Georgia CommonsHouse Judiciary Juvenile Committee
House Judiciary Juvenile Committee, March 4, 2026
2025-2026 Regular Session · 403 CAP · 13 min
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.
The video is the General Assembly's, played from its Vimeo channel. Select any time below to play that moment. Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel · Agenda
Summary
Written by an AI model (gpt-6.1-sol) from the transcript. It is not part of the record, and the video is what was said.
The committee reconsidered HB 1445 after the sponsor requested changes to language in a version previously approved. The discussion focused on notifying schools and law enforcement when a young person’s electronic monitoring stops working, improving communication between agencies, and clarifying the role of monitoring companies. The committee approved the new substitute by voice vote, with no opposition heard, and adjourned.
Bills discussed (1)
Each account covers the stretch of the meeting it names. The bill's number is said in that stretch, unless it was the only bill on a committee's agenda.
HB 1445. Juvenile proceedings; authorize sharing of GPS monitoring with law enforcement and school districts
From 0:03:56 · turns 3 to 81
The sponsor said HB 1445 would require the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), following a request, to notify relevant authorities and schools when a youth’s monitoring device loses communication, including through removal or failure to charge it. The sponsor said conversations with sheriffs and school officials identified communication gaps affecting youth and community safety. Asked about a connection to the Apalachee shooting, the sponsor said that was a different situation and the connection was communication. A committee member supported notification because school security staff may rely on devices without knowing they have failed. The sponsor said the new substitute changes “real-time” monitoring to “near real-time” to match DJJ contracts. A DJJ witness said it also removes monitoring-company references that could create operational and financial effects on contracts. The witness described current practice: after requests, DJJ verifies school attendance and jurisdiction, shares names, and notifies schools and law enforcement when it verifies a youth has absconded and their whereabouts are unknown. Asked about numbers, the witness estimated 800 to 1,000 youths statewide were monitored but did not know how many also had Division of Family and Children Services involvement and offered to check. The committee approved the substitute by voice vote, with no opposition heard.
Transcript
83 turns. Select a time to play that moment of the video.
- 0:03:38
Never moved so fast this morning.
- 0:03:41
Good afternoon.
- 0:03:42
Use the chair lady.
- 0:03:44
Good afternoon. All right, can you guys hear me? There we go. Good afternoon, and welcome to Judiciary Juvenile. I appreciate everyone coming during lunch break on this important matter. Um, we're gonna take up HB 1445, which we passed at a committee last week. Or was it earlier this week? I can't even remember when all this happened. We passed this bill out, and, um, there was some refining that needed to be done per the author of the bill, which is Representative Townsend. He requested it come back because he wanted to, um, resolve a couple of conflicts that he found in the bill.
- 0:04:17
And so, Representative Townsend, if you'd go ahead and tell us all about it.
- 0:04:21
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate that. I want to thank, uh, also, um, Margaret Kaywood from D- JJ for really helping out and perfecting this bill. Basically, what it requires is DJJ to notify... Once, once asked, received notification, they're a- asked to notify the local state and juvenile authorities in the school system when a person, a youth on, in prob- on probation, stops, their monitoring device stops working for some reason or it goes off.
- 0:04:54
Whether they take it off, whether because of not being powered, charged, it could be m- many things. But basically, th- that basic notification is once communication breaks down between the monitoring device and DJJ, then those, uh, entities shall be notified.
- 0:05:10
All right.
- 0:05:10
And one of the things we also changed was, um, added instead of, um, real-time monitoring, we made it near real-time monitoring. But that's the official term DJJ uses with their contracts, so we just wanna make sure we use their terms regarding contracts. And that's basically the changes. And, uh, Margaret's here now from DJJ in case anybody has any questions, just in case. Or I'll be l- glad to answer any as well.
- 0:05:36
Well, I definitely like, um, wording mirroring other areas of code. It makes things a lot more, um, cohesive and, um, germane, right? So-
- 0:05:46
It di- it, it certainly did. So I really appreciate the input they had, and they just called me and said, "Hey," and they, they made it better.
