Senate Public Safety Committee, February 23, 2026 Video: https://vimeo.com/1167379095 (a timestamp t plays at https://vimeo.com/1167379095#t=s) Page: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-02-23/senate-public-safety This is a machine transcript of the General Assembly's video, made by a speech-recognition model. It is not an official record and can mishear words, names, and numbers. Speakers are not identified. The video is the record: every timestamp links to the moment it plays. [0:18:32] Public Safety Committee. We're gonna call this meeting to order. If you could, uh, please close the back doors for us to keep it a little bit quiet. Someone, thank you. We're gonna begin as we always do with a blessing. I'm gonna call on our very own Chairman of Veterans, Chuck Payne. [0:18:47] If y'all would pray with me. Dear Heavenly Father, Lord, we just thank You so much for every many blessings from the air that fills our lungs that only comes with purpose in Your eyes, Lord. Just lead us and guide us in Your purpose in all things we do, that we refo- reflect Your will in all things that pass this body. Lord, we just thank You all of, for all the many times You just lead us and guide us. Just ask Your blessings today. For it's in Jesus' name we pray. Amen. [0:19:11] Amen. Thank you, Senator. Uh, welcome everyone. We're going to have four bills on the calendar today. In the back of the room, uh, Kiki actually has sign-up sheets, so if you need to sign in, please, uh, get her attention right now. Uh, there is a different sign-up sheet for each bill. And again, please remember to fill out all of the different areas, uh, that are on that form. Uh, reminder to everybody, we will have another committee meeting this coming Wednesday, and we are starting to get down to the final three meetings prior to crossover day. [0:19:43] Uh, so if there are any particular bills of interest to you that are Senate bills, which we're most concerned with right now, please let me know, uh, so we can, uh, review them, uh, carefully. All right, let's move on to the agenda today. The first bill we have is Senate Bill 454, which is in your folders, and I think that's from one of our very own, uh, Chairman Rick Williams. And do you wanna just, uh, present that from your chair? [0:20:08] Uh, if agreeable with you, Mr. Chairman, it'd be fine. Thank you. [0:20:12] That would be great. All right, just to make sure we're all operating on the same bill number. I'm looking at LC63-011S. [0:20:22] No, I've got 63-0044. [0:20:25] That's what I've got in my thing. Uh-oh. [0:20:26] Yeah. [0:20:27] That's what I've got. [0:20:28] I've got four. I have the wrong bill. All right. Hang on one second. Yep. Pause for just a moment. [0:20:42] Well, that was meant to be. Am I working or engaged? Okay. All right. Let's try this one more time, uh- P1 ... LC63-0044. So we went back to... Uh, we had a substitute that was incorrect, and we went back to the original. Is that correct? [0:20:56] Uh, wasn't aware of a substitute. [0:21:00] Okay. All right. Well, let's, uh, let's go for it. [0:21:03] Okay. Thank you, sir. Um, this is, um, a ni- This is a safety lock. And, uh, the, it's emergency door barricade- [0:21:20] Yeah [0:21:20] ... safety device locking. It amends Georgia law to authorize the limited use of temporary door locking devices in public buildings during emergency active threat situations or drills. This bill establishes clear safety training and oversight requirements to ensure these devices do not interfere with fire safety, emergency egress, or first responder access. Uh, why this bill matters, it improves responder awareness, standardizes training, and creates oversight compared to unregulated or improvised lockdown measures already in use. [0:22:02] It enhances occupant safety during active s- threat incidents. And what this bill does, it authorizes the use of temporary door locking devices only during emergency active threat situations or drills, including lockdowns and shelter-in-place scenarios. It allows this device to secure individual rooms, fire exits, hallways, corridors, entranceways leading to fire exits with additional approval also. [0:22:35] Uh, requires the devices to be integrated into building safety plans and emergency preparedness protocols. It applies to K through 12 schools, colleges and universities, childcare centers, medical facilities, state and local government buildings, religious institutions. Um, all temporary door locking devices must be engaged and removed without opening the door, be removable from the egress side without the use of a key, not modify or interfere with panic hardware, fire exit hardware, door closers, not permanently mounted in a way that impairs normal door functions. [0:23:16] It maintains the door's fire rating and complies with the National Fire Protection Association fire rating standards, be installed at a height not exceeding 48 inches above the floor. The devices must be incorporated into building safety plans, emergency drills, staff training programs. Safety plans and training materials must be made available to the first responders. Uh, the additional oversight. Use of this temporary door locking device on fire exits or exit pathways requires prior approval from one of the following: local fire department, local or state marshal, uh, the local law enforcement agency, and no part of this, this, uh, bill would interfere with ADA or interfere with the Americans for Disabilities Act. [0:24:11] Thank you very much for your great presentation, Senator. And I think, uh, we figured out the mystery for a substitute. There were some questions brought about whether we had to add ADA to this bill, and after talking to legislative council, it does not do, because ADA's covered no matter what. [0:24:25] Right. [0:24:25] So. [0:24:25] Okay, good. Okay. [0:24:26] I think that was the discrepancy. Okay. Thank you for this, uh, good overview of the bill. Are there questions from the committee members? [0:24:35] Uh, yes, Senator Bearden, go ahead. [0:24:39] Uh, to the author, I'm trying to find it now. Being for, for law enforcement, I look at the worst-case scenario. Could this... Where's this device gonna be at in the classroom? Let's say it's in a school. [0:24:52] It actually, the device would attach to the bottom of the door. Uh, this is a example of it. And it would be placed on the, stuck in the door right there. So it's not attached to the door. It would be adjacent to the door. So the door would be closed. They would take it, stick it in the floor to jam the door to keep it from being opened. [0:25:19] And everyone knows I'm all for school safety. I just look at it. It could be used to keep someone inside a room or people inside a room. [0:25:27] Right. Well- [0:25:28] That, that has- [0:25:29] Go ahead [0:25:30] ... cause of concern. [0:25:30] It's, it's, yeah, down on the bottom of the floor. [0:25:33] I un- I understand that one. [0:25:34] So. Yes, sir. [0:25:35] Just if I wanted, if I was in the room, I wanted to do harm, I could put that in. Could I not? [0:25:41] Yeah. [0:25:42] Yeah. [0:25:44] Uh, that was a good question that I brought up, and there's at least a dozen, uh, companies that I've seen over the years that make some type of a device like that- [0:25:51] Mm-hmm [0:25:51] ... which will allow, God forbid, there's an active threat in a school, that they can't get into those classrooms. Uh, power, I will just tell you, i- if they call us in the fire department, I'll get that door open about- [0:26:02] Yeah [0:26:02] ... 