Senate Transportation Committee, February 25, 2026

Transcript

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

1. 0:13:05

   Transportation Committee meeting. It is time for us to convene at 8:00 AM. Um, Senator... Who looks like they're ready? Senator Still, would you open us up in a word of prayer this morning, please? What are you on there, nine?

2. 0:13:20

   Nine. Please bow your heads. Heavenly Father, thank you for, um, keeping me safe on the roads today with, uh, with a blown out tire. Thank you for the relationship with Georgia Tech to let me park illegally at their campus, uh, so I could get here on time for this very important meeting. God, um, you, you guide our hand in all things that we do, and we are constantly reminded of your greatness and your grace, and we just appreciate you and bless you for all that you do to keep us here serving the people of Georgia.

3. 0:13:51

   In your name we pray, amen.

4. 0:13:52

   Amen.

5. 0:13:53

   And I literally did blow out a tire-

6. 0:13:55

   That's good

7. 0:13:55

   ... just for, just to get here.

8. 0:13:56

   I'm glad you are here. So we are one short of a quorum. I will, um, I'd like to take input from the committee on who you think will be the next member to show up.

9. 0:14:06

   Ah, let's see here.

10. 0:14:07

    I will list the non, uh, currently, the members not currently.

11. 0:14:12

    Sports betting.

12. 0:14:13

    Dead last.

13. 0:14:13

    So, uh, this will be a gentleman's, uh, bet here. Um, oh.

14. 0:14:19

    Oh.

15. 0:14:19

    We have our winner. Was anybody gonna choose-

16. 0:14:25

    I was gonna side with you, Mr. President.

17. 0:14:26

    The president pro tem-

18. 0:14:28

    I bet on you

19. 0:14:30

    ... of the Georgia Senate, Lawrence Walker III- ... is in attendance. Uh, we will continue, though, just for fun. Um, members not currently in attendance, uh, Senator Clint Dixon.

20. 0:14:43

    Yeah.

21. 0:14:43

    Uh, Senator Frank Ginn, Senator Steve Gooch, Senator David Lucas, Senator Derek Mallow, Senator Josh McLaurin. Um, starting with Senator Burns, who do you think will arrive next?

22. 0:14:59

    Senator Walker, who is your pick for the next arrival?

23. 0:15:02

    Uh, Senator Dixon.

24. 0:15:06

    Okay. Uh, Senator Anavitarte. I- I'm gonna say David Lucas. Ooh. Bold, bold pick. Oh. Bold pick. Uh, Senator Still.

25. 0:15:15

    Gooch.

26. 0:15:18

    All right, and Senator Dickerson. I will concur with Senator Burns. I'm gonna go with, uh, Senator McLaurin.

27. 0:15:25

    Ooh, I was gonna pick him.

28. 0:15:27

    Um, and I'm gonna go with the correct answer, um, with Dixon.

29. 0:15:32

    Oh.

30. 0:15:33

    And we will see what happens.

31. 0:15:36

    I thought it was Gooch.

32. 0:15:36

    I have seen him on campus, so I like my chances. All right. Before we, um, get started, I would like to ask if any members of the committee know what OCGA 40-6-71, uh, talks about. It's a very important area of Georgia code related to transportation. We've discussed this before. Um, this states that the driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left- ... within an intersection shall yield the right of way to any vehicle approaching the opposite direction which is within the intersection or so close thereto as to constitute an immediate hazard.

33. 0:16:17

    This means that right turners should never yield to left turners. However, engineers all over the state, but particularly in the north suburb of Forsyth County- ... have put r- right turn yield signs, Senator-

34. 0:16:35

    Yeah

35. 0:16:35

    ... at almost every intersection in the county-

36. 0:16:38

    Oh, boy

37. 0:16:38

    ... in direct conflict with the plain reading of this statute. Not only is this a gross waste of taxpayer funds, but it creates significant confusion where nobody knows whether they should be yielding or not yielding.

38. 0:16:54

    Oh.

39. 0:16:54

    Oh, we have-

40. 0:16:56

    You have quorum?

41. 0:16:57

    Who, we have, uh, Burns-

42. 0:16:59

    Sports betting on the sports betting

43. 0:17:00

    ... and Dickerson are the winners of the bet-

44. 0:17:03

    Yeah

45. 0:17:03

    ... of who would arrive next. And it is Senator McLaurin. Senator McLaurin, do you know what OCGA 40-6-71 refers to? Do they ever cover that in Yale Law School?

46. 0:17:13

    I've got the whole thing memorized.

47. 0:17:15

    In case anybody didn't know that.

48. 0:17:17

    It refers-

49. 0:17:18

    Consult your-

50. 0:17:18

    It, it, it refers to left turns, uh, having to yield-

51. 0:17:23

    Okay

52. 0:17:23

    ... to right turns. This is not political. This is actually physical. When you wanna turn left, you yield to all oncoming traffic.

53. 0:17:28

    I figured you were coming. I knew it-

54. 0:17:29

    Yes. But my, in my district, Senator-

55. 0:17:32

    Yeah

56. 0:17:33

    ... my county engineers for decades have put right turn, have put yield signs in the right turn lanes of intersections all over the county. It's an abomination. I am going to drop a constitutional amendment, 'cause they won't follow the law. Maybe they'll follow the Constitution.

57. 0:17:49

    Okay.

58. 0:17:49

    So we are working on that. Thank you for being here on this committee.

59. 0:17:52

    Senator.

60. 0:17:52

    Being, yes, uh, Senator Still.