- 0:05:54
Well, wonderful. And we appreciate, um, Margaret Kaywood for her participation in that. You do have a question, Representative Panitch. Go ahead whenever you're ready.
- 0:06:02
Thank you. It's probably more for Margaret.
- 0:06:04
Sure.
- 0:06:04
Um.
- 0:06:06
Sure. Mm-hmm.
- 0:06:17
Okay.
- 0:06:18
Thank you. What was the impetus for this bill? Were kids going back to school that were on monitoring and lost contact? Or what, what brought this about?
- 0:06:28
Actually, I think Representative Townsend can answer that.
- 0:06:29
Yeah, it wasn't DJJ who involved it first.
- 0:06:32
Okay.
- 0:06:32
Um, basically, I talked to a group of sheriffs, and then I talked to some school people. And mainly, um, I think the monitoring situation, they thought it could be, uh, uh, communication be more effective. One of the things that came out last year during the school safety bill that I was a part of and behind the scenes helped give input was that safety that happened, what happened, the breakdown what happened in Jackson County between the sheriff's department and Jefferson City School System, which I actually was an AP there for a while, so I know that area well.
- 0:07:03
And then Bear County, when the young man moved to Bear County, went to Apalachee High School. And so we're just trying to tie s- tie up loose ends. And so once this bill came about and I spoke in rules, that's when, uh, DJJ heard it, and they said, "Hey, we could even make it better than what you got." Not trying to- ... sing too many praises to you guys. But basically- ... they really tightened it up.
- 0:07:24
So was the child, uh, was the person who did the shooting at Apalachee on probation?
- 0:07:31
Uh, it's a different scenario.
- 0:07:32
Okay.
- 0:07:32
But it, what I was trying to relate it to was communication. Uh, uh, when anyth- as you know, in life, you have to have effective communication. And when I was in the school setting, whether I was a principal or whether I was superintendent or in charge of a career academy, I saw communications break down sometimes between public agencies and school systems. And so anytime I had a chance to help with that communication piece, you know, the kids usually want out, the kids. So that's what you try to do is find out, if you see, you see a gap in communication or see where we need to clean something up, I'm gonna jump in and try to help out, because I do understand the school setting pretty well.
- 0:08:09
And so, and then I understand what DJJ does. I appreciate what their services do to youth. And so when this came about to me, I was asked, "Hey, are you interested?" I was like, "Yeah, I'm interested," because this is an area we can tighten up, uh, notification. This could be, this could be safety for the kid who actually took off his or her ankle monitor or something else like that, or it could be safety for, um, someone in the community. So I saw this as, uh, to me, a good way to ensure effective communication.
- 0:08:39
Okay. Thank you.
- 0:08:41
All right. Thank you, Represent- Representative Panitch for that. All right. Um, Floor Leader Wade, please go ahead with your question.
- 0:08:47
Uh, appreciate it. I actually just wanted to share a comment for the committee. Um, I, I know of two incidences when SROs and a chief security officer for a school system, um, it's helpful because they trust these devices. Most of the time, they're aware of the student. Sometimes it's delayed information they may not know immediately, but they're trusting that that device is functioning properly, and would have no idea if it had failed, and if that student elopes from campus or is expected or has... I mean, there are situations where kids are, you know, they're being rehabilitated.
- 0:09:21
They can do work release. But if, if it's not working and they don't show up to work, sometimes the schools feel like they're held accountable for something that they can't control. So that communication piece, I think, is important. So I'm supportive of the measure.
- 0:09:35
That makes sense with SROs Need to know-
- 0:09:38
Yeah
- 0:09:38
... for our campus.
- 0:09:39
Yeah, definitely.
- 0:09:40
Okay. Thank you.
