livestock auctions.

459. 1:13:23

     And then also you may remember, uh, over the years, charity auctions have, uh, had exemptions granted by the legislature. Uh, fourth and finally, cemeterians. Cemetarian, uh, Board moves to the Secretary of State, um, who has regulated this under the Securities Division since 2000. Uh, it, there is an advisory group, uh, that will be in existence to, uh, uh, provide advice on these issues. Now, these are only cemeteries that are currently regulated by the Securities Division of the Secretary of State.

460. 1:13:58

     Representative Stinson helped clarify that earlier, uh, in response to a question of hers. So it requires business continuity plan for the affected cemeteries and clarifies statutory technology. So takeaways on this bill. It doesn't lower standards. Those regulations are fully in place. It just provides efficiency that is in line with other states. As I mentioned earlier on hearing aids, it brings us into conformity with a lot of other large states. Uh, the, uh, people at the table. This is Amy Dorman, who is the, uh, appointments, uh, contact at Governor Brian Kemp's office and also Deputy Chief Operating Officer, and then, uh, we have J.C.

461. 1:14:35

     Martin with the governor's office as well. Last year, three of these were in House Bill 79. Based on questions, they were taken out and tabled, and they have worked hard over the last year talking to the licensees, talking to the Secretary of State, and looking at the landscape of other states. So the bill that is before you is the result of a lot of work over the last year to provide legislative oversight in this issue and make the state of Georgia operate as efficiently as many of our sister states, uh, with similar issues. So, um, I'm glad to go deeper in response to questions or input, but respectfully request do pass.

462. 1:15:10

     If you'll hold that thought for a second. Now, we've had, already had testimony in the subcommittee, but I've got two people down here that would like, like to make a statement, and I'm going to recognize them. The first one is a Mr. John Turner.

463. 1:15:28

     If I might ask you if you can keep this very succinct and very short.

464. 1:15:34

     Yes, sir.

465. 1:15:38

     Thank you very much. My name is John Turner, and, um, I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. I've been an, a hearing instrument specialist since 2009. I've been an owner. I've worked with large companies and small companies, and I currently work in an ENT office. Regarding 1254, I understand the bill's changes regarding my profession. My concerns should have come up in subcommittee, but I wasn't prepared to speak at that time. My concerns specifically have to do with aligning the hearing aid dispensers with a board that could be controlled by audiologists and speech pathologists in voting numbers that could negatively affect our licensed hearing aid dispensers.

466. 1:16:20

     I know a lot of work has gone into, uh, this bill and behind the scenes to put all this together, and I very much appreciate that and the compromises that have already taken place. I'm speaking up late in the game, and my reasons for recommending that the boards stay separate are as follows. For the last 16 years, I've watched our board serve our providers well. No board is perfect, but in my opinion, they have done a good job and should be allowed to continue. Georgia does not currently have a Doctor of Audiology program, so we're not producing significant numbers of new audiologists in state.

467. 1:16:57

     In contrast, we have a steady flow of hearing aid dispensers entering and retiring each year through established training and apprenticeship pathways. Our current board has successfully supported this process for decades without major issues. Meanwhile, we have an active flow of hearing aid dispensers, uh, being trained and ret- um, so sorry, repeating myself. Our board has supported this process. Now, um, we would be inviting audiologists and speech pathologists who do not dispense hear- uh, speech pathologists who do not dispense hearing aids to participate in our licensing process when they haven't been doing much of that since 2009.

468. 1:17:40

     I have nothing against audiologists and speech pathologists. In fact, I work with them every day and have many friends among them. They, in fact, have a number of different jobs and responsibilities that do not apply to us hearing aid dispensers, which many of us have turned into an art form. Matt Reeves and I were talking before, uh, before this committee meeting, and it is my understanding that our Hearing Aid Dispenser's Board hasn't had a lot of activity from a legislative perspective, and that is one of the reasons why it is being recommended that we combine with audiologists and speech pathologists.