10 seconds. So, uh, just to keep the, uh, the active threat out. Okay. Other questions for the bill's author? [0:26:13] Seeing none, we have nobody signed up to speak on this bill. What is the will of the committee? [0:26:19] Make a motion. [0:26:20] All right, I've got a motion. Please, Senator. [0:26:23] I'll make a motion to pass. [0:26:24] I had a motion to pass from Senator Wicks. Do I have a second? Second from Senator Robertson. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. [0:26:33] Aye. [0:26:33] All opposed, please say no. [0:26:35] No. [0:26:36] All right, we've got one no from Senator Bearden, uh, and this will advance to the Senate Rules Committee. Thank you, Senator, for this bill. [0:26:41] Thank you. Thank you. [0:26:45] All right. Okay, moving on. We're gonna go to Senate Bill 473. Senator Robertson, you wanna do that from your seat? [0:26:53] I think I can. [0:26:53] All right. Thank you. [0:26:54] I think I can. With only one pair of glasses on, I think I can do it. I don't think I'm gonna need both of them. [0:27:03] I got a pair. [0:27:04] What's that? [0:27:04] I got a pair if you need them. [0:27:05] Yeah, that's right. [0:27:10] I know there's several people signed up, so I'm gonna go through this, um, fairly quickly, or so I say I am, 'cause there's been a sub bouncing around and trying to get everything back to- [0:27:27] Yeah, I think we're- [0:27:27] ... where it is [0:27:27] ... just making sure we're straight, uh, Senator. I've got LC39-4902. Is that what you're looking at? [0:27:32] That's correct. [0:27:33] Okay. [0:27:33] That's what I'm working off of right now. [0:27:34] All right. Perfect. [0:27:37] Okay, currently, um, in the State of Georgia, we have d- DUI schools, for lack of a better term, risk reduction programs throughout the State of Georgia that, um, individuals are normally sentenced to, uh, when they're convicted of DUI or they plead guilty to DUI, which I do want to point out is a conviction, um, that requires them to attend classes either in person or via, um, computer, uh, virtual, if you will, and in order to meet the requirements under Georgia law. [0:28:13] And these are individuals whether they are from Georgia or not. In my district, um, I have individuals who work in Georgia but actually live in Alabama. [0:28:24] Mm. [0:28:24] So if they get a DUI in LaGrange as an employee of one of my, um, companies that I, that I s- I, I'm the senator of, even though they live over in Alabama, they are still required to get their class in Georgia. On one end of my district, I have m- military, large military presence because of Fort Benning. If they get a DUI, and should they be deployed from Fort Benning to anywhere else in the country or the world, they're required to get their DUI training, uh, education, reduction education, uh, in Georgia. [0:28:59] And so we have these schools throughout Georgia. I've got quite a few letters. I don't know if anybody else got this white folder in their file, but, um, quite a few letters from DUI schools throughout the state, uh, supporting this, this type of, uh, DUI education. What this does is it, uh... Summary of the bill, it requires submission of proof of completion of a certified DUI risk reduction program by those who are required to, uh, go into the program and hope to obtain limiting driving permits. [0:29:33] It regulates the crediting of completion of such courses toward reinstatement requirements for certain driver's license suspensions, authorizes written consent for release of certain information to be obtained and transferred electronically. It removes an assessment component required for DUI risk reduction programs. Uh, speaking to the chair before the meeting, uh, there's not a physical note with this, and, and since the bill has been dropped, um, I think it was DDS that reached out to the chairman. Even though DDS and I have had at least two conversations, they did not bring this up. [0:30:08] They are concerned about, uh, the impact it could have on their budget because they receive, uh, funding or they receive money when these assessments are done. My concern about these assessments being done by the, um, DUI risk reduction programs, these individuals in these programs, the instructors are experts in risk reduction, in driving, uh, automobiles- and the dangers of driving automobiles while intoxicated. [0:30:38] They are not healthcare professionals. They are not mental health professionals. And many times, this particular assessment is duplicative to what the courts are already requiring individuals when it comes to the court's concerns about addiction to alcohol or other substances that individuals may be, um, caught with under the Title 40 in which they're arrested for. It also, um, revises the authorized fees for driver improvement clinics and DUI reduction programs. There's not been a fee adjustment in these schools. [0:31:10] And understand, we the state regulate what these fees are. These are businesses run by men and women throughout the State of Georgia, but we tell them what the tuition is. We have not made an adjustment in these programs for over 14 years. The adjustment we're offering today averages out, I think, to $5.02 a year for the last 14 years. Now, friends, there was a bill dropped in the House that would make that number much, much greater. And to be honest with you, I had to explain to somebody the other day, these schools are not meant to punish anybody. [0:31:45] These schools are meant to educate, give people the information they understand, and hopefully help them make better choices when they're out drinking, that they don't go get behind the wheel of a car. And, and please understand, too, and, and I know, uh, Senator, uh, Dickinson understands this very well. The DUI standard for a commercial driver's license is much, much lower than the DUI standard for a, uh, traditional, uh, motor vehicle. The DUI standard for a juvenile driver is lower than for one of us adults over the age of 21 who may get caught driving or... [0:32:22] And so, um, getting DUIs and addressing them the proper way not only makes our streets safer, but in ways it helps those who make a bad choice to be able to continue on with their business, especially those with commercial driver's license. So these schools are extremely important, but I do wanna point out that it is the responsibility of the Georgia State Legislature to determine what they're allowed to charge. And in 14 years, I don't think there's anybody sitting around this table, and we've been discussing affordability, um, ad nauseam since we've been here, that, that does not realize the additional expense added to the bottom line when it comes to technology, when it comes to marketing, when it comes to, uh, working with the courts because we're finding more judges are putting more and more responsibilities on the defendants once they are charged to go out, and they're mandated to get this if they wanna keep a driver's license and, and continue being a functioning part of the Georgia society. [0:33:21] Um, it requires the completion of a DUI reduction program for acceptance of a reduced plea of a charge for driving under the influence for drugs and alcohol. And I'm willing to talk. I know there's been some concern about this, and this is something I'm not willing to get hung up over. But what typically happens in the court system today is if somebody gets a DUI and they, in many cases, have an attorney, they g- they're given the opportunity to plead the case down to a reckless driving charge. [0:33:53] Um, I think last year, DUI claimed almost 13,000 lives. And oddly enough, we were, um, watching a, um, a crash of a police officer that was killed here recently in Georgia, and waiting for toxicology results to