House Ways & Means Committee, March 3, 2026

Transcript

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

1. 0:16:55

   By my count, we have a quorum this morning. Um...

2. 0:17:05

   Representative Barrett, uh, would you open us up in a word of prayer, please, sir?

3. 0:17:12

   What number are you?

4. 0:17:14

   11.

5. 0:17:15

   11.

6. 0:17:15

   Heavenly Father, we're just so grateful for the opportunity to be here today in your service, for the people in this room, for the people across the hall, across the aisle. It's just such a great honor and a privilege to be here to serve. Please guide us and give us wisdom today in these challenging times. In Jesus' name we pray, amen.

7. 0:17:35

   Amen. Thank you very much. I did see Representative Huddleston here. You have the...

8. 0:17:51

   I believe it's that hour. Are you ready?

9. 0:17:53

   Yes, sir.

10. 0:17:53

    Okay. I'll let you take the seat.

11. 0:18:00

    HB 1261.

12. 0:18:05

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, yeah, be, uh, House Bill 1261, which is LC560550. Thank you to the committee for allowing me to come back before you again. Uh, this bill is basically talking about level one Freeport exemption. It's related to the, uh, manufacture and production business of the inventories, um, of, of, of the materials that's on the yard of basically, um, paying taxes from one year to the next, but, uh, upon movement. What we're asking to do today, excuse me, is, is, um, add the language in here to allow the electrical utilities, uh, to get with their local municipalities and governments to, to, um, determine the percentage of exemption, um, on that level of inventories.

13. 0:18:54

    And basically, what this is doing is, uh, excuse me, is the, uh, reliability of service and basically, and, uh, help the rate payers.

14. 0:19:08

    Any questions for the author of the bill?

15. 0:19:12

    I don't see any. What's the will of the committee?

16. 0:19:14

    Move due pass.

17. 0:19:15

    I have a motion due pass. Is there a second?

18. 0:19:18

    Second.

19. 0:19:18

    The motion is second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by stating, "Aye."

20. 0:19:25

    Aye.

21. 0:19:25

    Those opposed, like sign.

22. 0:19:27

    All right. Thank you.

23. 0:19:28

    Thank you.

24. 0:19:33

    Representative Cannon, are you ready with HB 547?

25. 0:19:36

    Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have, uh, a, a CUVA omnibus bill. Uh, in recent years we've, we've done several CUVA bills separately. We're trying to combine them. We have got three topics we're covering with this bill. Uh, fairly simple. We're trying to mirror the language of FLPA and CUVA, and there's been some, you know, efforts the last couple years to carve some things out. We're trying to keep things more focused towards conservation, which is the intent of the, of the statute.

26. 0:20:07

    So in section one, uh, we bas- we say basically what's already in the FLPA statute, and we allow or make sure that the CUVA statute covers this. It's carbon credits for timber. Um, again, this already exists in CUVA. We believe it exists in CUVA. We're just clarifying that language in the CUVA statute. Uh, section, also in section one is more of a streamlining process. If you have multiple par- parcels in CUVA, they're on separate 10-year contracts. This language would allow you to put them on one contract so it's easier for the landowner and the local government tax assessor's office to track them.

27. 0:20:41

    Uh, so it's a streamlining mechanism and, um, w- will work very, make things a little bit simpler at the local level. The last portion, section two, is basically if there's no grace period for a conversion of CUVA to FLPA land, even if a person who buys land in FLPA, um, it automatically breaches the CUVA tract. So this allows you to basically have a grace period to convert land, which is already allowed by the law. It just gives you a grace period of 180 days to make sure the conversion takes place at a local level.

28. 0:21:13

    That's a summary of the bill, and I'll stand for any questions, Mr. Chairman.

29. 0:21:16

    Is that Chairman Williams?

30. 0:21:19

    Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I have a question on this, um, consolidation. So when I went to the, um, my county a couple weeks ago, I had a, I had to r- you know, re-sign for some CUVA, but I had like three or four different tracts.

31. 0:21:32

    Yeah.

32. 0:21:33

    So what you're telling me is I would just pay one fee to have them all combined up under one?

33. 0:21:36

    Well-

34. 0:21:36

    Or do I still have those three or four fees I would need to pay?

35. 0:21:39

    You'd still pay the fee for each one. You could just keep them on one timeline.