469. 1:18:13

     I would respond to that by saying that our board has had minimal legislative activity in recent years because it has proactively managed the profession carefully, avoiding unnecessary changes that could disrupt providers or patients. This caution has served us well, not indicating a need for dissolution or a merger. From a consumer perspective, I don't see a clear benefit to combining or, or centralizing regulation. Patients receive high-quality, accessible hearing aid services under the current system. If the state doesn't notice a meaningful difference between one board or two, there's no substantial, and there's no substantial cost savings, uh, or efficiency gain for Georgia taxpayers.

470. 1:18:53

     I respectfully ask the committee to keep our boards separate. If you would like more effort from a legislative standpoint, then we can work on doing more of that. Thank you for your time and consideration.

471. 1:19:05

     Oh, we thank you very much.

472. 1:19:10

     Questions.

473. 1:19:10

     Questions, number 18. Representative Jackson.

474. 1:19:14

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, my question is, uh, to my dear friend. So I understand the essence of, uh, House Bill 1254, but, um, the gentleman just, um, um, just piqued a, a, a interest, uh, 'cause if we consolidate the various boards, wouldn't we start to lose that specialized oversight, I mean, that, uh, we may dilute the expertise?

475. 1:19:48

     B- and, and when we bring this all under the Secretary of State where they may not have the expertise, today it's hearing aids, tomorrow it may be something else. Shouldn't these boards have their own entity? That, you know, they got, cardiologists got their boards, which is very different than a neurologist. Uh, and I'm just using a very broad sense to make the point, uh, to the gentleman that just, that just, you know, prompted this thought. Should, is there a concern here?

476. 1:20:19

     Yeah, in response to that, we are not moving it under the Secretary of State. What we're doing under this bill, under the substitute, we are moving hearing aid, uh, dispensers from its own board to the Audiology and Speech and Language Pathology Board. So there would be two seats on this, uh, audiology board that are, uh, hearing aid dispensers, and the regulations for hearing aid dispensers would roll over to that board. So certainly Secretary of State Professional Licensing Division already does a lot with both boards, but this is consolidating two boards into one, and that follows the model of 13 other states, the ones I mentioned earlier, Virginia, Ohio, uh, Pennsylvania.

477. 1:21:03

     And then of course, there are a lot of states that don't touch hearing aid dispensers at all, such as Arizona and Texas. So we're keeping the regulations. We're keeping a board for hearing aid dispensers. So it's not being moved under Secretary of State under this bill, under the substitute. Now, that's a result of feedback. Um, for months, the governor's office had said either move it to the Secretary of State or roll it into the Audiology Board. There was, uh, some discussion last weekend with some board members. Ms. Gwen Cantrell and her son, I believe, are here.

478. 1:21:34

     She served on the Hearing Aid Board, and, uh, she testified at the subcommittee that she favors this move. So it moves from the Hearing Aid Board to a joint board with audiologists. And, you know, it's kind of splitting hairs. Audiologists, ENT, hearing aid dispensers. Uh, it was in 2022 the FTC put most hearing aids over the counter, and so you got federal preemption. You got other state models that are working. Here, this is a good efficiency of, uh, combining these two boards. But the regulations stay in place and consumer protections along with them.

479. 1:22:06

     And I believe we do, Ms. Amy Dorman has something to add-

480. 1:22:08

     Can I follow up on that?

481. 1:22:08

     ... Mr. Chairman, if that, if that's acceptable.

482. 1:22:11

     So I do want to refute a few things. So, you know, it's not a growing industry. From 2024 to 2025, there are actually, uh, over 100 less licenses that have been administered by this board. So there were 600, and I have the exact number in a minute, but, and now there are 500 and something. So that is, is not necessarily, um, accurate. Additionally, the reason that two seats were given, not equal representation, the numbers and the proportion of the, the work are just, they don't make sense.

483. 1:22:41

     So in Georgia right now, we have over 6,000 licensed speech language pathologists under this board, and 741 audiologists. And under this bill, we'll have, um, around 296 licensees, um, for the hearing aid dealers and dispensers. This is a national trend. If the state has a licensing board, it typically is combined. Some of them are just doing it completely out of the administration of something like the Secretary of State, Commissioner of Commerce, stuff like that.