come back. And I think if something comes back and there's a problem, I don't know that I would necessarily be surprised. We watched the USA hockey team win a gold medal yesterday in the Olympics. [0:34:26] And during the celebratory pictures afterwards, we watched, um, two of the skaters, two of the hockey players, go over to the stands, pick up two small children, and skate them out to the ice, holding a jersey number 13 in remembrance of their father, who was a member of the United St- the USA hockey team, who he and his brother were killed by a drunk driver while attending a wedding this past year. DUI has become something that it seems we're, we talk about without realizing the absolute dangers that come along with it. [0:34:57] Whether they're intoxicated by alcohol, drugs, including marijuana, and other, and other substances that contain THC, uh, DUIs are not a light violation of law. They are serious. And because of that fact, we regulate those schools. And because of that fact, we tell those schools what they're allowed to charge. And because we have failed in the last 14 years to look at this and make adjustments as we do throughout state government, as we do throughout the budget process of departments that we do know we control, I think it's time that we make that adjustment here. [0:35:36] I know there are several people signed up to speak to the bill, and I'll be happy to answer any questions that any of the committee members m- uh, do have. But, uh, I don't think I have to articulate my passion for this. Um, I am not someone who would go out and find a particular person. I have went and sat in one of these classes where, um, I and one other person were the students in the physical classroom and watched individuals on a screen interact with us from New Jersey, Miami, and other parts of the country. [0:36:12] Some of them military, some of them who came to the city of Atlanta for some celebration, got a DUI, and had to go back home afterwards. And instead of them flying back to Georgia and taking the class here in Georgia, they decided to sign up and do it virtually. And in the virtual classes, the instructor engages with the student person to person. These are not videos. The individual on the other end is not allowed to mute their microphones when they're, when there's conversation going on, and they're not allowed to turn their video off. [0:36:44] If anybody does not cooperate in the class, it would be the same way if I was in the class physically and laid my head down on a desk and refused to cooperate, they are expelled from the class. And then it's their responsibility to go back to the court and articulate why they failed to follow the instructions given to them by the court. But this bill to me is very simple. If you do this, if you take the special interest out of it and focus on the interest of public safety here in the state of Georgia. And with that, Mr. Chair, I'll stand for any questions. [0:37:15] Thank you, Senator Robertson. Everybody knows your passion of keeping people safe, uh, on our roads and throughout the state. Uh, appreciate the great work you did on the bill. Uh, and I just wanna address, uh, after talking to Driver Services for the impact, uh, I'll let you all do a little homework while we're going through some questions, but I believe if we unstrike lines 140 to 146, that may solve your problem. So I'll leave that to Driver Services for you all to take a look at while we continue on some questions. Uh, I wanna thank you again for bringing the bill and, and specifically the area you brought up, which I think is, is very important. [0:37:48] We have people that get pulled over and, uh, are arrested for DUI who do plead down. In fact, they plead down so many times, we don't know whether they're habitual offenders or not because they're getting multiple reckless driving, um, tickets and citations as opposed to what happened. And the goal is, is to rehabilitate and make sure they don't do it again. So offering this as an option for them, uh, now to have to take a class, I think is a good thing. Uh, because not too many people I'm sure that plead down, uh, did so just because they were innocent. [0:38:22] It's because they had an attorney helping them out to get them out of a higher charge. So thank you for your work on this, and I'm gonna open it up to the committee members for questions to the bill's author. Question from Senator Bearden. [0:38:36] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to my senators to the left, I think we both feel the- [0:38:41] Oh, be careful now. [0:38:43] I'm sorry. Usually to my right, but he's sitting to my left. Um, I think we both feel the same way about DUIs, especially nowadays with Uber and everything else. Someone should not be getting behind the wheel intoxicated. Um, and I understand your passion for online instruction. Would you be willing to, I would call it a friendly amendment, because I also understand the active duty, to allow it to be in-person instruction unless you're an active member of the n- of the military? [0:39:14] No, because, uh, there are many people that come into the state of Georgia, as I said before. They come to Atlanta, um, to visit. They may come from South Carolina into Augusta. They come from where- wherever else in Alabama into Columbus. Uh, down in South Georgia, they come from Jacksonville and other places to visit. And these individuals are required to get this training in the state of Georgia. If this were, as you and I have seen years past, you and I can go onto the, um, Gypstyk site, as can, uh, the chairman, and we can take our hours for the fire academy or the police academy online, but there's no active instructor. [0:39:54] We read. The, our, our, our participation is timed to make sure people don't cheat, but, um, but there's nobody there for us to interact with. These classes are as if we are sitting in the room with the instructor. These are live, ongoing classes, scheduled classes. And I think with the requirement that the state of Georgia has put into place that they have to take the training in the state, I think not only is it the right thing to do since the DUI was given here in our state, but if we do have an industry that we regulate to give this instruction, then I would like for that industry to be the ones to provide that instruction. [0:40:31] But I do appreciate the friendly side of it, I do. [0:40:35] And I would say the biggest difference between the law enforcement and firefighters is they have not been charged with a crime, where these individuals have been charged with a DUI. So that would be my only follow-up with that. [0:40:44] Uh, and, and with that, and that, I agree. I agree. And I guess my, my concern is, is that we have, we have developed an idea of what online is. Um, I know that Georgia Tech does a class online, and there's a professor, and he has a lot of students, and I asked that question, and there is interaction through emails and others that maintain that because I was concerned that someone would look at this and say, "Well, they just sign on anywhere, and it's pretty much a, a freebie." In this case, it, it is not that, and which is why I went to a driver school not in the county I live in, but into one of the counties I represent and was able to go to the classroom, talk to the instructor, and sit in and watch the class. [0:41:28] I appreciate that. I would just say this is probably the first time y'all ever s- saw me and, uh, Senator Robertson disagree maybe on a subject matter over the last three years, so. [0:41:34] Oh, I didn't realize we disagreed. [0:41:36] Uh, there are no differences in our