61. 0:17:55

    Just asking, point of order, is it possible that Senator McLaurin may have had a hand in drafting this bill because he only makes left turns whenever possible, and I think that he could have been the conspiracy behind making this-

62. 0:18:07

    I think it's also possible he booby-trapped your vehicle this morning that caused your tire to blow out- ... in an attempt to swing the vote on our first bill. Um-

63. 0:18:16

    Wow

64. 0:18:16

    ... which is HB 638. This is a committee sub, um, brought by Senator Jason Anavitarte. And, um, why don't you go present from there if you don't mind, just 'cause it'll be easier for us to have-

65. 0:18:29

    What, you just want to look at my face?

66. 0:18:29

    I do. I really, yes.

67. 0:18:30

    Oh.

68. 0:18:30

    I think it'll be easier for the camera. We're asking you questions for you to-

69. 0:18:33

    Oh

70. 0:18:33

    ... be there, 'cause this is an important conversation, in all seriousness. It's something the House has had conversations about, um, at least over the last two years, and something you're bringing before the committee today.

71. 0:18:58

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, it's a great bill to discuss after that lovely icebreaker you just had. Um- So basically HB 638, if you remember, was formerly a MARTA bill. And working off LC39-4957S, I believe is the correct number, um, this, uh, committee sub would basically seek to enhance government efficiency by cutting several state organizations responsible- responsibly coordinating and s- consolidating them into the State Road and Tollway Authority.

72. 0:19:43

    Um, the highlights of the bill, just to go through, it's a pretty in-depth, uh, thick bill, and I do wanna, um, just recognize Representative Silcox and, uh, Speaker Pro Tem Jan Jones and Leader Efraten in the work that several, um, in the House have done on this topic in the last couple years. But I think as more of us have had conversations about the efficiency of what's going on with transportation in Georgia, um, I think the timing of doing this is perfect.

73. 0:20:15

    Basically, the committee sub abolishes the Atlanta Regional Transit Link, ATL, which is what most people know it as, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority, and the Governor's Development Council. It transfers all assets, liability, obligations, contracts, employees, and real property, property of both abolishes authorities to SRTA effective in July. It expands SRTA's board composition to include two members from non-attainment counties appointed by the Lieutenant Governor and the Speaker of the House.

74. 0:20:54

    It transfers all federal grant-receiving authority for transit to SRTA. SRTA replaces Atlanta's oversight and coordination role over MARTA, transfers the ATL's MARTA oversight functions, transit SPLOST approvals, multi-county T-SPLOST management, and regional transit responsibilities to SRTA. Requires SRTA to lease transfer transit vehicles to local governments by January 1st of '27 based on ridership originating in each jurisdiction.

75. 0:21:31

    It grants the Atlanta Regional Commission approval authority over developments of regional impact involving state or federal funds. Now, the next piece in terms of how and when this bill will be implemented, I've outlined a few of those things. Um, basically a- upon the governor's signature, um, the actual transfer of the ATL and GRTA assets, employees, obligations, as I said, in July. Um, SRTA would absorb all ATL and GRTA functions by operation of law July 1st of '26.

76. 0:22:05

    No separate legislative or administrative action would be required. Um, all existing contracts, federal funding commitments, agreements automatically substitute GR- SR- SRTA's name for ATL and GRTA. All employees transfer to SRTA with no reduction in compensation or benefits, with retirement and accrued leave rights fully preserved. SRTA gains new explicit statutory powers, including transit coordination among state and regional local authorities, federal grant recipients for transit, MARTA plan approval, transit SPLOST project approval, and T-SPLOST transit man- uh, project management.

77. 0:22:51

    SRTA's executive director would assum- would assume all decision-making authority previously held by the ATL's executive authority across multiple statutory references. SRTA's board is expanded and restructured to include legislative appointments from non-attainment area counties, ensuring regional representation as needed. And then the bottom line of how this helps Georgia. It cuts down government efficiency by eliminating three separate state entities, the ATL, GRTA, the GDC, and place- and replacing them with one authority, being SRTA.

78. 0:23:28

    Removes duplicative executive leadership, administrative overhead, um, administrative fees that are being charged, and separate board structures for ATL and GRTA, resulting in direct taxpayer savings. Consolidates transit coordination, planning oversight, federal grant management, and SPLOST approval into one agency that is already has deep transportation expertise and bonding authority. Streamlines the transit approval chain.

79. 0:23:58

    Instead of projects requiring separate ATL sign-off, SRTA handles it within existing operational structure that they currently have, reducing delays and redundancy. Reduces the bureaucratic friction for local governments that previously dealt with multiple state transit authorities for single project or funding streaming. Pushes transit vehicle ownership down to the local levels, further reducing SRTA's ongoing operational footprint, promoting local accountability, and directs more funding towards actual transit services by eliminating administrative layers that diverted resources from service delivery.

80. 0:24:40

    And with that, Mr. Chairman, um, if the committee wants to take a t- a stroll down memory lane of why the ATL was created, why GRTA was created, or why the GDC was created, um, we can have those conversations. As you know, GRTA and the GDC date back, um, to the 1990s. Um, if you remember when GRTA was created in the beginning, um, one of the reasons it was created because Atlanta, during the 1990s, leading up to the Olympics, um, had some of the worst air quality In the nation.

81. 0:25:18

    And basically, it has evolved and evolved, um, you know, and kind of morphed into different things to where today it's basically all it is is a regulatory shell, um, that doesn't really do much. And the same with the GDC in terms of, um, you know, their policy and, um, of why they exist is basically to assist and advise, um, the executive branch on state economic development and planning activities, um, with the board. And I believe, and others believe, and I think, um, you know, some of our peers and colleagues in the legislature believe, um, a lot of this is already being done by local counties through collaboration, through their regional commission such as ARC and, and then other counties like Paulding County and others that might be in other regional commissions, um, already doing this work.

82. 0:26:09

    So, um, I, I also think too, long term, in terms of the administrative costs and fees where, you know, the ATL is basically absorbing for the most part federal dollars, we would see, you know, probably in the millions in terms of fees just even over the last year, um, returned back to MARTA so MARTA can take those dollars and invest it, um, how they see fit within their footprint.