484. 1:23:15

     So this is how we landed here. We do feel like this was a good compromise. We were working all weekend in order to reach this, to provide representation and consumer protection, but also keeping in mind the two boards just aren't necessary. Uh, it, it's just not necessary. The board also only received six complaints last year.

485. 1:23:36

     Very good.

486. 1:23:37

     Follow-up, Mr. Chair? Just one follow-up. Just for the sake of clarity.

487. 1:23:40

     Mm-hmm.

488. 1:23:41

     So by consolidating, though, this won't create a, a bottleneck. It won't create, uh, delays of licensing or responding to the, to-

489. 1:23:49

     No, it, it shouldn't at all. And, and just to be clear, last year the board only received 54 new applications, so it's not even like the workload is heavy.

490. 1:23:59

     Okay.

491. 1:24:00

     And, and those weren't necessarily 54 different people. You've got the hearing aid dispenser, hearing, hearing aid dealer, and so those overlap frequently. So it's not like there's 54 out there. That is probably half that many.

492. 1:24:13

     All right, Ms. Cantrell, your name was mentioned. Did you agree you like the changes that were made?

493. 1:24:20

     Um, yeah, I've, I've ... You know, when I first saw this bill, I was not in favor of it, but after working with Amy and Matt and, uh, the governor's office and all that, uh, protecting our consumers, the senior citizens and the hearing impaired people, I have a deaf daughter that, um, I'm in this industry. All of my children are in this industry. Um, you know, I believe that with the modifications and everything, that this bill, audiologists and hearing instrument specialists basically do the same thing. We do testing and fitting of hearing aids, except they do the medical and clinical side of diagnosing.

494. 1:24:56

     Okay? Um, and so I think it puts us on a level playing field, and I think it, um, I would rather have a seat at the table than not have a table at all.

495. 1:25:05

     Very good. Thank you so much. All right. Represent- Chairman Carpenter.

496. 1:25:10

     Yeah, uh, Chairman Reeves, Mr. Reeves, whatever, however, Representative Reeves, would it be safe to say that if it was an issue in regards to, to dispensing of hearing aids, the board would lend their ear to these- I didn't mean to ... That was not even intended. Uh, would, would listen to these two people at this seat in those issues that they're more familiar with? It would be no different than when you bring a piece of legislation to this committee where somebody is, knows more about it than other, other issues.

497. 1:25:44

     Like cemeteries, we would talk to Rick or Lauren. We listen to those people that are on our committee who are more experts in that area, and that doesn't necessarily mean that th- they're gonna to- hijack them and not allow them to do the things that they need to move their industry forward.

498. 1:25:59

     Absolutely. Uh, some of the, uh, hearing aid dispenser licensees are audiologists already, and there's a lot of overlap, and, uh, one of the, one of the hearing aid dispensers asked, "What's our recourse if we don't like the way it works?" Well, you've got the rulemaking process, uh, that Chairman Powell educated us about in House Bill 903. You've got the legislative process. They could come here next spring if things aren't working out this year. And then also, the, the professional licensing division of the secretary of state, they're already intertwined there.

499. 1:26:30

     So you've got three checks and balances among others. And also, these, these people do business together. Audiologists and hearing aid dispensers already do a lot of business together. So those are some checks and balances.

500. 1:26:41

     All right. I think we've about beat this one to death, 'cause we've only got about 15 minutes for two of the funeral bills. All right. Any other questions from any of the committee? All right. What's the will of the committee?

501. 1:26:52

     Move it back.

502. 1:26:53

     We have a motion. We have a second?

503. 1:26:55

     Second.

504. 1:26:56

     We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Any amendments? Any concerns you want to wish? Very good. If not, all in favor say aye.

505. 1:27:06

     Aye.

506. 1:27:07

     Opposed? And the ayes clearly have it. Now, see, this didn't take as long as the masseuse bill. All right. All right, Senator, you have got 15 minutes. And, uh ...

507. 1:27:24

     Well.

508. 1:27:26

     Yeah.

509. 1:27:27

     Let's see.