opinions. [0:41:37] I thought you were on my side now. [0:41:38] I am on your side. [0:41:40] Continuing on to other questions- ... for the bill's author from the committee members. [0:41:48] Uh, I've got one from our minority leader, Senator Jones. [0:41:51] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was, I'm just looking at, um, the lines 150 through 153. [0:41:59] And just for clarification, were you saying that you were willing to take this out? [0:42:03] I said I'm will- I know you had some concerns about it- [0:42:05] Mm-hmm [0:42:05] ... so I'm absolutely willing to work with you on that and, you know, to, to somewhere where you're comfortable with that is, is what I was saying at the beginning. I didn't get you, uh, I was hoping you'd be here a few minutes earlier and we could have that conversation. [0:42:18] I understand. [0:42:19] Yes, sir. [0:42:19] Yes. Okay. [0:42:19] Well, you're, you're, you got more responsibilities than I do, so. [0:42:22] No, I don't know about that. [0:42:23] Yeah. [0:42:23] But yeah, I mean, other than just what would be, other than just striking it out, I mean, the person isn't, they're not pleading guilty to DUI. Why would they? [0:42:32] Well, and I understand that, 'cause an individual could be charged with reckless driving for other things that do not involve, uh, intoxication. I, I respect that. I think in this particular situation, we all know what the original charge is. And, um, to Chairman Albers' point is when the opportunity came along where individuals were allowed to basically plead down as we called it, even though the fines are typically higher for reckless driving, they're, they were actually able to plead down, in other words, to get the DUI off. [0:43:04] And if, and please correct me if I'm right, the third DUI within a certain period of time in Georgia now is a felony, right? [0:43:11] Mm-hmm. [0:43:11] I believe it's habitual violator. [0:43:13] It, it could be. [0:43:13] So what it does is it removes that- [0:43:14] It could be 18 [0:43:15] ... individual from the, that, that exposure of that. But with the, with the actual damage caused by DUIs, I think it's something, um, that, that should be addressed. But again, I'm, I'm happy to work with the minority leader- [0:43:31] Yeah [0:43:32] ... and get to a place that he and I both feel comfortable if, if that's- [0:43:35] I think- [0:43:35] ... what it takes [0:43:36] ... potentially maybe if it was, like, their second or fi- or third and five or some of them that answer. Because I do also want to point out that I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, that may be the, the, the point the person says, "I'm not gonna plead," and the prosecutor actually doesn't need to have that. Like, in other words, we need to get personal on probation. There actually is not enough evidence to some extent. It's, it's real questionable case. And the defense attorney say, "Well, if you're gonna make him do this class, we just, we just go to trial and you will lose. [0:44:06] And therefore, now we've got nothing." [0:44:08] Yes, sir. [0:44:09] Yeah. [0:44:09] And I appreciate that. [0:44:10] Okay. [0:44:10] And I do think, to your point, I know we have first offender and some other things out there. I, I would love to sit and talk to you if, if you wanna- [0:44:17] Absolutely [0:44:17] ... look at, like, second, second charge, third charge, something like that. I think that's reasonable. [0:44:21] Yeah. [0:44:22] Yes, sir. And, and- [0:44:22] I'm thinking through it. Yes. [0:44:23] You got... Yes, sir. [0:44:24] You can think. [0:44:25] You and I, you and I have walked through thicker weeds than this before. [0:44:27] Right. [0:44:27] So I have no doubt we can come to a, to something we're both comfortable with. [0:44:30] Oh, thank you. [0:44:31] All right, our learned attorneys are weighing in with some good wisdom. I like it. I got a question from Senator Goodman. [0:44:37] Another attorney. [0:44:39] I was just gonna ask a question of my, my great friend, the, the whip. Um, reading lines 150 there. So, and I, I think, I think you all just answered my question. But, you know, if somebody gets pulled over and they, um, they elect not to have... Say they're charged with a DUI, but they end up not being DUI, right? Say that they're, you know, uh, and I'm, I don't know if I'm asking this question the right way. But if someone is char- if there, there... I guess there's a difference between being arrested and being charged with a DUI. [0:45:10] Absolutely. [0:45:10] Is that right? [0:45:11] Absolutely. [0:45:11] And so, you know, if someone refuses a, a, a roadside test or whatever and- [0:45:16] There's, there's never been anything. What a roadside test is, is that's a, that's a g- evidence gathering device and it d- it can, that is not, you can't be charged for DUI for, for not taking a breathalyzer test on the side of the road. [0:45:31] Right. [0:45:31] Right. [0:45:32] Okay. Um, I think y'all, you answered my question there. [0:45:35] Yes, sir. [0:45:35] Um, and- [0:45:36] So next time, just refuse. [0:45:39] Thank you, Mr. Whip. [0:45:40] Until you get, till you get Senator Jones on the phone. [0:45:43] So I'll call, I'll ca- I'll call my g- my, my, my good friend, the minority leader, and say what I need to do. Um, also, um, I had some friends from DDS come and talk to me too, you know. [0:45:55] Right. [0:45:55] And of course, I think they were, uh, uh, they were nervous to talk to you about it. I told them, I said, I said, "Randy's a g- he's a teddy bear. Go talk with him." [0:46:03] I, I agree. [0:46:04] Would, w- w- are you okay if we strike that language? [0:46:07] You're talking about for having the financial- [0:46:09] The $30 [0:46:09] ... the fiscal impact? Yes. Talking to the chairman, uh, as, as the chairman always runs a stout committee without a fiscal note. Uh, I'm, I'm comfortable with that right now. [0:46:19] Okay. [0:46:19] Uh, I'm not, I'm not saying that DDS can't... When they, when, if you could bring them to my office- [0:46:24] Mm [0:46:25] ... and, and let them know that I, I've, I won't cannibalize them. That I'll, that I'll- [0:46:30] Well, I, I'm gonna do one better. I'm gonna have them come to the podium and have a- [0:46:34] Yeah [0:46:34] ... little chat with us right now. [0:46:34] Good deal. [0:46:34] Why don't you come on up here? We've got Miss Shavonda Leslie, Department of Driver Services. Ms. Leslie, thank you for reaching out to me a little bit earlier. Uh, and are we referencing the proper lines of 140 to 146 so it'll leave a budget deficit? [0:46:49] Yes, sir. Good morning. I'm, well, I'm sorry, good afternoon. I'm sorry, I just flew down here from Rome. We had a event in Rome. But my name is Shavonda Leslie. I serve as the director of governmental affairs and communications for the Georgia Department of Driver Services. Yes, we do believe that if that is, uh, that portion is added back in, that would sufficiently address our concerns. [0:47:08] And help us understand why we are ma- why are we charging these people today and bringing dollars back in general fund. What work is being done by the state or by driver services that requires us to charge and bring that back? [0:47:21] Got you. So a portion of that question, unfortunately, uh, I cannot answer in reference to, uh, because that's a DBHDD. Um, we collect those, and they are here as well. We do collect those funds, um, and, and a portion of those funds, half of it is split between DDS and the other half is, is split, um, with, uh, DBHDD. Um, and as you know, as I stated in my email to you guys, um, our funds that we collect is not s- is not kept by D- DDS, it