House Ways & Means Committee, March 2, 2026 Video: https://vimeo.com/1169672651 (a timestamp t plays at https://vimeo.com/1169672651#t=s) Page: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-03-02/house-ways-and-means 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. [0:18:39] Well, my-- How you doing? My apologies for the delay. Uh, we'll call the full committee meeting to order. Uh, Representative Smith, are you-- Chairman Smith, would you open us in a word of prayer, please, sir? [0:18:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Lord, thank you for another gorgeous day you've given us. Um, lead, guide, and direct us, have the things we do be according to your will. Be with all these committee members and the people in the audience and our families back home. Take care of them and keep them safe. In Jesus' name, amen. Amen. Thank you. [0:19:20] Um, I think first one on the agenda is HB1110. [0:19:33] Chairman Hilton. [0:19:35] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the committee, uh, presenting to you LC590386S, the Small Business Resiliency Act. This passed sub, well, subcommittee unanimously. This legislation is supported by Georgia Chamber amongst other groups, uh, NFIB and others. Uh, this seeks to address an issue that we hear most commonly from our small business folks, is that they have a hard time competing against some of the larger employers in our state in terms of attracting and, uh, retaining quality employees. [0:20:08] And so, uh, the meat of the bill essentially says that, uh, if you have some skin in the game, uh, and you help your employees, uh, acquire health insurance, along with a number of other things that we stipulate in lines 22 to 25, you'll receive a tax credit for a period of, of five years that declines over time. There is a cap to it. And, um, as I said, there's a five-year sunset. Um, so that I'll yield with questions. [0:20:39] Are there any questions to the author of the bill? [0:20:46] Seeing none, what's the will of the committee? [0:20:48] Move to pass. [0:20:50] Second. [0:20:50] We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by stating, "Aye." [0:20:57] Aye. [0:20:57] Those opposed. All right. Bill passes. Um, second, uh, Representative Cannon o- of HB1148. [0:21:08] Members of the committee, I think I'm on here, LC443491S relates to the Georgia Conservation Tax Credit. Uh, the critical thing the bill does is extend the credit for another five years through 2031. Um, that's the most important thing, the reauthorization. Caps the tax credit at 50% of the fair market value of the land offered for permanent restriction as a conservation easement. It, uh, caps the value of the tax credit at 500,000 for individuals and at one million for partnerships. Establishes the aggregate amount of annual credits at 30 million, which was the original amount established by the original language in 2006. [0:21:43] A few tweaks to the application process for streamlining. We removed the State Properties Commission to allow for, again, a more streamlined application procedure. Um, applications will be fully hand- handled and managed by the DNR. The DNR will be able to utilize the Georgia Real Estate Commission for any investigations and disciplinary actions regarding appraisals of property. There's also a federal law that regulates these conservation easements. So again, we've been very successful as a state in terms of development, very pro-growth state. Uh, what HB1148 does is take a, a few small acres and set them aside for permanent conservation, uh, and still have them managed by the private, uh, landowner. [0:22:21] So if you have any questions, Mr. Chairman. [0:22:25] I don't see any questions. Uh, what is the will of the committee? [0:22:31] Move to pass. [0:22:32] Second. [0:22:33] Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by stating, "Aye." [0:22:39] Aye. [0:22:40] Those opposed like same. [0:22:42] Can I vote for my own bill? [0:22:44] All right. Bill passes. Um, now we have an updated agenda. Um, one of you chairmen care to step in the hot seat and, uh- [0:23:00] Step in the hot seat. [0:23:03] Chair said you'd be right back. [0:23:04] Hmm. [0:24:38] All right. Uh, I'm gonna substitute as chairman here. We're gonna hear Chairman Blackmon's, um, uh... I'm sorry, Chairman, do you start with the resolution or the enablement? [0:24:56] Um, the bill number. [0:24:56] 1114. [0:24:56] All right. You just, uh, since... If you don't mind, we'll just start with the bill number and the LC number, please. [0:25:03] I tell you what, if it's okay, I- [0:25:05] Absolutely. I think, Mr. Chairman, you can present from wherever you want to. [0:25:16] Is this mine? [0:25:17] Yeah, it's yours. [0:25:19] All right. [0:25:24] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, members of the committee. I, I think, uh, as you'll often know, we, uh... [0:25:33] W- and, and as we have said repeatedly with regard to our, our property tax legislation, that we have been open and amenable to, um, suggestions and alternatives. And if we can make it better, then we certainly wanna try to do that. And, um, we have most recently received some suggestions from our local stakeholders, uh, that having after talked to leadership and, um, Speaker Burns, that we felt like, uh, incorporating them into the resolution and into