- 0:09:41
Well, and additionally, um, the batteries don't... If someone doesn't charge-
- 0:09:45
Yeah
- 0:09:45
... it properly, that's another-
- 0:09:46
I think a lot of times that's where it is
- 0:09:47
... if you don't know where they are if it's not charged, um, so.
- 0:09:49
Some of them don't charge them properly on purpose.
- 0:09:51
Well, and, and this would certainly make sure that everyone finds that out pretty quickly.
- 0:09:55
Yes, ma'am.
- 0:09:55
All right. Um, Representative Oliver, do you have a question? Go right ahead.
- 0:09:58
I apologize for missing. This is a substitute-
- 0:10:03
Yes, ma'am
- 0:10:03
... and it's a, a new substitute, or was it a substitute that the committee heard previously?
- 0:10:07
Yeah, it's a new substitute. We had to, we had to tighten up a little language, uh, on the substitute. Uh, one was, uh, changing from, uh, monitoring to the r- real-time monitoring to near real-time monitoring to match what the contract says with DJJ and the people who, who do the ankle devi- the monitoring devices. Also, this also clears up, uh, language in there, uh, regarding notification purposes of the difference to the state, local agencies, state and local agencies and the school system. And so really, uh, I was telling Margaret Kaywood from C, uh, DJJ, uh, she's an attorney for them, helped me tighten up this language actually.
- 0:10:46
I'm not an attorney.
- 0:10:47
No. So-
- 0:10:47
I'm not an attorney.
- 0:10:48
Not an attorney. I'm sorry.
- 0:10:49
That's okay.
- 0:10:49
But they helped me tighten up the language.
- 0:10:50
Yeah.
- 0:10:51
May I ask, um, if this is a vendor of some longstanding with-
- 0:10:55
No. And, and, and thank you for the question because that, that does clarify. Actually, what we did is we removed the s- the reference to the electronic monitoring company because that, it, the language was confusing and implied that they would be involved and given in, given information, and that would impact operationally and fiscally our contracts with the, um, monitoring companies. And we have several across the state that, that serve in different areas. And so w- what this does is that once the school, uh, or the law enforcement requests the information, we look at the kids that are on electronic monitoring.
- 0:11:34
We verify they attend that school system, they live in that jurisdiction of that county. And then we will provide to the law enforcement and the school the names of those children. And then if those children violate, if we-
- 0:11:48
This is what you're doing now, is what you're-
- 0:11:50
Yeah, it's what we're doing now. And then if they violate, and we have verified they have absconded and are not, nobody knows where their whereabouts are, then we will notify the school and law enforcement.
- 0:12:04
That's very helpful. Thank you. Uh, how many children are on monitoring?
- 0:12:08
I would say, I don't know exactly, but I'm thinking it's less than 1,000, 800 to 1,000 across the state.
- 0:12:15
And I wonder how many of them are jointly committed as DFCS and DJJ children.
- 0:12:21
I, I don't know that, but I could check and get you that.
- 0:12:25
That, that might matter under certain circumstances 'cause the disappearance of DFCS children into-
- 0:12:32
Mm-hmm
- 0:12:32
... either DJJ or into the world is something we're supposed to track.
- 0:12:37
Definitely.
- 0:12:38
Thank you. Thank you. That's very helpful.
- 0:12:39
Thank you.
- 0:12:41
Thank you so much, Representative Oliver, for that question and clarification. Thank you, Ms. Kaywood, for your help on that.
- 0:12:47
Thank you.
- 0:12:47
All right. Um, are there any further questions from the committee? All right. What's the will of the committee at this time?
- 0:12:54
Motion to pass.
- 0:12:55
Second.
- 0:12:56
Second. Motion to pass and second. Any discussion? All right. All those in favor of passing HB1445, the substitute LC481813S as in Sam, say aye.
- 0:13:10
Aye.
- 0:13:10
Aye.
- 0:13:10
Any opposition? All right. Measure passes. Thank you so much, committee.
- 0:13:13
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, committee.
- 0:13:18
And we are adjourned. Thank you.