83. 0:26:36

    Thank you. I was actually just gonna ask, that was gon- going to be my first question.

84. 0:26:39

    Ooh.

85. 0:26:40

    Um, frankly, as long as I've been down here, which is, this is my eighth year, I've never even heard of the Governor's Development Council. Um, and so I have no clue what they do, and it sounds like... You, you said they're an advisory board between the executive branch essentially and the boards. Are you referencing, like, the GDOT board, or-

86. 0:26:57

    No, I'll give you, I'll give you the full rundown here.

87. 0:26:59

    Okay.

88. 0:27:00

    Yeah, it's g- great question, uh, Mr. Chairman. Um, so the GDC is a separate statewide advisory board whose statutory duties and responsibilities are codified under Title 45, OCGA 45-12, to assist and advise the governor on state economic development planning activities. It's not a standalone agency with its own staff or budget. Instead, it's supported by SRTA staff, the same employees who run GRTA... Uh, GRTA. There's too many acronyms here.

89. 0:27:25

    There are a lot of acronyms.

90. 0:27:26

    That's why, this is, that's advocating for why we need to m- uh, move this substitute. Um, but it's the same employees who run GRTA and SRTA.

91. 0:27:34

    Okay.

92. 0:27:34

    Um, that's where this overlap is. Um, by law, every member of GRTA's board of directors simultaneously serves as a member of the GDC. The same 15 people wear, uh, two hats. In their GRTA responsibility, they oversee Atlanta transportation resources such as the Transportation Improvement Program. Um, and then secondly, in their GDC capacity, the same people have a statewide advisory role on economic development and planning that extends well beyond the 13-county metro jurisdiction, um, which is basically made up, which the ATL is made up in terms of, um, the board in those 13 counties.

93. 0:28:13

    Got it. So GRTA and GDC were set up in the '90s. The ATL was set up in the '10s. Um, I believe the former chairman of this committee and his House counterpart kind of worked on that together at the time. I know at least, uh, one of the members on this committee were here at that time. Can you walk us through what the stated and intended purpose of the ATL was, uh-

94. 0:28:34

    Yeah

95. 0:28:34

    ... when it was formed 12 years ago?

96. 0:28:37

    Yeah. Thank you, Chairman. Um, so back in 2018 is when the ATL was signed into law by Governor Deal. Um, th- its original focus was improving coordination and integration and effici- efficiency of transit in Metro Atlanta. A regional transit plan encompassing all transit projects and initiatives would be developed containing access to funding sources for activities within it, which is mostly federal dollars, as you know. The ATL has been tasked specifically to develop a regional transit plan ongoing for Cherokee, Clayton, Coweta, Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, and Rockdale counties.

97. 0:29:17

    The ATL was created by the General Assembly, providing coordinated transit planning and funding for the Metro Atlanta region. The ATL responsibility for developing ATL regional transit plan was identifying and prioritizing the projects and initiatives required to develop region-wide transit. The ATL was also charged with creating a unified regional transit system brand back in 2020. Um, the ATL was legislatively authorized to oversee the state's Express regional commuter, uh, transit system and the Atlanta regional's vanpool system.

98. 0:29:53

    And I think, Mr. Chairman, you know and are well-versed in, um, the ridership, the challenges, the number of buses that have been cut over the number of years, um, basically since the pandemic in 2020. The population of Atlanta, um, has been growing while ridership has basically fallen off a cliff. Um, and then basically also under the ATL, as I mentioned, just in terms of, um, the operaliz- operation of, um, the Express buses, which, I mean, that can be done by SRTA.

99. 0:30:24

    Yeah. The number that I heard last year that I would never have guessed this was the number if you asked me to throw out a random number, is that the state is subsidizing, um, those Express bus riders at, at the expense of $88 per rider per day. Um, that's the disconnect between the critical mass that they would need, uh, to actually have enough people on these buses to pay for it with their fares versus what the actual ridership is, which like you mentioned, I think is down something like 60% since COVID or something in that range.

100. 0:30:55

     So, um, I'm happy to, uh, take questions from the committee at this point. Um, but essentially what you're doing is you're dissolving GRTA, the ATL, and the GDC. You're rolling them up into SRTA, which in some capacity I believe is where they all were originally. Is that-

101. 0:31:10

     That's fair to say.

102. 0:31:10

     Correct.

103. 0:31:11

     Correct.

104. 0:31:13

     Any questions from, um, Senator Burns, Chairman Burns on four?

105. 0:31:18

     Uh, just a question. Do you have a... Can you give us a, a rough idea of what kind of Funding is in each of the three areas that we are proposed to consolidate?

106. 0:31:29

     Um, I didn't bring that. I can get that to you. I mean, I know in terms of the administrative fees and things that-

107. 0:31:35

     Right

108. 0:31:35

     ... um, let me see if I have it here.

109. 0:31:39

     But, but, but essentially this is an attempt to reduce overhead costs. Is that not true?

110. 0:31:43

     That's correct.

111. 0:31:44

     And to basically provide additional coordination, uh, across the region through one entity, not-

112. 0:31:50

     Correct

113. 0:31:51

     ... three.

114. 0:31:51

     'Cause I mean, whether it's with boards, um, staff, whatever, um, basically all it is is duplication of, of services. And if th- with this duplication of services, whether we know, um, you know, there's been express ridership challenges. Um, we've seen the challenges even in the other counties that maybe don't necessarily operate express, but maybe have their own local, um, you know, operators in their counties, you know, related to buses and transit.

115. 0:32:27

     Um, we've seen, you know, historically, you know, going back to even '24 and beyond, um, where, you know, MARTA was experiencing a 6% drop. And I, and I will say, excuse me, in fairness to MARTA, I mean, I know that they've, they're implementing have done things, you know, with fare gates and other cha- things to try and catch riders that are jumping, you know, the gates. I raised my hand that, you know, many times in, um, high school during the Olympics and before the Olympics, we jumped the gates at the Doraville MARTA station.