the, uh, enabling act, uh, made sense, and we wanted to present those back before the committee today. [0:26:12] Once again, I think- We all have the, the goal of trying to reduce and in as much, as many cases as possible, eliminate our, uh, our homeowner property tax to provide tax relief, much needed tax relief to, uh, a property tax system that has, has kind of really moved in a unsustainable trajectory over time. And, uh, we have, again, uh, had a lotta, lotta conversation and collaborative, um, discussions with our, our local stakeholders. [0:26:45] And, uh, I think, um, I'll try to go through this and answer as many questions as I can. And we'll probably get some assistance, uh, from Representative Cannon, Representative Kelly as he, uh, returns, and, and others. Um, so on HR, uh, uh, 1114, just to kind of run through the bill, um, this, uh, page two, you see under Section 1, this would over a 10-year period, uh, reduced the assessable, uh, taxable value, um, by 75% in, uh, in, in a, a tenth of an increment over those 10-year periods. [0:27:26] So you go from a 40% of appraised value to 10% of appraised value. You see Section 2, that we did incorporate 100%, uh, disabled veterans homestead exemption. Uh, so 100% exemption for 100% disabled veteran. There, that is a bill that we heard and passed out, uh, earlier this session. Um, Section 3, uh, establishes the same grant program that we previously had in the bill, um, that would allow locals to fund homestead property tax relief. [0:28:00] Um, it removes the $18,000 cap, and in this provision, we actually allow the, the proceeds, um, from the sales tax collections on high technology data centers to fund this, uh, particular, this, this grant on an, uh, ongoing basis. And we will get to the enabling act to talk a little bit more about that. Um, the Section 4 is the transition of sales tax for our schools, and then we, in Section 5, we enable the local homestead options sales tax. [0:28:37] Um, as you go through it, it's similar provisions to what we, what we had before. And then of course, Section 6 is the ballot question. What I will say, and you'll see in the enabling legislation as I get to it, is that, um, the local homestead option sales tax here would actually, um, be enabled for our schools. It would be enabled for our counties, and then optionally for our cities if they chose to split off from the counties. [0:29:12] Um, Mr. Chairman, I, I think that is by and large the, the resolution before you, and I'd be happy to try to stand for, for questions and... [0:29:24] All right. Well, Chairman, uh, Blackmon, thank you, uh, for your presentation. I know we'll take up the enabling as well. Uh, we're gonna take some questions now on our, uh- [0:29:38] Mr. Vice, Mr. Chairman, may, may, may I, if I, if, if I could, since a lot of this has come from GMA and ACCG, I know they are both represented here today. And if we wanted to make an exception to allow them to at least, you know, uh, make a statement regarding this, I, I, you know, certainly would welcome that as the author. [0:29:56] You're certainly the chairman, and I, uh, I think that is a, a great position. I know there's been a lot of conversations about how this will impact our local governments. I know I've certainly been talking with mine this morning. So I think it would be great if they were willing to kind of tell us where they're coming from for their organizations. If GMA and ACCG, if y'all are here. [0:30:21] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Chairman, I'm Larry Ramsey with ACCG. Um, as we've said before, we appreciate the opportunity to work with this committee and Chairman Blackmon on these issues, which is a extremely large undertaking. Um, we've been working very closely with the chairman and other interested members. Um, appreciate the changes. We've, we've seen some of these changes earlier this afternoon. Um, our c- our committee, our policy council, uh, has worked very closely and very diligently on a bunch of these principles. [0:30:53] Um, I think we're still at a point where we're trying to analyze the, the work that's come out of this, but we had, uh, agreed in principle to a list of topics to, uh, for discussion, and we're still, again, working through the legislation that I, I f- I don't know that we've seen the enabling act bill yet. With the constitutional amendment, it's, it's very close to what we have talked about before. Look forward to continue working with the committee, and again, we're, uh, we continue to want to be a partner with the general assembly on all these topics and happy to keep working in that capacity going forward. [0:31:25] Thank you. [0:31:28] Thank you. [0:31:29] Uh, Mr. Chairman, uh, Jim Thornton with the Georgia Municipal Association, and I would echo much of what, uh, Larry with ACCG had to say. So, um, we, we appreciate the opportunity to be in conversation with Chairman Blackmon as well as many of you and, and others, uh, others in the legislature, um, to work through this issue. We, uh, we recognize with 536 cities, um, ranging in size from large to small with rural and, and urban, uh, communities, um, finding a solution for every one is difficult. [0:32:00] And, um, that may in fact be, uh, an insurmountable task in some ways. But charged with trying to figure out is there a way to shift over time the