510. 1:27:30

     May I sit at the table, Mr. Chairman?

511. 1:27:32

     I be- I believe that you have about beat this thing to death in the subcommittee this morning.

512. 1:27:37

     Thank you.

513. 1:27:37

     Uh, would you like to start on the cemeteries bill, on the private cemeteries and all, and, uh, succinctly just spell out what this bill does?

514. 1:27:46

     Yes, sir. This, uh ...

515. 1:27:51

     And before they get away, my thanks to the, uh, to the people from the governor's office. I think y'all have done a great job with this.

516. 1:27:58

     Thank you.

517. 1:27:58

     Thank you.

518. 1:28:01

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. This Senate Bill 146 is basically a cemetery protection bill. We, uh, discussed this pretty extensively in sub- subcommittee this morning, but it talks about what establishing a private cemetery on your own property, that you have to have a half acre of land, and it has to be surveyed. It also talks about protecting cemeteries and what constitutes an abandoned cemetery, and what you would need to do, what steps if you were to move a cemetery, and that would be ne- a necessity if there's a, uh, road widening project from DOT or even some kind of erosion problem that could be happening that graves would have to be moved.

519. 1:28:57

     Uh, it also goes through the steps of, um,

520. 1:29:04

     of how to handle cremains that are abandoned by families and given a funeral home, those type things. Uh, it also talks about, um, if you have a private family cemetery and it happens to be on some land and the land gets sold and you want to have ingress or egress to that land to the, to visit your loved one's grave, it gives a solution on how to do that.

521. 1:29:38

     So I won't belabor the point, but I'll be glad to ex- to dig deeper or answer any questions.

522. 1:29:47

     All right. Questions over here. Mr. Draper.

523. 1:29:51

     Um, Chairman, good evening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I, I just want to know, uh, Senator, if, if my seatmate in the House, chairlady of the Funeral Home Caucus, has blessed this bill and is, would, would give her support to this.

524. 1:30:08

     Yes.

525. 1:30:09

     That's all I need to hear. Mr. Chairman, at the appropriate time.

526. 1:30:11

     We have a motion.

527. 1:30:12

     Second.

528. 1:30:13

     All right. Carolyn Carpenter.

529. 1:30:16

     Uh, sorry, I got one quick question just to make sure. When you're providing this e- ingress, egress to, to go to the family cemetery across somebody else's property, is there anything in this legislation that removes any right to sue if they trip on a, on a limb and fall on that person's property on their way to the c- on their way to the site? Like, you know, 'cause at the end of the day, the last thing I want to see is, is somebody g- allowing this e- or are we making them have give them e- egress and ingress, and then not providing them with any kind of protections of not getting sued?

530. 1:30:51

     Yeah, and we talked about that extensively in subcommittee this morning, and Representative Ridley, Chairman Ridley, brought that up. What this does is if, and, and where this came about was from Representative Jesse Petrea. His family had a family cemetery in Burke County, Georgia, and his great-great-grandfather is buried on that, and his other relatives. And all of that land went up for sale, and some guy out of Florida came and bought the whole farm, and then put up a no trespassing sign.

531. 1:31:25

     Well, you know, they can't go visit the grave or make sure that it's in a upkept condition. So what this bill does is allows them to go before a superior court judge, and the superior court judge would ask the property owner when would be convenient for Mr. Petrea to visit the grave, place flowers. Um, and I'm hoping that the judge would say, "Mr. Petrea, when you do this, you're, you're not gonna be able to sue him if you fall and get hurt on that property.

532. 1:32:02

     You'll need to sign a release."

533. 1:32:05

     So-

534. 1:32:05

     So what, that's what we anticipate that being done. I don't know how we can do that in this unless legal, legislative council knows of a way. But I would think that the, uh, superior court judge would say- ... um, "You know, we're gonna work out a, a, a convenient time, but you've got to be careful. You can't go desecrate the property. You can't damage the man's property. But still, uh, you know, you may need to sign a release." But I, I don't know that we can do that in this bill.

535. 1:32:44

     Legislative council may have different opinion.