36. 0:21:42

    Okay.

37. 0:21:42

    If that makes sense.

38. 0:21:43

    Okay.

39. 0:21:43

    It's more, it's- it's easier for you to track, easier for the local assessor's office to track.

40. 0:21:47

    So they're not losing any money.

41. 0:21:48

    Correct.

42. 0:21:48

    Thank you.

43. 0:21:52

    I don't see any, uh, other questions. No other questions to the author. What's the will of the committee?

44. 0:21:59

    Due pass.

45. 0:22:00

    Second.

46. 0:22:00

    I have a motion due pass and second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by stating, "Aye."

47. 0:22:08

    Aye.

48. 0:22:08

    Those opposed, like sign. All right. Thank you, Representative Cannon.

49. 0:22:15

    Mr. Chairman.

50. 0:22:16

    Chairman Martin, are you, uh-

51. 0:22:19

    Disheveled?

52. 0:22:20

    Yes.

53. 0:22:21

    You ready?

54. 0:22:22

    Go ahead, Clint.

55. 0:22:23

    Thank you. Look, Mr. Chairman, I slipped right in. It didn't, didn't, you know... You don't, you're not used to seeing me on your left.

56. 0:22:33

    HB 560.

57. 0:22:34

    Yeah. A- HB 560 is, uh, a bill that, uh, we passed out last year. Um, we've gone back to the original bill. If, if we recall, we were, um, we Last year moved it out of committee with some language, uh, to help a, a fellow member. I, I think it's sitting in, in front of me. I believe that language passed in another form last year. So what this does is, uh, it goes back to the original bill, um, and, um, sections one, two, and three in this bill map, map exactly to sections three-one, three-two, and, and three-three last year. This bill, uh, seeks to make sure that loss, uh, doesn't get in- voluntarily stopped, uh, when cities and counties can't agree.

58. 0:23:14

    It tries to provide a path for them to agree more. Um, continuing to work with ACCG and G- GMA to make sure that, uh, we have the, the spe- specifics worked out. But at this time, if we could move this forward, um, I can assure the chair that we'll continue to work those things out, and it'll be the best interest of our cities and counties. That's the bill.

59. 0:23:35

    And, uh, it is a return to the original form in which I think we've seen two different times.

60. 0:23:41

    At least.

61. 0:23:41

    All right. Um, I don't see any questions, so will the committee...

62. 0:23:47

    Do pass.

63. 0:23:48

    I have a move do pass and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

64. 0:23:55

    Aye.

65. 0:23:55

    Aye.

66. 0:23:56

    Opposed, like sign. All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

67. 0:23:59

    Thank you.

68. 0:24:00

    Um, Chairman Hilton, 1135.

69. 0:24:08

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'll be reading from LC492766S. Uh, in July of last year, Congress passed a, uh, federal tax credit for $1,700, uh, that goes to, uh, students, both private and public. Uh, this is, uh, this bill here. Uh, one thing that was some- somewhat short-sighted of the bill was that it provided that states opt into the program on an annual basis.

70. 0:24:39

    Uh, this would leave parents in the lurch as to, um, one year to the next being able to receive these resources for their education. This can range from tutoring services to books and supplies to, uh, transportation. And so the money goes directly to the students themselves. Uh, this bill would simply, uh, uh, say that Georgia opts into the program on an annual basis, uh, automatically. Uh, th- this is a sub. We changed line 45. It was initially January 1, and we just changed it to read annually since they haven't set a firm date yet.

71. 0:25:16

    And I will yield for any questions.

72. 0:25:19

    Any questions for the author of the bill? 18, Representative Buckner.

73. 0:25:24

    It was... Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It was brought to my attention after we had a hearing on this that this isn't really necessary right now since none of the rules are in place, that we can wait and do this after they establish the rules and we decide that we wanna adhere to those confines that they put upon it.

74. 0:25:42

    Yeah, we've shared this language with some of our partners at a federal level. They've said this kind of comports with where things are going right now. We, we can... You're right. We can do it now, or we can do it after, uh, more of the rules are flushed out. But the, the bill itself has, has passed, and so, uh, that's sufficient enough to, to pass this legislation here.

75. 0:26:01

    That just came from a lot of the education associations and things. They felt like it was not necessary at this time. Thank you.

76. 0:26:13

    Uh, Representative Kelly.