116. 0:33:01

     Um, so, you know, I'm one of those that probably broke the law and, you know, there wasn't enough police back then in the, in the early '90s to catch us. But, um, uh, that's a real challenge. But I think once you kind of get past, you know, whatever that measurable erosion is, um, you know, from not collecting those fares, overall ridership and levels, um, you know, have gone down or, you know, have been down, um, just overall. So with that continuing trend that really hasn't changed, you know, for the last few years, to me it only makes sense, and it's a good, you know, policy, you know, position to have.

117. 0:33:37

     I, I think it's, you know, is to consolidate these into one agency. The, the basic functions of things that, um, you know, Certa would do doesn't really change kind of necessarily the overall mission, but it does empower the local counties, the 13 counties, to basically own, you know, their future plans or transportation plans or transit plans of what they do and don't wanna see happen. But I think it also empower, it re-empowers MARTA, um, in Fulton and DeKalb Counties in particular, to take the almost 4.3, you know, 4.5 million that's basically literally just going to administrative costs, and that's four, $4 million.

118. 0:34:19

     Um, you know, and we can have a debate over $4 million, but, you know, that's $4 million that can go back into their fees, you know, hiring police officers, making the system more secure, um, addressing other infrastructure needs that maybe are needed in Fulton and DeKalb County. Um, but still allowing them to, to have broader conversations if other counties, you know, decide, you know, that they wanna move in a certain direction around transit or put it on a ballot.

119. 0:34:49

     But I think that's for each and every county to decide under current law, that is the way it's set up right now. Um, but I think it just kind of busts up this, busts up this, you know, just huge entity, um, that honestly is not really doing anything. And even after we've seen ballot initiatives fail, even most recently in the last few years of, um, some counties not wanting to see the ATL expanded into communities, um, you know, in Atlanta. It just begs the question, you know, why are we continuing with the model that, um, we have?

120. 0:35:22

     At the end of the day, state money is taxpayer money, federal money is taxpayer money. Um, and again, for, you know, those that are living in the city and in Fulton and DeKalb County, um, I see this as an empowerment, um, you know, to kind of drive what they wanna do in their community. Um, and the other counties kind of, you know, drive to where they want to go on their own, no pun intended.

121. 0:35:45

     Thank you.

122. 0:35:46

     Thank you.

123. 0:35:47

     Uh, Senator Chairman Still.

124. 0:35:49

     Thank you, Chairman. Um, Peter Anavitarte. I'm, I'm, I'm all about making government smaller. I think this is a great thing. I'm just wondering, do we have approximate numbers of how many people are impacted that might rely on this transit service versus anything else that's gonna be able to backfill its absence? Do we, you know, do we have any data on, uh, ridership or, um, how we believe that we can just make sure that people that don't have their own vehicles can get to and from work and home?

125. 0:36:28

     Yeah. So just to be clear, I mean, this change is not a disruption in service. So this doesn't change what the operators do. This doesn't change the bus lines. This doesn't change the train lines. Doesn't change anything related to that. I mean, most of that is still independently, you know, done and run and operated, whether it's by MARTA or Gwinnett or whatever, you know, oper- Cobb, you know, in terms of those aspects of it. Um, the only impacts would be from an administrative, um, perspective.

126. 0:36:59

     Wonderful. Thank you.

127. 0:37:00

     Mm-hmm.

128. 0:37:03

     Uh, Chairman Ginn, on, let's just put you on eight there.

129. 0:37:07

     Yeah. Senator Anavitarte said the... I, I have, I guess, angst about, uh, the idea of BRT and, and putting funds in there. Is there anywhere in this legislation that it allows the, uh, oh, to take-

130. 0:37:24

     What we have is, is, uh, lanes, traffic lanes that are used by the public, moving them into bus lanes, said they, uh, and fining people for doing that.

131. 0:37:36

     So what, what I bring you today doesn't change any statutes related to anything that you're referencing in terms of fines, um, how the mechanism of bus or rapid, uh, transit operates or anything else. This is strictly an administrative, um, bill in terms of the agency, the oversight, um, and the power granted to the different agencies. So if, if there's something you're wanting to amend or change or address on that, that would either have to be a, a separate bill or that would have to be, you know, probably a, a st- that would be a po- an in addition policy discussion I think in terms of beyond what this bill is trying to accomplish.

132. 0:38:16

     I'm, I'm wanting to ensure that there's no provision in here for, uh, people taking cameras on the bus and taking pictures of, of a vehicle that's using a lane, the, uh... and, uh, ending up with a citation. And to me-

133. 0:38:31

     Y-

134. 0:38:31

     ... that's one of those things that, that, uh, we, we've been duped before on some, some, uh, cameras and, uh, citations. The, uh... And I just can see that originally when the, the, uh, bill was drafted, or, or conceived I'll say, the, uh, years ago, the idea was that, "Oh, they're gonna have a Marta bus that's gonna go by a lane every 10 minutes." Said the, uh, "And the lane's gonna sit there." And to me you got one or two lanes full of cars and there's an empty lane over there, the, uh, I've got an issue with, with, uh, what we're doing to the, the motorist in, in our state, the, uh, by not giving them access to, uh, roadways that have been paid for by all the taxpayers.

135. 0:39:16

     Thank you, sir.

136. 0:39:17

     So are there any, any chance that, that that's in this bill?

137. 0:39:21

     No, I'm, I'm not... That's not the, the policy debate that I bring you today. If that, that is something that you all want to debate or discuss or take up-

138. 0:39:28

     Just-

139. 0:39:29

     ... that, that would-

140. 0:39:30

     I think the reason, I think the reason the question's coming is the original House bill that passed was on that subject matter.