536. 1:32:46

     All right. Chairman DeLoach.

537. 1:32:48

     Isn't it true that there's nothing in this bill that places any higher duty on that property owner than he would have in, under any other circumstances with someone coming on his property, whether they had permission or not?

538. 1:33:03

     Well, exactly, because you know, somebody can have up no trespassing signs. You can trespass onto that property, you can get injured, and you can still sue that property owner.

539. 1:33:17

     Thank you.

540. 1:33:17

     I slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

541. 1:33:21

     All right. We have, we have a motion and we have a second. Do we have any other comments? Any more concerns?

542. 1:33:29

     It may be amended.

543. 1:33:31

     Beg your pardon?

544. 1:33:49

     I mean, you don't need me, I don't think, but I think it's important.

545. 1:33:55

     Do you have an amendment you want to make?

546. 1:33:56

     Yeah.

547. 1:34:01

     You're recognized.

548. 1:34:02

     All right. Uh, make a m- m- make an amendment. Um-

549. 1:34:07

     We have a motion for an amendment.

550. 1:34:12

     All right. If, if you'll read it. Main bill read. All right. Yes, I did.

551. 1:34:18

     All right.

552. 1:34:19

     So this would be, uh, a new subsection C following line 596 to read, "Entry upon land pursuant to an order described in subsection A of this code section does not thereby," and then there are three paragraphs. Paragraph one, "Extend any assurance by the owner of such land that the premises are safe for any purpose." Paragraph two, "Confer upon such person the legal status of an invitee or licensee to whom a duty of care is owed," or paragraph three, "Assume responsibility for or incur liability for the in- for any injury to person or property caused by an act of omission or," oh, sorry, "of such person."

553. 1:35:10

     All right. Does everybody understand that motion? That's to create the, a, uh, exemption for liability.

554. 1:35:19

     Draper. Draper.

555. 1:35:21

     Miss Draper.

556. 1:35:21

     Are we discussing the amendment?

557. 1:35:24

     Yes.

558. 1:35:24

     Okay. So I, I think when you're balancing the interests of the person that owns the land and the person that's visiting the land, you have to assume that if they've been through litigation to get an order to get onto that land, there's somewhat hostile relationship. Um, I think the amendment that's been proposed goes too much in favor of the landowner. Um, I do think that you don't want to provide a situation where the person that is on the land has, can easily, you know, hurt themself on something they've put down and then be able to sue the landowner. But by the same token, you don't want the landowner to make a unsafe setting, uh, and the person who is visiting gets sued.

559. 1:36:02

     Um, so by making the, uh, this effectually makes the person that's visiting the land a trespassee, as opposed to a licensee. We have three categories. We have a invitee, trespassee, and, and licensee. The licensee is the middle ground, which offers protections both to the person that's visiting, but offers protections to the landowner. Um, so I just offer that up for discussion in case we'd want to amend the amendment to- ... not make them a trespassy, but make them a licensee instead where a medium duty of care is pr- is offered.

560. 1:36:32

     But is it not true that we're requiring them to issue a license now? So it's not necessarily a typical licensing agreement where they've agreed to the licenses. This legislation is forcing the landowner into this licensing agreement, so I don't think the standard would be-

561. 1:36:47

     It's not a licensing agreement. There's-

562. 1:36:49

     Well, but I'm saying that we're g- we're, we're taking the... We're, we're forcing the landowner to allow this person to come on his property.

563. 1:36:57

     Well, a-

564. 1:36:58

     So it's not, it's not a-

565. 1:36:59

     According to the legislation, there's been a judicial proceeding where the interests have been weighed, right? The evidence has been weighed, and there's been a determination by the court that this person should have access to the land, because their burial, family, whatever is on there. Um, so you're balancing two parties' interests. And right now, as the amendment is written, it's very much in favor of the landowner, and there's no protections whatsoever to the person who's visiting the land. So I'd just like to balance those interests.

566. 1:37:19

     E- except that we're allowing them now to access the land, whereas before they did not have access.

567. 1:37:25

     Correct.