77. 0:26:15

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Hilton, help me just understand the process. If currently this is an annual renewal, who does the annual renewal?

78. 0:26:25

    So right now, uh, you, the governor opts in or opts out of the program. We've seen nationally both, uh, red and blue states opt into the program. If a state chooses not to opt into the program, their citizens can still receive the tax credit. Those dollars, though, are spent elsewhere. Uh, so for example, if I'm a Georgia resident, my state has not opted into the program, I can still receive a $1,700 tax credit if I contribute to a Alabama SGO or a New York SGO.

79. 0:26:56

    Uh, and so this bill will simply make sure that Georgia tax dollars, Georgia contributions stay in, inside the state.

80. 0:27:05

    Thank you for clarifying that. So let me, uh, ask you, if we pass this legislation, what is then the process should the governor or a legislative body or who would then come in and decide should-

81. 0:27:19

    Okay

82. 0:27:20

    ... should something change at the federal level as it relates to the program and we don't want to consider, uh, continuing to, uh, participate? And I guess that's my concern, is what if substantial changes are made to the federal program and we are continuing to operate inside of it without any review or oversight? What is our concern there?

83. 0:27:41

    And then the good news is this body meets, uh, and, and we make, pass laws once a year. Uh, and we make changes based on what happens. I mean, we do have an annual IRS cleanup bill, and so, uh, I think you'd just simply a- address it then.

84. 0:27:55

    So that, so that is what we'll do just as a legislative body. We'll come in and, and, and determine if we wanna continue or whatever. We still have the purview now. We're taking power away from the governor and putting it in the hands of the legislature. Is that correct?

85. 0:28:08

    Putting it in the hands of the people, yep.

86. 0:28:09

    All right. Thank you.

87. 0:28:13

    All right. Uh, I don't see any further questions. Um, what's the will of the committee?

88. 0:28:21

    Move do pass.

89. 0:28:23

    I have a motion do pass. Is there a second?

90. 0:28:25

    Second.

91. 0:28:26

    I have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor please signify by stating aye.

92. 0:28:32

    Aye.

93. 0:28:33

    Aye.

94. 0:28:33

    Aye. Uh, excuse me. Those opposed like sign.

95. 0:28:37

    Aye.

96. 0:28:37

    All right. Uh, those in favor, please signify by raising your right hand.

97. 0:28:46

    All right. Uh, those opposed likewise raise your right hand. All right. Thank you. Bill passes. Thank you, Chairman. We have one o- other bill on the, uh, that we've seen, uh, two other times, and I think we have passed in, uh, general law before, um, HR1392. It does have some of, uh, language in here that I think, uh, Mr.

98. 0:29:17

    Tony has put some, some information on your desk. Um, and if you, if you'd like to take the podium, I'll just briefly say as the sponsor that this is consistent with our latest Supreme Court rulings and, um, I think, uh, federal, uh, kinda comports with the federal definition of, uh, of these qualified, um, building projects, so.

99. 0:29:42

    Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, and thank you-

100. 0:29:43

     In the interest of time, I wanted to just bring you before full committee since we've seen this language multiple times before.

101. 0:29:50

     Thank you and, uh, Representative Leverett for sponsoring this constitutional amendment. This, uh, this subject matter has been a 26-year journey for, for this committee and the General Assembly. Uh, the state low-income housing tax credit was passed by the legislation nearly unanimously in 2000. The first state income tax credits for low-income housing began to flow in 2001, and in that same year, uh, in a few counties, the assessors began to assess the LIHTC, L-I-H-T-C properties at a much higher rate, uh, than should be using the normal income level.

102. 0:30:40

     Uh, we are now at a situation, and I have a property owner here with me, Mr. Rob Haley, who owns three properties in Bleckley County. Um, we have many more counties now that are, uh, seeing assessments that far exceed, um, what would be considered a reasonable taxation for these properties that are rent controlled by the federal government. So in, in, uh, Mr.

103. 0:31:11

     Haley's three properties in Bleckley County, he is looking at assessments that are 118% of his net income on the property. That's mind-blowing. His other property is 145% of net income, the assessment on it. And then finally, a third property, the assessment is 248% of the net income on the property.