141. 0:39:35

     Right.

142. 0:39:36

     Um, what Leader Anavitarte has brought forward is a complete sub that does not include any of the language that was in the original House bill as it related to Marta cameras or bus lanes or anything like that.

143. 0:39:47

     Could-

144. 0:39:47

     What-

145. 0:39:47

     Yeah, the or- the original bill is not included in this, this-

146. 0:39:49

     Could we have somebody from, from, uh, Marta or SRTA, Leah, reiterate that for us?

147. 0:39:55

     I mean, you got the bill in front of you. There's, there's-

148. 0:39:57

     Yeah, I'm just, I, I'm, you know... I intentionally didn't want to come late 'cause I didn't want to be the, the, uh, bearer of bad news for some of our, our friends at, at, at, uh, some of our travel agencies, the, uh, because they're not taking people where they are to where they wanna go. And, and I have issues with, with, uh, what we do and, you know, when we start looking at the cost per ride, we'd be a lot better off to give the people that need to ride these things the, uh, Uber money and, and do that and save the taxpayer money. Get them to, from where they are to where they wanna be, not-

149. 0:40:29

     Right

150. 0:40:29

     ... to where they don't wanna go.

151. 0:40:34

     One question I had was in relates to Governor's, um, Development Council. Have you had conversations with this, anyone on the governor's team to see kind of the efficacy and the, and the value that they found in that council? Or I think you said it's, it's duplicative. Did you say it's duplicative that everyone on SRTA is on the Governor's Development Council?

152. 0:40:54

     GRTA.

153. 0:40:54

     So GR- GRTA. So it literally is, uh, just a, a board by a different name. Was that, did that come about before the GDOT planning director was put into place that reports to the governor? Or what was the... I just don't quite even understand why that entity exists.

154. 0:41:08

     I don't have... Yeah, Chairman, I don't have in front of me, let me see, the year it was created. Um, but we do know, let's see-

155. 0:41:18

     Sometime in the '90s I think is what was said.

156. 0:41:20

     So it was ni- it was. I'm sorry. So the dual role structure was built directly into GRTA, um, in the 1999 GRTA Act.

157. 0:41:30

     Okay. I will tell you that when this, when, not this House Bill 638, but when a bill of a similar concept passed the House last year, I sat down with, um, some, some people from SRTA and had a conversation around help me understand how this works, what do y'all think? And essentially, I m- I heard the same commentary that Leader Anavitarte's giving us, which is that ba- on the ATL front, it was their impression that the ATL had kind of done what it was originally stood up to do in 2018, um, when Senator Beach passed that bill out of the Senate.

158. 0:42:03

     Um, and Kevin Tanner actually had it in the State House. And it was, it was largely, uh, had served as a marketing entity u- um, as well as an entity that was trying to help some of these other, uh, transit services coordinate with each other. And then on GRTA it was definitely the sentiment of them was that if you roll this up under SRTA, um, it would certainly be more streamlined than having four separate entities currently doing the same thing. So, uh, that's my understanding of what you're doing. This is not touching anything that Senator Ginn, um, talked about.

159. 0:42:34

     Are there any other questions from the committee? Um, Pro Tem Walker.

160. 0:42:40

     Thank you. Uh, Chairman, I have a, a question for you. First, an a- an admission I guess. You know, I live in middle Georgia and I just got on this committee this, recently, this session. I don't even know what... I, I have to admit, I know nothing about this. Um, and making such a dramatic policy change, which may be brilliant, effective July 1, 2026, would, it just seems...

161. 0:43:14

     I, I don't know how plausible that is to, to get all that affected that quick-

162. 0:43:19

     You're right

163. 0:43:19

     ... with all these, uh, acronymed agencies and stuff-

164. 0:43:25

     Indeed

165. 0:43:25

     ... that-

166. 0:43:27

     After our first meeting last week where we had, um, Senator Dickerson introduce himself to the committee, I walked out and I thought, "You know, Lawrence Walker III has been in the Senate for 12 years. Is that correct?"

167. 0:43:37

     That's 11.

168. 0:43:38

     11, has finally ascended Not to pro tem-

169. 0:43:43

     Pro tem

170. 0:43:43

     ... but to the Transportation Committee. So I want to officially welcome you here, um-

171. 0:43:48

     I lobbied hard to get on your committee, Chairman.

172. 0:43:50

     You, you, it-

173. 0:43:51

     I really did.

174. 0:43:52

     It coincided with your rise to committee on assignments, then magically somehow you appeared on this committee. Uh, y- talk to us about that. It would be-

175. 0:43:59

     Yeah, I mean, it's-

176. 0:44:00

     It would be something that would happen this year.

177. 0:44:02

     Uh, I mean, I'll say it this way, um, if, if this was happening in the private sector, it, it could happen. Um, I know this place moves as slow as molasses. Um, I know sometimes change is very challenging, and I know there is one part of this bill I had referenced earlier about, um, you know, the transition of fleets and vehicles, um, being transitioned to the local jurisdictions, you know, in January of '27.

178. 0:44:35

     If you all want to move the, you know, implementation back to, you know, January 1st of '27, I think that's, I think that's cool. That's probably acceptable. Um, but I don't think that this should be something that takes a year or more to, to implement, um, because all it is at the end of the day is it's a structural change. If, if this was a private sector or even nonprofit board with all the players involved, um, this could be done in less than three months.

179. 0:45:05

     I've done that myself. So, um, I think that's a fair question, but if it's, you know, extending the time to maybe allow a transition to happen, I mean, I'm open to that. Um, but I don't think that this is something that needs to drag on and on and on. Um, and maybe it coincides with, um, you know, the term of the next governor.