reliance on property tax, um, on homesteads to other sources of funding without adversely impacting the provision of local government services Police, fire, public works, et cetera. With that task in mind, our policy council and our officers and, uh, staff at GMA have been glad to work with, uh, Chairman Blackmon and with our counterparts at ACCG to see if we could find a model that would move us in that direction, and we'll continue to do so. [0:32:40] We feel like that the substitute... Again, I have not had a chance to review the enabling, uh, statute either. I know Chairman Blackmon indicated he, he'd only had it recently. But, um, based on the, uh, understanding of what's in it and the principles that, uh, we discussed this morning, um, we think it's something that we can find a path forward on. So thank you very much. Thank you, Jim, Larry. And I, I know y'all represent diverse, uh, diverse groups, but what I'm hearing today is, um, not, maybe not to a full support, but y'all are in a certainly a neutral position at this point. [0:33:12] Is that my, kinda where I took that? That's a yes from y'all, neutral position at this point? Um, on the, on the principles that we've discussed with the chairman, and we'd still like the opportunity to see it in writing, but yes, sir, we're working to, to be in that neutral position. Appreciate that. Thank y'all. We do have some questions. Uh, Chairman Blackmon, uh, we'll move on to those questions. Uh, Chairman Parsons. Thank you, Chairman. Uh, yes, Chairman. Wanted to ask you, on this section three, I'm looking here at, uh, uh, line 53, 54 and 55. [0:33:50] I'm looking at the section three as I, uh, as I believe we voted out of, uh, committee before, and this is, this is a change of language in that about where that funding would come from, I believe, how it would be done. The, the, the 61 through 65 would be the additional language, Mr. Chairman. Well, okay. Well, I'm, I'm sorry. Then I am referring to, uh, this section three, like 49 down through 65. Okay. I'm j- I'm trying to figure out how data centers got pulled into this and how, uh, I mean, that would... [0:34:26] I'm not objecting, but it certainly seemed like that, I don't, it doesn't go w- in my opinion. But I'm wondering if the, uh, if the definition of a cl- of a data center shouldn't be more specific than, uh, on high technology data centers. I mean, it doesn't mention how, the, what the, how large or- W- the, the way this is set up, and you'll see it in the enabling legislation, is that, uh, the exemption that sunsets in 2028, the, uh, the, the revenue from the sales tax that would be collected is actually funneled into this, uh, grant fund at that point- Yes ... [0:35:05] to backfill homestead property tax relief. And it would be done in con- in, in the manner in which we do similar to the tire fund, and it, it runs for a period of 10 years. And so that is, uh, the mechanism and, and what we've used, and, and this kind of just sets kind of the framework for that upfront, but, uh, the enabling legislation gets into that in more detail. I'm just trying to figure out why, I mean, how data centers, sales tax from data centers got pulled in other than some other kind of a, a large business or manufacturing. [0:35:35] Uh, yes, sir. I, uh, understood. I, I- I appreciate that- Thank you ... uh, question, Chairman Parsons, and I was the, the author that came through this committee that originally offered that, uh, sales tax exemption that's helped drive some of our data centers here. But it was always on the understanding, Mr. Chairman, that once we help develop the technological eco-structure and infrastructure for them to exist here in our state, that that would go away. And we've seen them come to our state and enjoy a sales tax benefit. [0:36:06] But now that it is on the cusp of expiration, uh, I think we all know that it's, it's fine for that to expire at this point, and s- we're simply putting that revenue that we have forgone to help develop the technology will now be dedicated to providing property tax relief. Right. I un- Yes ... understand that. I understand what's hap- what we're doing. I'm just, it doesn't seem to me that that would be the c- correct way to do it, but I understand. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Chairman Hilton. [0:36:37] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the author. Um, two quick questions. So if I under- just trying to put it in plain language, if I have a hou- a $500,000 home, uh, my assessed value, uh, right now is 200,000. In this bill, 10 years from now, it'll drop to 50,000 or, or 10%. Am I saying that right? That's correct. Okay. So property taxes will go down, not entirely eliminated under this. Well, depending on the, the other methodologies that are, uh, enacted by local governments, it, it could certainly go to zero as soon as 2028. [0:37:12] Um, but, uh, yes, that, that's correct. It would rotate down by 75% over the course of 10 years. With the new tools of the sales tax that we're giving to local counties, is there a backstop to, uh, say they find themselves in a big windfall where now we the taxpayers, uh, th- they're finding that they're collecting way more with the sales tax structure than they are the property tax. Is there a backstop to kind of undo that or refund back to the taxpayer? It, it, it, it's