is always sent back to the general fund, and then we are to come back before the legislature to request additional funding as needed for the year. [0:47:58] I'm gonna make an assumption, could be wrong, that part of the reason those funds are collected by the state is if we have to suspend and then reinstate someone's driver's license, that's part of the administration pur- purposes of going through that. Could that be accurate? [0:48:11] It did. You are correct. I'm sorry, I misspoke. Um, in reference to that, yes, you are correct. And also, we provide oversight for all the, uh, driving schools, DUI schools and risk reduction schools in the state of Georgia. So, uh, part of that is to, it funds our regulated, uh, um, operation. [0:48:28] All right. Senator Robertson, you have some questions? [0:48:30] I do. Uh, could you explain to me what exactly this assessment does? [0:48:35] That I, I cannot explain that to you. I think that may be for the providers- [0:48:39] Okay [0:48:39] ... as well as DBHDD. Uh, so just to be clear, D- G- Georgia Department of Driver Services, we collect those, those funds, uh- And then of course, we don't handle the treatment side of it. We don't handle the, the, uh, ruling in the courts, uh, portion of it. We, we collect it. That helps, uh, helps our team as far as the people that go out to audit to confirm that they are doing what they're supposed to be doing. But the- there are some subject matter experts in the, in the audience- [0:49:08] Yeah [0:49:08] ... that may be able to speak to that. [0:49:09] Are you f- are you familiar with what the purpose of the assessment is? [0:49:14] Again, I don't wanna misspeak, nor do I wanna speak for someone else, someone else, so they would... I would probably feel more comfortable if you had the subject matter expert speak about that. I can answer questions as it relates to the Georgia- [0:49:25] Okay [0:49:25] ... Department of Driver Services, um, but I can't answer- [0:49:28] Okay [0:49:28] ... attribute- [0:49:28] And I'm not trying to put you on the spot, I'm really not. I wish y'all would've come and talked to me. [0:49:32] We did. We- [0:49:33] No, ma'am. We talked in the hallway briefly one day, and we had a conversation there. My concern is, is that this is a fee you collect. Do you know what... What's the, what's DBHDD's relationship in this particular assessment? And if that's something you don't know, I'm comfortable with that. [0:49:49] Yeah. [0:49:49] Yeah. [0:49:49] I think we have some folks here from DBHDD. [0:49:50] They are here. [0:49:51] Okay. [0:49:51] Why don't we have them come up next? [0:49:52] Okay. [0:49:52] Any other questions for Ms. Leslie, though, before we move on? All right. Come on down. [0:49:58] Thank you. [0:49:58] Thank you. [0:49:59] Thank you. Who's here from DBHDD? [0:50:04] Our director is set right next door to another meeting. All right. Could we come back to the podium- Sure ... and speak with you Oh, you w- ... That would, that would be just fine. Okay, thank you. All right. Uh, we do have some people signed up to speak. Uh, but the first one, uh, Aaron Christansai? [0:50:22] Yeah. [0:50:22] Okay. Hang on a minute. Now I need you to come over here and fill the entire form in, otherwise we can't hear from you. So why don't you walk around here and meet Kiki. First of all, have Mr. Barry Shrank come up. Why don't you come up to the podium, Barry? And we look forward to hearing from you and your testimony today. [0:50:42] Shrank. Is that the right pronunciation? [0:50:45] I believe so. I'm sure. [0:50:46] Uh, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the committee. My name is Barry Shrank, and I'm president and owner of Taggarts Driving School. I've represented GARD, which is the Georgia Association of Risk Reduction and Defensive Driving Educators, uh, since 1981. I've been licensed by the State of Georgia to teach driver education for over 50 years. Also, the six-hour defensive driving improvement course. It's used for points reduction, ticket dismissal, and insurance premium reduction. [0:51:20] I was licensed to teach the PRI, Prevention Research Institute's DUI Risk Reduction Program, usually called PRI, for over 25 years. Although I no longer personally teach the risk reduction program, my school is still licensed to provide that service, thus my interest in, uh, Senate Bill 473. Uh, I was going to provide some background on the risk reduction program when it was first implemented in 1990. [0:51:51] Actually, in 1988, uh, a group of GARD members got together and actually wrote a new curriculum for the DUI schools. We didn't realize at the time that there were two fine ladies from the, the old Department of Human Resources that were looking around the country for a curriculum that would be, um, based on facts and research. And they actually found a curriculum in, in Kentucky by this nonprofit called Prevention Research Institute. [0:52:26] To make sure there was a good fit for the State of Georgia, they ran a test project for about two years, 1988, '89, and i- into 1990, inside of four or five state institutions, uh, mental health institutions, to see whether or not this curriculum worked. In 1990, they announced their results, and they were just overwhelmingly in favor of this curriculum. It, uh, helped people that, uh, were not already alcoholics, uh, or just, uh, had a DUI, but it was a, a, a... [0:53:06] The best result was the, a reduction of recidivism by using this curriculum. So at that time, l- I guess a couple hundred instructors were trained in the PRI Risk Reduction Program, and we've been using that since 1990. Uh, they're all, they are now on, I think, version number 10 or 11 of the curriculum. Uh, it's changed every couple of years slightly based upon the research that's done at various universities in the United States and throughout the, the Western civilization. [0:53:43] And, uh, so that's why the updated curriculums, uh, have been presented to the, uh, the teachers. PRI provides a training program for all the instructors, uh, on an annual basis, and, uh, which is needed because they have to have continuing education hours totaling 32 hours to renew their license every four years. [0:54:07] And Barry, we've got a bunch of people signed up, so we're gonna need to, if you can kind of point to, uh, to the, the history. [0:54:13] Okay. All right. Uh, basically the program itself consists of four parts. The first is the assessment. The assessment has about 130 questions on it, and the student/offender has to answer all of those questions. It is then fed into the computer, the, uh, the ADE, it's the name of the company, the provider, into the computer, and the results are sent to the school and the particular instructor of that class. [0:54:45] And it really tells, it is about a 96% accuracy, and it's very important as the 20-hour class is being taught for the instructor to have a pretty good idea of where the stu- each individual student is in their, their use of alcohol and/or drugs Also, that's part number one. Part number four is after the class is over and the offender has to go before, uh, or be interviewed by a licensed, a DBHDD evaluator. [0:55:19] And the evaluator wants a copy of that, it's assessment tool because it's very helpful in determining whether or not that person's gonna be able to get their driver's license back, or do they have to go to an in-person program, or whatever the evaluator who's on the DD, DDH, uh- [0:55:38] DBHDD [0:55:39] ... BDHDD. [0:55:40] Say that three times fast, Barry. [0:55:41] I always, I always have a problem with it. So that's, that's part four. So that assessment instrument