104. 0:31:47

     There have been, uh, court cases that have ruled, uh, and have given guidance to the assessment process, but still assessors are not following what would be considered the traditional methods for assessing these unique properties. House Resolution 1392 gives, uh, the voters an opportunity to empower you as the General Assembly to specifically prescribe how these unique properties would be assessed.

105. 0:32:22

     And if we use the guidance of ... You, you may not believe this, but Mississippi has taken this bull by the horns, and because they don't have a uniformity clause, they were able to directly create legislation that creates a formula by which assessors would generate the assessments on these unique properties. And so if HR1392 is adopted by the voters in the fall, then you, as you return, will have an opportunity to adopt general law that would prescribe how the properties are assessed.

106. 0:33:04

     Um, Mr. Haley, do you wanna say anything?

107. 0:33:06

     Sure. Um, just real quick, thank you very much for your time today.

108. 0:33:10

     Yes, sir.

109. 0:33:10

     Um, as Jed had said, we have three properties in Bleckley County. Uh, Havenwood Gardens, uh, which is a 50-unit family deal. Havenwood Garden- uh, Havenwood Daisy Senior, which is a 60-unit senior deal, and Havenwood Gardens 2, which is another 50-unit family deal. Um, just to, just to give you some numbers here that, uh, he's already spoken about, but, uh, our NOI for, on 2024, this should be in the packet that you guys received. Our- we had roughly $77,000 in net income before payment of any types of taxes on Havenwood Gardens.

110. 0:33:42

     Um, our tax bill that year b- uh, before any appeals was $109,000, putting us roughly $70,000, $80,000 in the hole. Um, just to continue that, that property forward now, uh, we've paid our t- we've had to go through appeals, paid the '24, 2024 tax, uh, bill at 85% in, in, uh, December of '25. And then again had to pay our '25 tax bill on Gardens in 2000, um, just, uh, the beginning of February. And we actually, at that point, we have cleared out all of our escrows, all of our operating terms, every, every single bit of money that's set aside for, for, for things should they go wrong.

111. 0:34:20

     And now we've ha- we're having to start write checks out of the company, uh, fro- uh, at a corporate level to basically cover, cover all these expenses. And our other two properties, Havenwood Daisy Senior, Havenwood Gardens 2, are also, uh, starting to head towards that direction. As a matter of fact, on Gardens 2, we received a full assessment as if it was complete when it was 25% complete. Um, so they, they went ahead and assumed that we were complete and running. Um, and we had at that time, no income to even pay anything on that property. So, um, just to ... But anyways, thank you for your time, and take it up, Jed.

112. 0:34:53

     I, I wanna give credit to the General Assembly for having, uh, attempted to address this issue many years ago. Three times, uh, the General Assembly has adopted legislation to guide how these properties should be assessed. The first two were struck down as violative of the uniformity clause. The third bill passed in 2017, many of you voted for that, uh, again, nearly unanimous, was, um, law written by the late, uh, Chairman Jay Powell.

113. 0:35:25

     That, uh, not only survived a constitutional question with the Supreme Court, but, uh, was twice rendered constitutional by the state Supreme Court. But still, the problem persists, and, um, uh, these taxpayers, these owners who own property all over the state are asking you to put this ballot question on, "Let's make these properties a unique class for ad valorem purposes." Mr.

114. 0:35:56

     Chairman, I'll answer any questions.

115. 0:36:00

     Um, Chairman Williamson.

116. 0:36:05

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, uh, Mr. Toney, I was wondering if I could just, uh, address a question to the owner of the property there of Havenwood Gardens.

117. 0:36:17

     Sir, I was just, um, doing the math on this. Irrespective of how this, uh, you, if they're, um, calculating your taxes owed on this based on your income, I'm just sort of astounded. You've got an assessed value, and I just verified it on Q Public, that of $12,670,500 market value or assessed value on just 50 units?

118. 0:36:42

     That's correct.

119. 0:36:43

     Well, th- that- that's an average cost in Bleckley, Bleckley County, Georgia of $253,000 a unit.

120. 0:36:50

     That's correct.

121. 0:36:51

     Th- th- that's astounding, uh, to me, um, th- th- that they would assess that kind of value. Irrespective of what your rent roll is, what is the average, uh, rent per apartment on that?

122. 0:37:05

     Uh, our rents are-

123. 0:37:05

     Full fair market rent. I know you, you have to subsidize.