568. 1:37:25

     So they are gaining something in this relationship. I'm just saying... Or in this conversation. I'm just saying the last thing you want is to tell somebody, you, you, you have to allow this person on your land, and oh, by the way, if he trips and falls, he can sue you.

569. 1:37:39

     Yeah.

570. 1:37:39

     Like, that's a lot for me.

571. 1:37:40

     The way it was presented this morning, uh, was the suggestion that the person, the landowner who is allowing some... The person who is visiting the land might create a situation where they are harmed and then sue by creation of their own making. Uh, I think that's a pretty extremist point of view. By that same token, you might say the landowner is doing the same thing to the person that's visiting, creating a kind of unsafe situation where, uh, the person might get hurt. Um, so I just... Because it is a, because it's a somewhat hostile situation, because they've had to go to court over this, I just wanna offer protections to both sides.

572. 1:38:19

     I move to amend it.

573. 1:38:22

     All right. Well, let's see. We have an amendment. Did we have a second to the amendment?

574. 1:38:35

     Do we have a second to Chairman Carpenter's amendment?

575. 1:38:41

     Second.

576. 1:38:41

     All right, we have a second. And now, any discussion on the amendment? Any amendments to the amendment?

577. 1:38:49

     Yes.

578. 1:38:52

     All right. Chairman DeLoach.

579. 1:38:55

     This question probably is for our legal counsel and, and perhaps for other members of the legal profession on this, on this panel. If we did not... If, if, if we left off the third of those three things you offered in that amendment, would that satisfy the concern of Representative Draper?

580. 1:39:32

     Not specifically, because it would-

581. 1:39:34

     Sorry

582. 1:39:35

     ... it would lessen the protections, uh, for the landowner. But, uh, as I understand Representative Draper's concerns, she has an issue with number two, which is confer upon such person the legal status of an invitee or licensee if from a duty of care zone. Um, since an individual would not be given the, the duty of care, either of those two classifications, I believe that that was Representative Draper's concern.

583. 1:40:00

     Yeah. So now we got, now we gotta let 'em access it, and then we got a duty of care to make sure that they can get on their side, then get back off the property.

584. 1:40:10

     A medium duty of care.

585. 1:40:11

     Just making sure I understand.

586. 1:40:13

     A medium duty of care.

587. 1:40:14

     Okay.

588. 1:40:14

     Not the highest, and not no care at all.

589. 1:40:17

     Can I ask, can I ask something, Chair?

590. 1:40:23

     Sure.

591. 1:40:24

     This is a, this is a question also to Legis counsel. Are there a way that we could give a guidance to the judge that is gonna access to, to address both sides, uh, to your concern and to your concern when he's, when he's give... Handing down the, the way to access it? Can he give guidance to, to both sides that, you know, you will give them access, and it will be free access, and you won't put hindrance in, and then on the person visiting, you, you will, you know, y- the same on both sides.

592. 1:40:59

     Can you give the judge guidance on that when they hand down the ruling?

593. 1:41:07

     We can provide as much guidance as we'd like to put into the, into the answer.

594. 1:41:15

     But I might also add, the way the amendment is currently written, we are taking away that discretion from the judge. We are essentially saying the way am- the am- it's written that they must establish a no duty, um, category.

595. 1:41:27

     But, but can we write it-

596. 1:41:28

     Just so-

597. 1:41:28

     ... so that you can give the judge-

598. 1:41:30

     I almost didn't hear you

599. 1:41:31

     ... equal on both sides?

600. 1:41:32

     Not with this amendment, but we could.

601. 1:41:33

     No, no, I know not with this amendment, but I'm asking.

602. 1:41:37

     If I could interject from my experience, I think I have more experience in the funeral business than anybody in the room, and I've had families come from Virginia to Wilkinson County wanting to visit a cemetery, and the landowner stopped them and would not let them come onto the property. They actually go to the sheriff's office, and the sheriff goes with them and escorts them to the grave. Now, what this does is not that they have to file a lawsuit, but they can ask to sit down with the judge and say, "Judge, I own this land, and there's a cemetery on it.