is very, very important. Um, the, the evaluators, and there'll be somebody here from that department, the evaluators, um, are funded by that fee that you were just talking about, the $30. $15 goes to the Department of Driver Services, $15 goes to DB- DBHDD- ... [0:56:13] and, uh, to pay, pay the, um, uh, pay for the f- f- the, the instruction, the continuing education. The second part of the program is the actual curriculum, and I've already mentioned the fact that the curriculum has been upgraded and updated, uh, 10 or 12 times over the last 35, 36 years. And, um, so basically that's how that program works. Um, I had some comments, uh, o- o- I- [0:56:40] Yeah, we're gonna have to wrap up in about 60 seconds to give everybody else a chance to speak. [0:56:43] Okay. Uh, my understanding is that if someone from out of state, say South Carolina, gets a DUI in Augusta, South Carolina is one of the 16 states that uses a PRI curriculum. They would just go to a, a s- a cur- they would just go to a program that was recognized by the Department of Driver Services, and they can take that program in their home state. And there's 16 of them that use the, uh, the same curriculum that we use. [0:57:14] We were the first state to use that curriculum, and now there's 16. I should also mention that all the branches of the military now use that same curriculum. That started about seven or eight years ago with one branch. I don't know whether it was the Army or the Navy, but today all five branches of the military use that same curriculum because it's that good. So basically, if you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them. [0:57:40] What about the Space Force, our sixth branch? Are they using it as well? [0:57:43] I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. [0:57:44] What about the Space Force, our sixth branch? Are they using it as well? You only mentioned the five branches of the military. [0:57:50] Uh, well, uh, it's the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and the Coast Guard. [0:57:55] And the Space Force. [0:57:57] And? [0:57:57] The Space Force. [0:57:59] Uh, well, you know, I've heard that, but I'm not sure whether they do or not. [0:58:02] All right. Yes, sir. All right, we're gonna do a couple quick questions here. Uh, Senator Robertson. [0:58:07] So Barry, would it be right to say 44 states do not use, uh, Prime for Life? [0:58:14] Uh, no, because, uh- [0:58:16] Well, you just said 16 do [0:58:17] ... other than the 16 that mandate that as the- [0:58:19] Yeah [0:58:19] ... only curriculum, many other states use that as an alternative curriculum for something they have developed. [0:58:26] So, so why do states mandate it and 44 states do not mandate it? I'm sure- [0:58:33] Uh, it's just a different philosophy with the, uh, with the legislatures. And, uh, some want just one program, so they're sure of what's being taught, and others will allow another, a second or a third curriculum. [0:58:45] So you said the evaluation, the $30 eval, correct? [0:58:49] Fee. [0:58:50] Right. Right. [0:58:51] Yeah. [0:58:51] To do the evaluation, it's $30, correct? [0:58:54] Uh, no. No. [0:58:56] That goes to DDS. [0:58:57] The $30 is taken from the total income, actually from the first $100, uh, that the student pays, and $30 is sent to DDS, Department of Driver Services. [0:59:11] Well, right. What I'm trying to say is what, what, what do people pay for the evaluation? [0:59:16] For the actual assessment? [0:59:17] Yes. [0:59:18] Uh, we pay, I think it's $8, and that hasn't been raised to the- [0:59:22] Right [0:59:22] ... assessment company. [0:59:23] The student pays that, correct? [0:59:25] The student pays that. [0:59:27] Okay. [0:59:27] The student pays all the fees. The state, the, uh, taxpayer does not pay any of the fees. It all comes from the offender. [0:59:33] So the DB- well, then the DBHDD eva- eval, who pays for that? When they go meet with the DBHDD. [0:59:41] The offender. [0:59:43] The offender pays for that? [0:59:44] Yes. [0:59:44] Where does that money come from? [0:59:45] Out of their, out of their pocket or from their mother or wh- whomever. [0:59:49] So that's not factored into the regular fee- [0:59:51] No [0:59:52] ... of the driving school? [0:59:52] It's not because, uh, there's a list of about 500 that are on the list from DBHDD, and, um, the offender can select any person they want to. [1:00:03] Does every- [1:00:04] That's li- that's on the list [1:00:05] ... does every offender have to do the DBHDD part? [1:00:09] They're supposed to, but apparently there's some locations, and these are my friends I know, uh, at DDS, uh, that will issue the license without, uh, that, that particular, uh, check, which- [1:00:23] Does Georgia law require that they do the eval with DBHDD? [1:00:26] That's my understanding. Everything that has to do with DUI is required by law. [1:00:31] Okay. So, so your testimony is that something that is required by Georgia law is not being done? [1:00:37] That's what I've been told, but I, I don't take that as fact. [1:00:41] Okay. Thank you. [1:00:44] All right, uh, got a question from Senator Goodman, and we're gonna have to wrap this up and keep moving after that question. [1:00:49] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Don't mean to belabor the point, but is it your contention then that anyone in another state that gets a DUI in Georgia, that there is, that that state has some, some program or some approved course or whatever that that person would not have to travel to Georgia and take this course? Is that what you're contending? [1:01:09] That, that, that's correct. And I give you an example- [1:01:10] Not just the, not just the 16 states [1:01:13] That's correct. As long as the... I'll quickly give you the background. [1:01:19] No, it's, it's, it's fine. [1:01:20] Yes. [1:01:20] I, that, that's what I wanted to know. [1:01:22] Yes. [1:01:22] Thank you. All right. [1:01:23] Yes. [1:01:23] All right. So, uh, just to make sure we got this, uh, Barry, you signed up, uh, against this bill. Is that because of the $30 fee- [1:01:31] Well- [1:01:31] ... that the author's willing to unstrike, or are there other reasons that I need to do this in 10 seconds or less, please? [1:01:35] There, there's a couple of reasons. Uh, actually, I didn't want... I, I wasn't sure whether I should check against or for, because I'm in the middle. There's some good parts to the bill and a couple of parts that need to be changed. [1:01:48] Okay. All right. Thank you very much for your testimony. [1:01:51] You're welcome. Thank you. [1:01:51] All right, next person. Uh, Renee, why don't you come on down, introduce us, introduce yourself to us and tell us who you're with. [1:02:01] Hello. Um, I'm from ADE Incorporated. We provide the assessment, um, we're the assessment vendor. But how I got here to this position, um, as a trainer for them is I was part of the pilot in 1989. And so over that time, I was an instructor, DUI school owner. Um, for 30 years, I ran a program. I've done contract work for Prevention Research Institute as a trainer and for DBHDD as a trainer. So I understand the program deeply and all the aspects, um, that we're talking about today. [1:02:37] And first, I want to talk about standardization and why that's important. And standardization is not rigidity. You know, it's about protecting the integrity of, uh, evidence-based care. And for mandated alcohol and drug clients, you've got to have certain pillars to make sure that those clients, the clients that are coming through the program, are getting the best services available and that we're collecting the data that w- that we need. Um, this