designed to go to homestead property tax, and then it would roll into other property tax. [0:37:44] And, um, at, at that point it can be used either general or capital or other things of, of, that is decided. But those are, those are determined by and large by the local community. And that's, again, I think one of the reasons it, it provides some sort of, uh, ability and, and, you know, the, the incentive to keep property taxes down because, you know, anything they keep down, the residual would be able to come back to them for operations. [0:38:14] Got it. Thank you. [0:38:21] Representative Buckner. [0:38:24] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, on lines 61 through 64, it's talking about the, what we have, um, like the, the ta- sales tax exemption and the, all of those coming back. My question is, let's say the data centers are a bubble. Let's say they go away, and we've been counting on that revenue. Is there a way for the locals to make adjustments rather than having to come back to us and having a CA and a changing law? [0:39:01] This is not, this would not be the only mechanism by which this grant fund could be filled, but it is one mechanism. [0:39:09] I think it's in the Columbia County bill. They have a way that they can adjust it either way, up or down, but this would not do that. Is that what you're saying? [0:39:18] A- adjust, w- w- [0:39:19] When the money is not there, then they might have to go back up on the taxes, or they might have to fund the re- tax relief another way. They have flexibility locally. Does this give local flexibility in the event- [0:39:37] Well, I think... Oh, sorry, go ahead. [0:39:39] In the event funding goes away from, like, data centers or something like that. [0:39:44] Well, the, w- when you don't have the zero, you know, when you're not taking the homestead exemption down to zero and you still have all the property tax that are, is in place, and you have the other funding mechanisms, this just provides one other mechanism by which the backfilling can occur. [0:40:02] Okay. [0:40:10] Chairman Stevens. [0:40:14] Mr. Chairman, I know our original intent was to make sure that homesteaders in Georgia would not lose their homes at the courthouse door. Is that still our intent? [0:40:25] Well, I think we have some other, uh, other bills that are, are looking at, at that particular component. Um, and I think that's something that we wanna continue to look at also. [0:40:44] Thank you for the question. Leader Efstration. [0:40:47] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Chairman Blackmon, for your, um, hard work on this. Uh, just a few very basic kind of top level questions here so I can maybe better understand this. Uh, sir, is it fair to say that this is, this is really by shifting ad valorem, uh, homestead property tax really to sa- to the sales tax, this is a revenue neutral model? [0:41:11] It, it is a, a dollar for dollar offset, that is correct. [0:41:14] It- [0:41:14] And, and yes, there, there would be, you know, estimated somewhere from two thirds on up as the sale, as the, uh, assessed value goes down, you would see more and more fully exempt properties. And I think to Chairman, um, to, to the Chairman's question just before, Chairman Stevens, he, you know, the, the minute you get to a zero homestead property tax, then you're obviously alleviated from having, being able to have your home taken from you on the courthouse steps. [0:41:40] And this pros- this, uh, policy that we're considering here would allow most Georgians, over time as implemented, but to elim- it, it would be an elimination of the homestead property tax for most Georgians. [0:41:54] We, we, we see a large number of cities, counties, and schools in a position to do that sooner than the 2032 date that we were anticipating before. And then over time, you would see more and more gradually work their way up to 100% of full exemption. [0:42:09] And as part of your proposal here, there, for 100% disabled veterans, there would also be an elimination of homestead property tax for them. Is that right? [0:42:19] That, that is correct. That's, that's immediate. They already have an exemption. This just takes it up to a full exemption. [0:42:23] That'd be very exciting. And, and, uh, finally, just procedurally with how this works, if the committee passes this out today, um, this would be reported on the floor of the House tomorrow when we convene at 10:00 AM. And as, as far as, um, availability online and things like that, that procedurally happens after a bill is reported on the floor. But certainly if any member, um, here of the committee or anyone seeking, any member of the public seeking access to these drafts, that's available through the LC number that we have here through the committee that's considering this now. [0:43:02] Is that right? [0:43:02] Well, as we said previously, any, any version that is, uh, passed favorably out of committee, then that, those versions become immediately available, you know, as, uh, you know, uh, online. We also have a list of individuals that have signed up, and any time we've had a new version, we are trying to get these out to not only our committee, but also members of stakeholders at the local level. But again, uh, much of this has come from suggestions from our local stakeholders. So yes, I