180. 0:45:27

     You have provisions in here. One of the things that you do in June is essentially move existing employees from the ATL into SRTA. Um, as I read what you had done here, you essentially are giving them the same pay structure, same comp, um, same ER, ERS, uh, I, I guess, vesting-

181. 0:45:45

     Right

182. 0:45:45

     ... timeframe. Um, and then you're abolishing the boards as well at that date.

183. 0:45:50

     That's correct.

184. 0:45:50

     And you have property transfer that happens on that date as well.

185. 0:45:53

     Correct.

186. 0:45:54

     Um, is there anything else that you're doing on that date? I know you have the vehicles that-

187. 0:45:59

     Mm-hmm

188. 0:45:59

     ... that transition in January of next year.

189. 0:46:04

     Yeah, that's pretty much it.

190. 0:46:04

     You had January 27th. What, what was the reason for the 27th of January? Do you know?

191. 0:46:10

     Uh, I don't recall at this time.

192. 0:46:12

     Okay.

193. 0:46:12

     While we...

194. 0:46:14

     Mr. Chairman.

195. 0:46:15

     I know, I know-

196. 0:46:16

     Senator.

197. 0:46:17

     Yeah, go ahead. No.

198. 0:46:18

     Yes. Question for Senator McLaurin. You're recognized on three.

199. 0:46:21

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Leader, good morning.

200. 0:46:24

     Good morning.

201. 0:46:25

     You discussed that there were roughly, what, four, four and a half, something like that, million dollars worth of fees that the ATL board currently keeps for admin, and you made the claim a minute ago that that would be returned to locals or operators for other uses. That's, is that your claim?

202. 0:46:43

     Right.

203. 0:46:43

     Okay. Um, I'm gonna dispute that claim. I'm just curious if you agree with me that the fees that are taken by these administrative agencies are taken as sort of almost like out of a stream of federal funds that... Like, I guess one way to ask this question would be, you agree that designated recipient, which is a technical term for federal funds under this bill-

204. 0:47:06

     Mm-hmm

205. 0:47:07

     ... would just move to become SRTA, right? SRTA would be the new designated recipient, correct?

206. 0:47:12

     Correct.

207. 0:47:13

     Okay. And you would also agree that they're going to take the same funds for fees that ATL would be taking now or is taking now, but just will be taking them as part of the same federal appropriations process, and then under their authority. Essentially meaning that 4.5 million is sh- is not gonna be freed up for locals and operators.

208. 0:47:35

     Mm-hmm.

209. 0:47:35

     It would go to SRTA in fees in much the same way that it's going to the ATL board now. You agree with that, right?

210. 0:47:42

     I... So I don't necessarily agree, and I, and I think kind of to your questioning, you know, the policy premise, um, I think with a change like this, um, at least from my standpoint, and I know I'm only v- one vote on the island, but I would highly encourage those fees to go back to, as ma- much of those fees to go back to the operators and not for administrative overhead or things. So those monies could actually be invested into those communities where I think the federal funds at the end of the day were originally were intended to, to have an impact.

211. 0:48:14

     I think that'd be a nice idea. I think what, what I'm questioning is whether that will happen or whether that can happen. My understanding of the way that this works is that SRTA will just take the same fees.

212. 0:48:25

     Right.

213. 0:48:25

     So if that's true-

214. 0:48:25

     That's a fair, it's a fair-

215. 0:48:26

     It-

216. 0:48:26

     It's a fair question.

217. 0:48:27

     And, and if that's true, then I think the discussion that tees up for this bill as it moves out of here with my lone objection is that it's just sort of rearranging the alphabet or rearranging entities with no real cost savings in terms of fees. And then the question becomes, well, if it's fee neutral, then what's the policy aim of consolidating everything under SRTA? And then maybe you get into a more traditional conversation about de-emphasizing Atlanta and state authority and all the, you know, where's the conversation happening?

218. 0:48:59

     Is it happening local to Atlanta?

219. 0:49:00

     Right.

220. 0:49:00

     Or is the transit conversation statewide, and you're red and I'm blue, and something, something. We wa- I, I mean, I want Atlanta-

221. 0:49:07

     Right

222. 0:49:07

     ... to have a substantial, you know, ability to have a conversation about its own transit future that's not at the exclusion of the state, but certainly in addition to the state's state-wide conversation.

223. 0:49:18

     Well, and not, and not to, and to your point, Senator, I mean, not to, you know, knock our friends in Cobb and Gwinnett and, you know, the little bit of... Whatever's going on in Clayton County, I mean, at the end of the day, the, you know, the behemoth and the, you know, the main part of all of this is MARTA at the end of the day. I mean, I know there's some buses and there's some, you know, van lines and there's other things, um, you know, go out to these other counties. But, but at the end of the day as a whole, I mean, ba- basically this is, you know, allowing MARTA to, um, you know, have greater say and dictate of what they're doing and specifically DeKalb, Fulton, whether they partner with Clayton and Gwinnett and DeKalb, I mean, I think that's completely up to their leadership team and their board and, um, you know, even you as a, as a delegation member, I think, you know, where that entity lies, um, if-

224. 0:50:15

     If it stays in SLOGO. Otherwise, I'm, I'm cooked. But

225. 0:50:20

     Yeah. Um, but, um, you know, so, so I think that's, that's the conversation. You know, we, we know that people in Paulding County, Forsyth County, other places, um, you know, th- those fees are... They're not coming to our counties. We don't need them in our counties. You know, we're not providing rail service or any of those things. Um, you know, and so I, I mean, that, that would be my hope. Um, I'm sure as this bill moves through the process, as, as I mentioned at the top, um, it is gonna go back to the House.

226. 0:50:55

     Um, you know, we will see if, you know, what, if any, changes and tweaks, um, it may have. But, um, you know, I am of the position that, you know, with the tens and hundreds of millions of dollars that are out there, um, you know, and we get in... We start talking about admin fees and those kind of costs and overhead of, you know, where, where can we save money and be more efficient? Um, you know, my, my hope is that, you know, some of that would just go back to the operators, and we're not just holding onto money for, you know, duplication of, of staff.