requires appropriate level of monitoring from DBHDD, trained providers, that's why we have all the continuing education, a structured curriculum that shows evidence-based, um, public safety and for meaningful client outcomes. [1:03:25] And so the needs assessment, and we are on version five of the needs assessment through this, this timeframe, is one of the core components of the DUI Risk Reduction Program. It is a structured, validated, evidence-based assessment tool. It's a screening tool that's used. It helps the instructor know who the students are in their program- [1:03:45] And, and Renee, I'm sorry, I'm gonna have to interrupt for a second. I apologize. We have 12 minutes left to the committee, and we have three more bills that we're gonna have to get through. I appreciate all the history. Really need to know why you're for or against in a small timeframe of about 30 seconds or less. [1:03:57] All right. So- [1:03:58] Thank you [1:03:58] ... um, I'm against the bill as it is currently written. Um, it takes out the pillars and the structure of a program that has become a model program throughout the whole country. [1:04:09] Thank you so much. [1:04:10] Thank you. [1:04:10] Okay. [1:04:10] Want to go for four? [1:04:11] Uh, next, uh- [1:04:13] I think there's only one. [1:04:16] Now I'm looking for, uh, what the name is. Is that Enja? [1:04:20] Ina. [1:04:20] Ina. Okay, Ina. All right, Ina, unfortunately, we're gonna have to give everybody had 60 seconds now to get through some stuff. So please, uh, tell us exactly why you're for or against the bill. [1:04:28] Okay. So I'm Ina Mitchell. I am representing Prevention Research Institute. So we are the developers of the Risk Reduction Program, and we are also developers of the Lifestyle Risk Reduction model. And so if you go back to when the legislators put this in, um, the namesake of the program comes from that model. Um, the model has decades of research. This is a public safety issue, and we have seven recidivism studies in our country. One was done here at Emory University, one at University of Georgia in 2019. [1:05:02] Georgia is a model for the entire country. We are utilized in every state, and that is why 16 states have mandated it, because of the recidivism data that supports it. We also, our recidivism studies actually reach the most severe, which is, when we're talking about public safety, that is so important, because we want to make sure that we are not just reaching people who are on the small end of the continuum, but we're reaching people who are more likely to recidivate, and that is what the data shows. [1:05:33] We have, um, peer-reviewed literature articles that I have brought with me to leave, because I know that as you're making these decisions, um, that's really important. Um, the University of Georgia's data in 2019 shows that Georgia, in a 10-year period, recidivates less than the two-year national average. [1:05:53] Thank you. [1:05:53] And that is, it, I mean, it's just remarkable. We work with every branch of the military, and that does provide another level of scrutiny, but the Space Force has not joined in yet. [1:06:05] All right. Well, we'll get them next. [1:06:06] Yes. [1:06:07] Present two bills. [1:06:08] So we are in... We believe that the- [1:06:11] Okay, we're gonna have to wrap up. We're at two minutes already. [1:06:13] Yeah. [1:06:13] So thank you so much. [1:06:15] Thank you. [1:06:15] All right, Mike, uh, next, uh, up, and Aaron, if you'll get on deck and be right there, uh, just for timing perspective. [1:06:21] This, this- [1:06:22] Again, again, 60 seconds. I'm sorry, folks, we just got a lot of stuff we gotta get through. [1:06:26] Okay. [1:06:26] Hey, I'm Mike Latella. I own a DUI school, um, and a counseling service down in Peachtree City. Um, I have answers for those questions that you guys had if you wanna, wanna ask me or s- get in touch with me. The assessment is 100 bucks. That's what the student pays. $30 goes back to the state, $8 goes to ADE for p- processing the as- the, uh, test. The rest of it goes to the driving school. The danger of, of eliminating that, um, and the cost of the workbook is the other problem for PRI, is that's where they, the PRI gets most of their income, from those workbooks. [1:07:02] Um, and you look at, it's a $25 workbook, it looks like, well, they, probably cost four bucks to print. But that's where their income comes from. And PRI is a, is an excellent, excellent teaching tool. It is the most effective thing that I've seen. I've got a master's degree in addiction counseling, and it is by far the best thing I've ever seen out there in terms of leaving people with an, a, a sense of urgency and fixing their problem [1:07:28] What the assessment does in that part which is very important is that the, it does give a profile to the instructor. The instructor doesn't, doesn't evaluate it. They don't talk about it. But I've never... I teach the course as well occasionally, and I've never talked to them about the assessment and what it means. It gives them the answers there, and while they're in the middle of this, of this course, they're given the reality of what their situation has done to them. [1:07:55] And Mike, we're already over time. [1:07:56] Okay. [1:07:57] I'm sorry. We have to wrap up. [1:07:58] I'm against this bill because it would take away from the, the income from the two programs that are working very well for us, the, uh, both the ADE and the Prime for Life. And the online stuff has got to go, too. I'll just tell you that right now. The online for out-of-state people is one thing. You put 40 people on a video screen and have somebody try to instruct a course like that, we're losing our effectiveness, and it's gonna show in recidivism, recidivism rates. [1:08:27] All right. [1:08:28] Thank you. [1:08:28] Thank you. Okay, tell you what we're gonna do. We're gonna take a little chairman's prerogative. I appreciate everybody standing up. You can take a seat. Uh, we're gonna run out of time in order to have the rest of the testimony today. So we have a meeting coming, uh, on Wednesday where we're going to pick it back up. For those that signed up, I promise you'll be first on the list, so you don't have to, uh, worry about that. Uh, in between now and Wednesday, I'm gonna give the, uh, bill's author a minute to just, uh, say a few words. Uh, I'd encourage you to please work in good faith together to express your concerns. Uh, so any questions? [1:08:59] I know the minority b- leader had brought up, uh, a couple of good points. Let's see, uh, what we can do together as well as the, the issue that DBA, or sorry, DDS brought up about the, uh, the fee so we can come up with what might look like a committee substitute. All right. Uh, Senator Robertson, to give us a minute to close out, please. [1:09:16] Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this. And some things were said I just want to clear up. Uh, Orli Mowbray, who's a PhD, um, with the exec- well, excuse me, the executive director of the Rawson Institute for Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities at the University of Georgia, go Dogs, um, says, um, "Based on evidence reviewed, I conclude that universal front-end DUI school assessment does not demonstrate clear added public safety value when a clinical evaluation is required. The current structure imposes unnecessary financial burden on Georgia citizens. [1:09:49] The sequencing of requirements creates avoidable confusion and administrative inefficiency." And so I, I think it's pretty clear that, uh, when our state's university, uh, research, researches this and has no vested interest, doesn't