House floor session, March 6, 2026 (legislative day 28, PM, part 2)
Video: https://vimeo.com/1171182070 (a timestamp t plays at https://vimeo.com/1171182070#t=<seconds>s)
Page: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-03-06/house-floor-pm-2

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.
[1:18:27] House will come to order.

[1:18:31] House will come to order. Mr. Clerk, how about ring the bell?

[1:18:58] Okay.

[1:19:45] All members please come to the floor. We'll, uh, bring this meeting back to order.

[1:19:57] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 951? 9-5-1. House Bill 951 by Representative Clark of the 100th to be entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 24, Title 33 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to insurance generally so as to require health benefit plans, policies or contracts executed by the state to cover medically necessary orthotic devices and prosthetic devices and their materials and components. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Health, that committee recommends that this bill do pass.

[1:20:32] You ready? Stage ready. Representative David Clark is recognized to present House Bill 951. Gentleman's recognized. Please give the gentleman your well. This is a pretty cool bill, y'all. Give the gentleman your well, your attention, please. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm bringing before you H- uh, House Bill 951. And last year we passed legislation which required commercial, uh, insurance plans to provide coverage for medically necessary prosthetic and orthotic devices, and that legislation was signed into law by Governor Brian Kemp.

[1:21:06] However, the state healthcare plan was not included, meaning employees under the state health benefit plan and the Board of Regents system do not have the same protections. And so this bill just simply brings parity across the state so state employees, university employees, and teachers are treated the same as those on commercial plans. And it also just promotes responsible healthcare policy because mobility and proper prosthetic care often prevents more expensive medical complications later. So I'll just, I'll answer any questions, but it's just going along with the bill from last year and it's adding the state healthcare plan and the, uh, Board of Regents.

[1:21:42] You have one bill, Representative Park Cannon to your left is recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Do you yield? I yield. What kind of prosthetic devices would this bill cover? So th- th- this covers orthotic prosthetic d- uh, devices, um, if the physician recommends it. Um, and so I mean, whatever the needs. So, so whether... 'Cause usually, and we talked last year, you usually only got one every five years. Now it's, it's allowing a total of three.

[1:22:12] Um, because a lot of times the standard one you get, you can't go take a shower, you can't go work out, you know, do other basic things. So this is just allowing, based on that doctor and the patient, to talk about what's best for them to just live a normal life. Thank you. Do you further yield? I yield. And so, um, you mentioned prosthetic devices perhaps to be able to go to the shower, so maybe that means having to ambulate or walk like a leg prosthetic. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Do you further yield for one final?

[1:22:43] I do. Okay. And so many of us have become aware of, uh, Mr. Rodney Taylor, who's currently incarcerated here in Georgia, seeking prosthetic devices to get to the shower. Would this support him or is this only for state employees? Thank you. This is, last year we did commercial plans. This is adding the, uh, Board of Regents and state healthcare plan. You have one more. Yes. Chair Lady Katie Dempsey's recognized for a question. Does the gentleman lead? I yield. Yield.

[1:23:13] I'm sorry. You always lead. I'm sorry. I yield. Yes, ma'am. It's getting late and tired, aren't we? No, I just wanna thank you for this measure. Actually, I believe someone came from Rome to speak in the committee. Yep. Hannah Neighbors, a true champion and advocate not only for herself but for others. And she was a victim of such a surprising and dreadful accident, and has just stood forward not only for this, but for all kinds of people who struggle in the world that might be considered people with disabilities.

[1:23:43] So thank you for giving ability to those. Definitely. Thank you. With that, I yield the well and ask for your favorable consideration of House Bill 951. Thank you. Thank you for bringing the bill. The gentleman's yielded the well. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to agreeing to the r- report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes.

[1:24:14] All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[1:24:34] Have all members voted?

[1:24:42] I got you. Take a minute.

[1:24:52] All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine.

[1:24:58] On the passage of House Bill 951, the yeas are 163, the nays are two. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 641? House Bill 641 by Representative Lim of the 98th and others to be entitled an Act to Amend Chapter Three of Title 46 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to electra- electric services to, so as to require that an electric supplier hold a proposed discontinuation of electrical service to a residential consumer who suffers from a serious illness in advance for a certain period of time.

[1:25:37] This bill having been referred to the Committee on Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications. That committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[1:25:52] Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Representative Marvin Lim is recognized to present House Bill 641. Gentleman's recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good evening, colleagues. I'm... All right, let's start over. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am honored to present House Bill 641. This bill simply states that electric utility suppliers have some written policy regarding disconnections for those residential consumers with serious life-threatening conditions that could be aggravated by that disconnection and will furnish that policy to consumers upon request.