mean, the short answer is yes, that all that will be reported out, you know, directly. [0:43:38] Yes, sir. And I, I, um, I'm just thinking through, even if a bill has to be reported on the floor before the online version, I guess, is updated, there'll be no obstacle or, or issue with getting members of the public copies of this, uh, or certainly the legislators here copies of, uh, uh, these substitutes so that they can be reviewed. Is that right? [0:44:02] No, sir. I, I, we've, we've intended and, and maintained a, a very transparent approach to this from the beginning. [0:44:07] Yes, sir. And we will continue to. [0:44:09] Thank you for your work. [0:44:09] Thank you. [0:44:09] Thank you. [0:44:11] I certainly appreciate that line of questioning. And, and our great committee aide, uh, just whispered in my ear that, uh, anyone who would like a copy can certainly stop by the Ways and Means Committee room this afternoon to, to pick up the most current version as well. So certainly wanna do everything in a open and transparent manner. [0:44:31] Chairman Carpenter. Thank you. And this is just a quick point. Nothing in this legislation would prevent local governments from, say, cutting expenses to make sure if they have the revenue shortfall that, that, um, Representative Buckner discussed. Nothing in this legislation would have them evaluate and say, "Well, I, I don't have as much money, I can cut expenses." Is that correct? It, it rolls down at a, a very modest rate of 3% a year from that 40 to 10. So, uh, yes, I think if they chose to attack this or, you know, uh, manage it from a different perspective, such as, uh, adjusting any kind of spending or adjusting increases in spending or however they, growth that might occur at the local level, then they could certainly do that. [0:45:12] Thank you. [0:45:18] All right, Chairman Blackmon, it looks like we're wrapping up with our questions. Uh, Representative Cannon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a, a, I guess a question about a couple of key provisions about the bill. Uh, as my, as I understand it, if in year one the homeowner gets a, a reduction in their fair market value from both the county and the school side. Is that correct? County, city, and, and school that they reside in. Yes, sir. And you've been very instrumental in, in bringing, uh, a lot of this legislation forward and, and assisting us in, in how we would, uh, be able to apply this at the local level. [0:45:51] So thank you very much for your assistance, Representative. Yes, Mr. Chairman. And for counties in 581, basically that, that provision would kind of, not cap, but keep their home assessment values at their rate of inflation based on current law. Uh, a- any, any, any one of those floats that are in place or other base year exemptions would still apply. Yes, sir, that is correct. Okay. Mr. Chairman, final question. Because of the long runway for implementation, it gives counties, cities, and school boards a, a chance to better manage their backfill of the homestead property tax as it goes away with the, with the drawdown. [0:46:24] Is that correct? I, I think the gentleman knows of what he speaks. [0:46:29] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Chairman Holcomb. Wow, thank you for the promotion. Um... I'm sure you're chair of something, Scott. I am not. Uh, yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Chairman Blackmon. Do you have a sense, like, uh, as you all know, I represent DeKalb County, and DeKalb County, at least the initial analyses on prior versions were that it would be negative in terms of revenues of, um, under the new proposal relative to the existing proposal. [0:47:02] Do you have a sense that all local governments would be net positive by 2037, or is that somewhat of an open question? And if it is an open question, is that still the idea of the grants to be able to make up that shortfall? That is correct, yes. Uh, I think a yes and yes. Okay. Thank you. [0:47:23] Representative Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Chairman, uh, i- is, talking about lowering it 3% per year, uh, are there limits on the assessment that could be made to a property? I know, uh, Representative Chairman Hilton was talking about my house is 500,000, 10 years from now it'd be down to 10%, but 10 years from now, what's the assessed value of the house? So are there limits on the how much the assessment can go up each year? [0:47:54] Well, the, uh, as Representative Cannon mentioned, uh, we do have a bill sitting in committee, uh, that would mandate those, uh, the floating homestead exemption. And we have many of those across the state in existence already for those that did not opt out. So that is a, a consideration, um, to, to keep those in check. And that obviously is something that, that we're looking at as well. So, isn't it true, I hope I live that long, 10 years? [0:48:24] Isn't it true that I hope I do, too? [0:48:31] All right. Uh, Chairman Parsons. Thank you, Chairman. I'm trying to how, uh, I figured how to frame this question, but I, I'm s- still kind of stuck on this one issue. But is it not true, I'll put it that way, and this will be it, but is it not true that it's, if, um... I feel kind of stingy myself about taxes that come to the state and taxes go to local governments. Uh, but given the fact that many