227. 0:51:31

     'Cause, you know, if we're gonna consolidate, you know, um, you know, operationally as, as an, as an entity, there, there should be some efficiencies that come out of that. And I think that's where, kind of where you're, you're going with this.

228. 0:51:44

     Yeah, I guess so. I mean, the last thing I'll leave for the committee, as you do what you're gonna do anyway, is that it, it feels like if there's not gonna be a th- We need clarity on whether there's really a fee savings. Because if there is a fee savings, you still have a policy debate about whether the fees are justified and Atlanta setting its own transit directions and having that conversation internal to itself and having a structure to do that. But e- especially if there's no fee savings and it's just sort of that we'll be collecting the same fees, then you really have a conversation about were we ju- are we just rearranging deck chairs and talking about government efficiency, when in reality we're not doing anything about the routes and services where we are allegedly subsidizing, et cetera, et cetera.

229. 0:52:21

     So I, you know, I'm gonna vote no today, uh, because I don't know that this does very much and it de-emphasizes Atlanta's ability to plan its own transit destiny, um, and I'm sad for Representative Silcox. So those are all my reasons for voting no. Thank you.

230. 0:52:33

     I'm gonna go, um, with, uh, Chairman Burns real quick here.

231. 0:52:37

     Uh, ju- just a, a question, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Um, wasn't this disc- Doesn't this discussion about combining, uh, GRTA with, uh, um-

232. 0:52:48

     GRTA

233. 0:52:48

     ... GRTA g- discussed back in the late 2000s? Wasn't this a conversation back around 2009? And, um, there was, uh, uh, some... So this is not a new idea, not a new concept, and is it not true that the GRTA and the GRTA offices, uh, essentially merged in 2017, and now they currently cohabitate? Is that not the case?

234. 0:53:09

     Yeah. I mean, Senator Burns, um, you know, as, uh, you know, as, as Clark Griswold's relative once said, I mean, this is the gift that keeps giving. I mean-

235. 0:53:21

     Yeah. That's right

236. 0:53:21

     ... this thing, this thing was created in '99. Express bus system was created in '01. Um, basically, uh, GRTA almost sat dormant for eight years, nine years, you know, in '03, while I was basically sitting in-

237. 0:53:41

     That's basically a town

238. 0:53:41

     ... sitting in college, um, just before I was jumping the, you know, the gates, um, or after I was jumping the gates. Um, you know, basically had a little bit of a functioning period between '04 and '17. Uh, to your point, you know, the merger happened in '17. Um, you know, the express was, buses were transferred to the ATL in '20, and this thing just goes on and on and on. And, you know, a- at the end of the day, the operators, you know, to kind of push back a little bit on Senator McLaurin's comments, I mean, the operators are what's making it what it is.

239. 0:54:20

     So this isn't, you know, to, to argue and say, "Well, it's not really changing much." No, it's, it's getting rid of an unnecessary entity that honestly has been morphed and sat around and been debated and whatever the, you know, the heartburn of this thing has been since 1999, um, you know, and putting it to bed and letting each county, jurisdiction, and operator figure out what is, what is their future. And if they, and if people want to partner, we've seen in state law and we've seen with local legislation, and we've seen, you know, a lot of creativity the last 24 months with local governments, they will find a way to, um, to do it.

240. 0:55:01

     But I think as long as we continue to see ridership down, we continue to not really see that there's need, a necessary, you know, macro regional plan that's gonna actually be efficient. Because if it was gonna be efficient, it would already be done. Voters would have approved it, and we wouldn't be, you know, sitting here, um, you know, replaying 1999-

241. 0:55:26

     That's right

242. 0:55:27

     ... in '26.

243. 0:55:28

     All right. We're gonna take just maybe one more question from the committee, then I've, I know that nobody's signed up to, um, you- speak to this, but they also probably didn't know what the topic was. So I'll recognize anyone in, uh, in the room that would like to testify as well. We'll recognize Pro Tem Walker.

244. 0:55:44

     Mr. Chairman, I've got another meeting at 8:45. I think you do, too. And then we, uh, have the Budget Conference Committee meeting at 9:00. Um, this really is the first I've seen this bill. It is a House bill, um, so it's not subject to crossover day. I'd love to get more information. I think, uh, streamlining government is what I'm, I'm all about. Um, reducing bureaucracy, red tape rollback.

245. 0:56:18

     But, um-

246. 0:56:21

     A- a- and Mr. Chairman, I will say for the record, the Speaker Pro Tem and the Majority Leader in the House are in favor of this bill.

247. 0:56:27

     I believe that a version of this bill actually passed out of House Transportation.

248. 0:56:31

     That is correct.

249. 0:56:32

     Um, not this year, but I, it was either last year-

250. 0:56:34

     By Representative Anderson

251. 0:56:35

     ... or the year before.

252. 0:56:35

     Correct.

253. 0:56:36

     So, um, let's, w- we'll, Pro Tem Walker, we'll get to the will of the committee in just a second.

254. 0:56:42

     Okay.

255. 0:56:42

     But I do wanna see if there's anyone in the room that would like to offer comment or testimony- ... on this bill. If you would, please raise your hand. All right, seeing none, what's the will of the committee?

256. 0:56:57

     Move. I move to- Table the bill

257. 0:57:01

     We have a motion to table from Pro Tem Walker, second from-

258. 0:57:06

     Second

259. 0:57:06

     ... Senator McLaurin. Um, you were the second, second. Um, any discussion?

260. 0:57:13

     And that's just to allow, for me, it's just to allow more time to understand it and be informed, Mr. Chairman.