do their research in order to, uh, to fund, uh, anything beyond good information, I think is where I'm gonna hang my hat every time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:10:14] All right. Thank you, Senator Robertson. All right, we're gonna move over to Senate Bill 501, which is also Senator Robertson. This is an agency bill. Uh, so if we have, uh, some of our representatives from the Department of Insurance and Safety Fire here. Uh, as the committee probably knows, we have agency bills regularly, uh, that keep up, uh, with necessary updates to our code to align, uh, with the needs of the people we serve. Uh, this one is pretty straightforward. Uh, Senator Robertson, uh, uh, do you want to, uh, give us a lead-off, or wanna turn it right over to, uh- [1:10:49] For effectiveness, Mr. Chairman, and for time, I would, I would like to ask, um, the insurance department who I've worked with closely on this legislation to speak to it briefly and inform the committee members. [1:11:00] And Bryce, the, uh, the question there, uh, the opportune thing is briefly. [1:11:05] Of course, uh- [1:11:05] Thank you. Don't talk us out of it. [1:11:07] Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. My name is Bryce Ralston. I'm the director of legislative affairs for the Georgia Insurance Commissioner's Office. For the sake of time, I'll just dive br- straight into what this bill does. Uh, the, uh, I'll highlight the most important things here. So first, it creates a deputy commissioner of state fire, uh, that allows our, our state fire marshal, uh, to ins- get away from the administrative and operations side, uh, and allows the, him, that position, him or her, to take over and allow the state fire marshal to focus on enforcing our state minimum fire safety standards. Uh, it also establishes a consistent process for our hearings across agency. [1:11:37] It aligns it with how we have hearings on our insurance code, uh, just so we're all following just one process for our legal division. It establishes an appeal mechanism for those that have been aggrieved or adversely affected by a final authority or a final ruling by a local governing authority on building permits. Uh, we had an issue where local authorities, uh, they are delaying some of our projects, uh, you know, up to a year, as is, with Georgia being the number one state to do business. We wanna make sure that, that we are, uh, you know, enhancing our, our abilities for our businesses to compete in Georgia, uh, and not hindering them. It provides oversight over deputized personnel, so we, we authorize local fire marshals and deputize them. [1:12:12] So we wanna make sure that we have some level of oversight over them, 'cause right now what we do is we, we deputize them and then almost send them out into the wild. Uh, it also gives the commissioner the ability to issue an immediate evacuation order, uh, if there is an imminent life safety danger, uh, as r- if a building is dilapidated or ha- has some other life safety danger present. Uh, it al- it enhances our fire fatality investigation provisions, uh, by allowing us to receive, uh, certain reports from coroners, uh, if they- [1:12:42] If I could have the floor [1:12:42] ... uh, it will have the, the coroners and MEs, uh, medical examiners, report all fire fatalities to our office, because right now we do not have an accurate count of how many fire fatalities occur in the State of Georgia. Uh, and then it amends punishments for violating Title 25 provisions by adding, um, some additional, uh, imprisonment by up to 12 months for violating Title 25, and then a fine of up to $1,000 per violation. And- [1:13:06] All right. Pretty straightforward, uh, stuff here. Uh, I know, uh, Cindy Morley's back there. She just gave me a thumbs up from the Homebuilders Association. [1:13:13] Appreciate the bill. [1:13:14] All right. Questions to the committee members for the bill's author or our representatives from the Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner? Seeing none, uh, we are gonna do a minor amendment. Our esteemed legislative counsel found a scrivener's error, uh, on line 96. It simply removed the word B. Uh, it was a grammatical error. Uh, but we're gonna begin by opening it up for a motion, and then we'll go to amendment. Uh- [1:13:38] Make the motion. [1:13:39] I've got a motion from Senator Bearden. Uh, do pass. Do I have a second? Oh, second from Senator Payne. He beat you. All right, now, uh, would someone be willing to offer an amendment on line 96 to strike the word B? Senator Halpern, thank you for that excellent amendment. That was wonderful. Do we have a second? [1:13:58] I'll second. [1:13:59] A second from Senator Goodman. I love the bipartisanship work on this. All in favor of the amendment, please say aye. [1:14:03] Aye. [1:14:04] All right. Well, now we're back to the bill as, uh, amended. Uh, I'm gonna call the question. All those in favor, please say aye. [1:14:10] Aye. [1:14:10] All those opposed, please say no. [1:14:13] The- [1:14:13] Bill passes unanimously. Thank you very much. [1:14:15] I hope you've got another couple bills, Frank. [1:14:17] Well, we have one more. It'll be about 60 seconds. I'm gonna wait. [1:14:20] It'll be the 60 seconds of hell. [1:14:21] Maybe 120 seconds. [1:14:22] Okay. [1:14:23] All right. [1:14:23] This is gonna be really quick. [1:14:24] Okay. All right, last, uh, bill is also, this is the day of Senator Robertson. Uh, I think this one is, uh, even simpler than the last one. This is, uh, Senate Bill 527. Uh, Senator Robertson, I will turn it over to you. [1:14:37] This is really simple. We voted it out of the Senate last year. The House got confused. Um, all this does is, um, it requires that candidates for the office of sheriff are certified peace officers at the time of qualifying as a candidate. [1:14:51] What a novel concept, that somebody who runs for sheriff should actually be a certified police officer. I think that's excellent. Questions from the committee members? [1:14:59] Senator- [1:14:59] I got a question. Oh, uh, this, this is for questions. [1:15:02] Is the, is- [1:15:03] Mr. Chairman, is this the Randy Robertson power hour? [1:15:07] It is. [1:15:07] Uh, some have said it would be. Yes, Senator. It's true. All right, questions first. All right, uh, Mike with the Georgia Sheriff's Association, very quickly. [1:15:17] Yes, sir. Mike Mitchell, Georgia Sheriff's Association. Thank you to this committee. I wanted to thank, uh, Senator Robertson for bringing this bill. Uh, it is our elusive qualifications bill. It seems to fly out of committee here in the Senate, and, and funny things happen over in the House that's, uh, beyond our control, unfortunately. So, uh, we hope that we can find the secret sauce this year. Want to thank y'all for hearing it, and we do ask for your favorable support. [1:15:43] Thank you. I'm gonna recognize Senator Payne. [1:15:45] I'd pray to make a motion to do pass. [1:15:47] I got a motion to do pass. Do I have a second? [1:15:49] Second. [1:15:50] A second from Senator Bearden. Any further discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor, please say aye. [1:15:54] Aye. [1:15:54] All opposed, please say no. Passed unanimously. Best of luck in the Rules Committee. All right, ladies and gentlemen, thank you again for being here. Again, we're gonna meet on Wednesday at our normal scheduled time. Assuming we got a session and time, we will have at least two bills, Senator Robertson's bill, as well as we have another one from Senator Harbin. Thank you. Have a great day. This meeting's adjourned. [1:16:13] You mean, Wednesday's not gonna be Randy day?