of these local governments, these counties, more and more are getting, I think, pretty tremendous, uh, benefits from property taxes from data centers, shouldn't there be some way to, uh, evaluate that as far as the money that goes to them from the sales tax on the data centers? [0:49:17] I mean, some of these, some of these counties are getting a lot of money in property taxes from data centers already. I mean, shouldn't that be taken in consideration, uh, I guess in the local act we're talking about, but shouldn't that be taken in consideration as far as how much money from sales tax on data centers that they would get? The, uh... I, I, I th- I think that if you, if you take a look at what we f- are seeing with, uh, Representative Richardson's bill for Columbia County and you were to apply your logic there, that they're gonna get to zero a lot quicker. [0:49:49] And so, yes, that would be contemplated with regard to any backfilling from, you know, state dollars that would replenish this grant fund, uh, because they're all gonna be benefiting, and they're gonna be benefiting, uh, in, in most places i- in a significant level. Um, so I, I, I don't know if I'm answering your question or if, if, if I'm not. But I- Well, you are. Thank you, Chairman. You, I know you've worked really, really hard on this, and I, I support your efforts. I support the, the, uh, the resolution. [0:50:20] I just, just questions that I have, but thank you very much. Yes, sir. Appreciate the question. Yes, sir. [0:50:28] All right. Chairman Prince. [0:50:32] Thank you, Vice Chair. Uh, thank you, Chairman, uh, Blackmon for the, uh, for the bill or for the resolution. Uh, what, uh... My question goes back to the data center portion on p- uh, line 64. Those, um, rural areas or, or those cities or counties or whatever that do not have data centers or none are locating there, how does that balance work as far as, uh, their revenue? Well, I think that's part of it, is that, you know, this is... these are the state sales tax dollars that would be used to fill this grant fund. [0:51:04] So the... when you have a, a dangerous data center, you have, you know, the same amount of sales tax. Once this expires, the, you know, the exemption would apply just as Chairman Parsons mentioned to, to the locals, and then you'd have the amount that applies to the state, and these would be the state sales tax dollars that would fund this grant. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. [0:51:28] And I know we still have the enabling legislation coming too to discuss today, correct, Mr. Chairman? I, I'm very excited about it, Mr. Chairman. And, and some of the specifics possibly about how we're gonna administer the grant program. You're gonna get into that a little bit here in just- I, I, I sure am gonna try. We're all excited. So we're gonna get moving on to that. We're gonna take one final question, and then we'll see what the committee wants to do with the chairman of the committee's bill. Uh, but we will start, uh, our final question will be to Chairman Williamson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Chairman Blackmon, I echo, uh, uh, Chairman Parker's sentiments that you've worked tirelessly and, um, and been a, a good faith af- a- actor through this entire process, es- especially with our friends that representin' our local, uh, uh, governments back home, ACCG and GMA. [0:52:15] And maybe this is something I should have, uh, brought up with my friends at GMA, but, uh, isn't it true that over 20% of the cities, the certified cities in Georgia which are offering ser- services, they're certified cities, but over 20% of them do not collect any property taxes at all? I think that is correct. I think the gentleman has those numbers correct, yes. And, and those cities are able to survive on premium tax, uh, fines, um- Enterprise fines ... hotel/motel, um- Occupational tax, regulatory fees. Exactly. [0:52:45] All the, all these other sources of income that aren't- Franchise fees ... franchise fees in particular that all headin' their way. And, uh, and I kn- I know that I have three such cities in Walton County. They all do a great job. Well run, good services, and citizens are happy. But I just wanna make, point out the fact that you do not have to have property taxes to run a good certified city in Georgia. Is that not true? I'm sure the gentleman knows what he speaks. All right. We've heard extensive, uh, discussion throughout this entire process. [0:53:18] We have had opportunity for robust questioning on our, uh, resolution that's before us. It is House Resolution 1114, LC339893S. The resolution is now before the committee. What is the committee's pleasure? Move to pass. We got a motion to pass. Do we have a second? Second. All right. Any discussion? Seeing no discussion, all those in favor of the passage of House Resolution 1114, LC339893S, make it be known by saying aye. [0:53:54] Aye. All opposed like sign. Aye. All right. We're gonna have a showing of the hands. All those in favor of the passage of House Resolution 1114, uh, make it be known by raising your right hand. [0:54:16] All those opposed, make it be known by raising your right hand. [0:54:24] The resolution passes, Mr. Chairman, 14 to five. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. All right. We will move on now to the, uh, enabling legislation. Uh, that will be before House Bill 1116, LC339892S. Chairman Blackmon. Uh, thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Um, if, uh, if you'll, you'll look with me, uh, starting on page three, uh, you'll see that this enabling legislation, I think, aligns with, uh, the resolution put before you. [0:55:01] Um, again, you see the, the same, uh, 10% of the, uh, fair market value, um, in section 2.1. Uh. [0:55:21] You look in part three as it, as it runs through it, it puts the limitations on the, uh, sales tax that we have seen in previous versions. Section 3.2, um, [0:55:41] talks about the, uh, the interg- governmental agreement with regard to, uh, education and the, uh, municipal and county governments. Still don't have, have a whole lot of changes thus far other than the change in the 75% reduction instead of the full exemption that we rolled up to. Uh, s- same on page 11. You have the increments of .05 with regard to... and, and page 10 with, uh, lost and splost. [0:56:12] And then you see on page, uh, 12 that we roll into the LHOST provisions. It is actually mirrored, um, as you work through it in section 8 with regard to the school's LHOST [0:56:29] So very similarly how that would apply and how that would work against and replace or offset homestead property tax. And then again, uh, on page 29, uh, the municipal homestead option sales tax, something that would function, uh, very much like the current most if a city decided to remove themselves from the LHOST, uh, partnership that they have currently, uh, under LOST and others with the county, that they could, um, sort of bifurcate and, and be, uh, apply, uh, and, and utilize this MHOST if the, if the people were to, um, approve such. [0:57:10] And so again, the same provisions for those homestead reduction sales tax, uh, as you move through those. Um, [0:57:23] moving into kind of part 10 is when you see the, the same language that we've seen numerous times, that the exemptions would qualify, um, against the digest for our schools. Um, new provision with local fair share on their, uh, funding formula. Section 10[3 is the QBE, um, study committee as we look into, uh, the funding formula again for our schools. And then 10[4], 10[5] and 10[6] are all sections that I don't believe are as necessary, but, uh, essentially are, um, the duty to report and, uh, the penalties and the database for homestead exemptions. [0:58:04] Um, but I believe those are, are provisions that, uh, largely do not necessarily speak to, to the bill at this point because of the mechanism by which we are reducing and providing tax relief to our homeowners is through the, uh, assessed value versus the homestead exemption. [0:58:27] You'll see a number of things that have been removed, and again, the number of pages are f- because of the duplication of the LHOST for the different municipality, I mean the different local governments. [0:58:42] Thank you, Chairman Blackmon. [0:58:45] I would, I would also say that since we, we do have, uh, some of our partners here that have, uh, a, a pretty good idea of how this operates since much of it is, has come from them, that they may be able to weigh in on certain provisions. [0:59:00] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will, uh, take some questions from the committee if they get any. And, uh, if, um, if we feel like you'd like to bring our partners up, uh, we certainly will, will do that at your discretion. All right. Um, number nine, Chairman Hilton for a question. [0:59:20] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is kind of building off a question I asked on, on the last bill. My, my home county of Gwinnett hasn't met a tax dollar that they don't like. Um, and my concern is that while we are taking down the appraised value 3% every year, adding on that sales tax, that there's kind of a point at which the county is, uh, you know, and, and tell me if I'm wrong here, but coming out way and above, um, where they are at today. [0:59:50] Uh, do we have any protections against... You know, I mean, as we are drawing down on the property tax, giving the homeowner relief, we are adding the sales tax. Could the county come out way ahead of where they are at today? And if so, what protections do we have in place? [1:00:05] Well, I mean, you're talking about two pennies that are already in existence, right? And you're talking about the county penny. So I don't know that it could come out ahead because right now it already has that penny in existence. But if you repurpose it just for homesteads and it reduces all homestead properties and it reduces all other properties, and then the remainder is able to be utilized for operations or capital, uh, I think again, the incentive is there to keep down property taxes, you know, insomuch as that they may have that residual leftover. [1:00:38] That is not necessarily currently in place. [1:00:41] So they won't have any, uh... I thought they were having additional pennies to be used. [1:00:44] Well, we, I'm just, uh, I'm just saying there, well, there are two existing pennies that are i- in utilization. The cities would have access to, uh, to one penny. [1:00:53] Got it. [1:00:54] So, uh, again, right now you, you don't necessarily have that incentive because there is no requirement to roll back homestead property taxes