261. 0:57:22

     Any other discussion from the committee? I see none. All those in favor of tabling, please signify by raising your hand. One, two, three, four, five. All those opposed, like sign. Motion to table carries five to two. I don't even know that we need a motion to table necessarily. Um, right.

262. 0:57:41

     Right.

263. 0:57:42

     Um, but all of that to say, um, we will revisit this at a future meeting. So, um, why don't those of you that would like to-

264. 0:57:50

     Mm

265. 0:57:51

     ... to get with Leader Anavitarte, um, do so. We will continue the dialogue. Thank you, Mr. Leader, for being here.

266. 0:57:57

     Thank you.

267. 0:57:57

     We do have one more bill for the committee, um, and that is Senate Resolution 624. Um, is Senator Setzler here?

268. 0:58:07

     No.

269. 0:58:07

     This is one of the more unconventional moves by Senator Setzler I've seen. Um,

270. 0:58:15

     he has sent his aide to tell me that other people will present the bill. Um-

271. 0:58:23

     Will this be another form of arrangement-

272. 0:58:25

     So,

273. 0:58:27

     indeed. Um, I will tell you what the bill is. I guess I'll present the bill for the senator, and then I believe that a family of Officer Drew Haynes, uh, Brown is here as well. Thank you, ma'am, for being here. Um, so this is our road naming bill, and we have combined thr- uh, two other bills into this bill. And for those of you that are new to the committee, what we will do is we will pass a road naming bill out of the Senate before crossover day. That bill will sit in the House likely until sine die, and any late arriving House road naming bills will get added to our Senate bill.

274. 0:59:05

     Uh, 'cause they need to do no conflict letters and run the legal ads and all that, and some senators are not as, uh, quick as Senator Setzler was in getting his done. They will send us a House road naming bill as well. And for those senators that want to have a late arriving, uh, road naming, we will put that onto the House bill. Across, or I'm sorry, on sine die, we'll pass those two bills back and forth, and ultimately pass two separate road naming bills that ha- hopefully capture all of the desired road namings from, uh, members of the General Assembly.

275. 0:59:35

     So, um, with that, ma'am, welcome. I didn't get a chance to meet you. Can you tell the committee what your name is?

276. 0:59:40

     Jessica Dallas.

277. 0:59:41

     Jessica, thank you for being here today. You are presenting the first third of Senate Resolution 624, which recognizes, um, an intersection in Cobb County for Officer Drew Haynes Brown, the memorial intersection. So if you would, please, uh, tell us about Officer Brown.

278. 1:00:01

     Cobb County Officer Drew Haynes Brown was born in 1954. He died in 1983. Officer Drew Haynes Brown was born July 5th, 1954, in Thomaston, Georgia. Drew attended O'Kelly, O'Keefe, sorry, O'Keefe High School, then moved to Marietta and graduated from Osborne High School. He attended Kennesaw College, studying business law at the time of his death. Drew was the son of Elmer, Betty Ha- Betty Haynes, uh, Brown, and Mary Christine Vaughn Brown.

279. 1:00:33

     Drew was second generation police officer. His father, Elmer, was a detective for the department in the 1960s and '70s. Drew joined the police, the Cobb County Police Department on September 26, 1977. His first assignment as a uniformed officer was at Precinct 2 in Mableton in 1983. Drew was assigned to a newly created Marietta DUI task force and became one of its first members. On December 17th, 1983, while Drew was operating radar in the medium of Highway 41 northbound just north of Blue Springs Road, a drunk driver crossed the intersection and struck the rear of his patrol car.

280. 1:01:14

     Drew was killed instantly when his c- vehicle exploded. Officer Drew Brown was promiscuously awarded the Cobb County Police Department Medal of Valor in February of 1984, and also was awarded Cobb County's Bar Association 1984 Officer of the Year Award, and for six years, a scholarship was awarded to a deserving student in Drew's memorial at Kennesaw College. In 1993, a new award was added to the department's annual award ceremony. This award is known as the Drew Haynes Brown...

281. 1:01:46

     Community Service Award is presented to a deserving officer who displays outstanding service to the department and to the community as a whole. This award was given by Drew's mother, Christine Brown Wess, and his brother Louis Dowess. Upon his mother's death in 1983, his brother Louis has presented the award ever since. Officer Drew Brown was a Cobb County police officer for six years.

282. 1:02:12

     Thank you, ma'am. What's your relation to Officer Brown?

283. 1:02:13

     I'm his sister-in-law.

284. 1:02:15

     Fantastic. Well, thank you for being here today.

285. 1:02:17

     Okay.

286. 1:02:17

     Um, we don't really have... At the general assembly, we don't have things like medals of honor-

287. 1:02:22

     Mm-hmm

288. 1:02:22

     ... or congressional, uh, medals or anything like that. And so the highest honor that we have as state legislators that we can use to recognize someone is, uh, this process-

289. 1:02:33

     Mm-hmm

290. 1:02:33

     ... of naming a road, an intersection, a highway after someone. It sounds like this is overdue-

291. 1:02:38

     Yes

292. 1:02:39

     ... um, being 40 years, um, after his death. Sounds like he was an amazing man. Um, and we are combining, um, two other bills into this bill. One from Senator Harbin for Sheriff Randall Johnson to name the intersection in Fayette County after him. Um, and a second road, uh, in- intersection, uh, that will be, uh, that was introduced by Senator Steve Gooch for Donald Sebolt in Lumpkin County. And so w- and we are working, by the way, off of LC394985S.

293. 1:03:10

     Mr. Chairman? Yes, um, Representative- Every time I move do pass. Recognize Senator Ginn with a motion of do pass on LC394985S. Have a second from Chairman Burns. Any discussion from the committee? Thank you again for being here today. We'll take a vote. All those in favor, please signify by saying... R- go ahead and raise your hands. We'll raise our hands. Sure. Motion carries unanimously. This bill will be on to rules. Thank you all so much, and the meeting is adjourned.