124. 0:37:09

     Um, I mean, we, we... It depends on the area media incomes, but our, you know, anywhere from between just depending on the AMI percentages of the unit, it's probably 500 to 100 bucks a unit, something like that. So, and, uh, you know, and with these taxes, we're gonna have to keep, keep raising them, raising them, because, um, you know, this is unsustainable, and we can't have three properties that are gonna be in the hole going forward, and we can't just write checks.

125. 0:37:31

     What, what's the average square footage of each one of these units?

126. 0:37:34

     Um, our, our one bedrooms are probably 750 square feet, and they go up probably a couple hundred square feet per, per unit.

127. 0:37:40

     So over... You got a con- They've got a, a assessed value, call it $250 a square foot-

128. 0:37:46

     Yes

129. 0:37:46

     ... for attached, attached dwelling units-

130. 0:37:50

     Correct. Now, our-

131. 0:37:50

     ... which are the le- least expensive way to build.

132. 0:37:53

     Yeah. Now our... Just to let you know, the, the Havenwood Gardens and Garden Cities are family deals, so there'll be one, two, and three bedrooms, combination of those.

133. 0:37:58

     Right.

134. 0:37:59

     And Daisies, uh, since it's, it's senior, 55 and up, will, uh, will just be one and twos.

135. 0:38:03

     Well, again, I'm very sympathetic with the fact that that is a very high assessment in my opinion. But thank you for educating me.

136. 0:38:11

     Chairman Dickey.

137. 0:38:13

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, I just want to make sure. I think I know the answer, but, uh, but just for the committee, we're changing, you're asking to be changing from a, a, a replacement cost as, uh, assessment. I mean, just tell the committee w- w- how, how these counties are assessing now, and what are we going to? We're going to a, a, a income-based type, uh, assessment based on, on, uh, income value is like we do some other properties.

138. 0:38:40

     Well, uh, what, what they're doing right now, at least they are in Bleckley County, is they're taking the cost, what they think the cost of the building is, and then adding in the, the tax, the, the tax credit.

139. 0:38:47

     Yeah.

140. 0:38:47

     So it's like taking the cost of your house and adding the mortgage on it, and then saying, "That's the value and we'll tax you on." Um, so what we would preferred i- is, and I think this is what's in, in the bill, is just basically have a deal by income approach, which basically we want to pay taxes and, but pay them based on the fact, on our ability to pay them, uh, on our rent. So what the, the, the value based on the rents and the operating income.

141. 0:39:12

     Do you have anything to add, Jett, or?

142. 0:39:15

     Chairman Dickey, the, um, again, the Mississippi approach is very simple, and it's prescribed in general law. And these developers, these property owners, taxpayers believe that the income approach is the most appropriate approach, as, as is the, uh, case with most rental property. And so, uh, if I might, um, and I do have copies of the Mississippi law, but it's basically the income on the property less the expenses, a capitalization factor, and that spits out, uh, the property value.

143. 0:39:52

     And property, uh, owner pays the tax and, and moves on.

144. 0:39:56

     Thank you. That was-

145. 0:39:57

     Yes, sir

146. 0:39:57

     ... the explanation I wanted.

147. 0:40:02

     Representative Barrett.

148. 0:40:04

     If they use the income approach only, what happens in a year when you're renovating or whatever and your income goes way down? Do you expect it to be reassessed based on that temporary lull in income?

149. 0:40:15

     I mean, it would just, I would think it'd be based on what's, what the initial, you know, as if it was full at 7% vacancy or something like that. It's, you know, I'd think there would be certain underwriting standards. Uh, we'll let an appraiser, uh, talk m- more about that. But, so yeah.

150. 0:40:32

     We've, we've not had to contemplate that. Um, we're overwhelmed by the assessments at this point in, in the initial years.

151. 0:40:48

     Okay. I don't see any further questions. Uh, posture of the committee is we'll entertain a motion if, if anybody-

152. 0:40:57

     Do pass

153. 0:40:57

     ... We have a motion to do pass. Do we have a second? Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by stating, "Aye."

154. 0:41:05

     Aye.

155. 0:41:05

     Those opposed, like sign.

156. 0:41:07

     Aye.

157. 0:41:08

     We got a no. All right. Thank you very much. Um, anybody have anything else for the good of the order? Hearing none, thank y'all for being here this morning. Have a great day.