first- [1:01:04] Okay [1:01:04] ... and then other property taxes all the way to zero next. But when you take 40 down to 10, you have a much greater opportunity of eliminating those homestead property taxes, and thereby you would roll over to other property. [1:01:15] Perfect. Okay. Thank you. [1:01:17] Yes, sir. Thank you. [1:01:21] Chairman Parsons for a question. [1:01:23] Thank you. Thanks, Chairman. Chairman, uh, and I apologize for asking these questions. I know we're getting close to something happening here, you know, in the next day or two , and I just wanna make sure I kind of understand. Is, are there any changes in this, uh, substitute that you have as far as the assessments? I don't think... You may have said that there were, but I'm not sure if you said there were. [1:01:43] There, there are no assess- assessments in, in the bill. The- [1:01:46] Oh, there are no assessments? [1:01:47] There, there are no assessments, no, sir. [1:01:48] So that was taken out? [1:01:49] They are taken out. [1:01:51] That answers that question. Thank you. [1:01:53] Yes, sir. [1:01:57] All right. Chairman Blackmon, we appreciate a thorough explanation. We will, uh, open the door here if any of our partners would like to say anything, but I'm showing, uh, no other questions on, and, uh, unless they, they want to say anything, I think we're just gonna put it, uh, before the committee, uh, at, at this point. Um, I think our partners say they're, they're okay. Um, all right. We have before us House Bill 1116 LC339892S. [1:02:32] What's the pleasure of the committee? [1:02:34] We have a motion do pass. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion, we have a second. Do we have any discussion? Uh, yes, sir. Got a one quick question. [1:02:46] Is, is it- Chairman Williams. Isn't this, isn't this true that in, with, with the, uh, constitutional amendment that we would be eliminating 100% of the property taxes for our disabled veterans community in Georgia? Is that not true? Uh, for 100% disabled veterans, yes, sir, that is correct. Thank you. So mo- Representative Frye. Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Mr. Chair, I appreciate all the work that you, you've definitely put into this. [1:03:18] Um, I just would like to go on record in saying that I'm not comfortable voting for a bill that I just got a copy of that's 47 pages long. But that does not diminish my respect for your efforts on this, and I wanted you to know that. Thank you, Mr. Representative. I, I think you'll find that, um, much of this is consistent with what you have seen and what has been online before, and that the, the moving pieces are, are generally all parts that have, have either been part of this bill before or have been explained, I think, that are, are relatively easy to understand regarding the homestead exemption versus that reduced assessed value. [1:04:03] But I, I certainly understand the representative point, and I thank you. Thank you, sir. [1:04:11] All right. We're gonna take a final question, the majority leader of the House. Leader Efstration. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Chairman, along the lines of the previous representative's question, isn't it true that from local government stakeholders, uh, you received input recently about proposals that could be incorporated into a constitutional amendment and enabling legislation, and that, uh, that what you've presented here today, the shortness in time is a result of getting that feedback and incorporating in those recommendations? [1:04:46] So the, uh, shortness that, that the represent- shortness of time the representative's referencing is only due to taking the input from county and municipal governments and others, uh, so that that can be part of this proposal that's before us today. Uh, the gentleman, uh, knows of what he speaks. I would, I would say, you know, I mean, even, uh, you might, you might ask those, uh, local governments. I mean, this is entirely, uh, representative and consistent with what was brought to us by them. [1:05:19] Um, a- and, you know, and I, I know that they too would like to see the legal language, but it is, is certainly, you know, on paper exactly what, uh, we were representing with the, the recommendations coming to us from our, our cities and counties, and then others from the schools over the period of time as well. Thank you. Thank you. All right, I see no further discussion. No amendments have been offered. Sitting before the committee and a do pass recommendation is, uh, House Bill 1116 LC339892S. [1:05:55] Uh, all those in favor for the passage, uh, will make be known by raising their right hand. [1:06:11] All those opposed make be known by raising your right hand. [1:06:16] They're disabled veterans. Congratulations, Chairman Blackmon, to you and the taxpayers of Georgia. The motion passes 14 to five. And thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. If I might just add that, uh, while we continue to try to be respectful of our local governments, it is just as you said, this is a provision that is meant to benefit the taxpayer and our homeowners across the state. And I thank the committee for their, um, uh, favorable consideration. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Seeing no more business before the committee today, the committee shall stand adjourned.