603. 1:42:17

     These people want to come on it, but it's right by my family swimming pool, and they wanna come Saturday afternoon at 2:00 o'clock and visit the grave. I don't want them doing that." Okay. The judge would then say, "Okay, you can come at a different time." And I think most judges who've gotten to the point of being a judge is gonna say, "Okay, Mr. Smith, you can go on there, but you use due diligence. And if you go on there and if you cause a disturbance, then you're gonna answer to me." And I don't think anybody's gonna be jerking a superior court judge around.

604. 1:42:55

     I think the judge is gonna be pretty much open and pretty much flat to it. I just don't see... I think we're trying to make it into something more than it actually is, is what, is the way I see it.

605. 1:43:09

     I think you're absolutely right. You know, I never had thought that we was gonna get Morgan and Morgan involved if somebody wants to visit a cemetery. Um, but we have a motion and a second. All right. What's the will of the committee? All in favor say aye. Aye.

606. 1:43:30

     Of the motion?

607. 1:43:31

     You got it.

608. 1:43:32

     Of the amendment?

609. 1:43:32

     This is to the amendment. All in favor of the amendment say aye. Aye. All opposed. No. No. No. No. I believe that's pretty clear. The amendment does not pass. Now we're back to the body of the bill. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed. No. And the ayes have it. Well, Senator, that was supposed to have been an easy one for you.

610. 1:43:59

     Sorry about that. That's okay.

611. 1:44:01

     And, uh, so that bill-

612. 1:44:02

     That's all right

613. 1:44:02

     ... passes. And we are past time, but we've got one more bill. And I see you've got a, a choir section with you today.

614. 1:44:09

     Yes, sir. I'll be as brief as I can.

615. 1:44:12

     Yes, you will.

616. 1:44:12

     This bill basically devises a funeral director and embalmer license. This is what's we know as you don't have to be a surgeon to be a general practitioner. You can be a funeral director. You can be an embalmer. You can be a funeral director and an embalmer if you want to. This just opens up the licensing to allow you to do as much or as little as you wish. It does not remove any education requirements.

617. 1:44:43

     The education requirements are there. Uh, it doesn't change that at all. What this does do is brings us into compliance with 26 other states in the state of, in the United States. Every state that's contiguous to Georgia has split license. And I use the analogy of a army couple moving in from one of the neighboring states, uh, to Georgia, and the wife or the one spouse may be a RN, and they can go right to work when they move in to have the reciprocity.

618. 1:45:20

     The other spouse is a funeral director, which is legal in the other state. But in Georgia, they can't be recognized because they're not an embalmer, so they couldn't get licensed in Georgia as a funeral director. This happened to an employee of mine, uh, about 15 years ago. Uh, the man was 72 years old at the time. He had a funeral director license. He was not an embalmer. He accidentally let his license expire.

619. 1:45:51

     He goes back when he realizes it, not even a month, and he applies to be renewed. They turn him down and the state board tells him, "You gotta go to mortuary college to become an embalmer before we can renew your license." It's pretty much like your driver's license. Just because you didn't renew it, did you forget everything you know? No.

620. 1:46:14

     All right. We're running out-

621. 1:46:15

     It's just common sense

622. 1:46:16

     ... past our time. Tell me there's no questions. Tell me everybody understands what this does. Move. I second the motion. We have a motion. We have a second. There's a choir over here. Y'all all like this idea? Amen. Hey, can I give you an... Can I, can I give you an amen, brothers and sisters over there? What about that? Amen. And I said, I did say brothers and sisters. I don't need to say you did. All right. We have a motion.

623. 1:46:46

     You said it all. And we have a second. Any comments? Any amendments? If not, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Senator, I picked the wrong bill first. That's, that's quite all right. Thank you so much.

624. 1:47:05

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman-

625. 1:47:06

     Thank you

626. 1:47:06

     ... members of the committee, for your endurance. Thank you.

627. 1:47:09

     Thank you. You were great. Adjourned.

628. 1:47:20

     Thank y'all.

629. 1:47:24

     I'm sorry. How many did you get? No,

630. 1:47:30

     I-