[1:26:30] I want to thank those who have told of their experiences in support of this bill. Above all, one Ms. Tina Morrison, who's watching from Griffin. She has a left ventricular assist device, or LVAD, and has definitely told her story regarding the importance of this legislation given the disconnections she experienced despite being able to make payments. I also wanna thank the American Heart Association as well as Representative Mathiak for their advocacy. T- to be clear, Georgia Power, which already has a policy per Public Service Commission rules, as well as Georgia EMC and the Electric Cities of Georgia are each and all in support of this legislation.

[1:27:06] And I thank them all, not only for coming to the table, but also for their commitment to work with us to ensure that each supplier develop the best version of a policy that works for them and their localities. I ask for your support on this legislation, and I am happy to yield for questions if there are any. Representative Rhonda Taylor is recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To your left. Does the gentleman yield? I do. Uh, while this bill, I, I understand the effort and I appreciate the effort, what happens when the bill, um, increases, the total amount gets to be insurmountable for that individual?

[1:27:41] Is there something in this bill that allows them to not have to come up with all of the money, the balance at one time? There is not. That is left to the discretion of the individual supplier. However, we feel strongly that by having that policy, most suppliers are quite ready to be able to refer people not only to payment plans within that supplier, but also to programs like LIHEAP, the Low Income Housing Energy Assistance Program. And so while it does not directly address that, it certainly facilitates those conversations.

[1:28:13] And I've had many experiences with my own constituents working with my EMC as well as Georgia Power to facilitate exactly that. Thank you for the ques- for the answer. Thank you, Representative Taylor. Representative Park Cannon, she has a question. Lady's recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Do you yield? I do. So does this help people with serious medical conditions to charge their medical equipment, to refrigerate their medicines? Can you just tell us a little bit more? E- exactly that, and, uh, Ms.

[1:28:44] Morrison's experience is a perfect example of that. She was disconnected despite having the LVAD, which very much relies on electricity to be able to charge it and keep it running. And of course, there are other conditions that are quite, uh, serious that specifically require that electricity, including the refrigeration example you mentioned. So yes, absolutely, in those cases, this would assist. Thank you. Do you further yield? I do. Thank you so much. And so would you say that this is a preventative measure for our growing healthcare costs in Georgia, that this would be something that could actually prevent people from fatalities or having to go to the emergency room, things as such?

[1:29:23] Absolutely. We know that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, as my mom always states. And so if we can prevent people's already serious conditions from becoming not only fatal, but worsening even if it's not fatal, not only will we preserve their lives and their dignity, but also lower healthcare costs both for them as well as for our healthcare system as a whole. Gentleman, yield for one more. I do. Representative Lauren McDonald is recognized for a question. Does the gentleman yield? I do. Uh, do you have a list of all these illnesses, or is mental health included in this as an illness that would q- qualify for this?

[1:30:00] That's a great question, and we did discuss that, uh, in committee. There are general definitions within the code as to what consists a serious condition. But ultimately in the amended version, or rather in the substitute version, we felt that, uh, A, with respect to the PSE rules that already exist, that that system was working well enough for that supplier, in that case Georgia Power, to be able to define that, and two, that we still wanted to leave it with some discretion, depending on the size of the utility, for example, to be able to state what does and does not qualify.

[1:30:31] As we discovered in committee, not one policy will fit every single person, so that is intentionally by discretion. The gentleman has no further questions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and again, I ask for your support. Thanks for the work on the bill. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill?

[1:31:02] Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no, and Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[1:31:17] Have all members voted?

[1:31:58] All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill six forty-one, the yeas are one hundred thirty-four, the nays are twenty-eight. This bill having received a requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed.

[1:32:24] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill six six eight, six hundred and sixty-eight?

[1:32:34] House Bill six hundred and sixty-eight by Representative Thomas and the twenty-first and others to be entitled an act to amend Title 16, Chapter 4, and Title 30 and Chapter 6 of Title 40 in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to crimes and offenses, rights of persons with disabilities, and uniform rules of the road, respectively. So as to change reference to assistance and guide dogs to service dogs. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Public and Community Health, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[1:33:07] Representative Brad Thomas is recognized to present House Bill 668. The gentleman will suspend for a second.

[1:33:20] The gentleman's recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. I rise today to present House Bill 668, a bill that at its core is about one thing, keeping faith with Georgians who depend on service dogs to live full, independent lives. This legislation d- d- does several important things by modernizing our law and protecting the dogs that protect our most valuable citizens. Right now, Georgia statute uses a patchwork of terms guide dog and assistant dog spread throughout our criminal code and our disability rights code.

[1:33:51] The Americans for Disabili- with Disabilities Act, the federal law, uses one term, service animal. HB 668 brings Georgia statutes into alignment by adopting a single, clear, unified term, service dog. When a police officer responds to an incident, when a prosecutor builds a case, when a business tries to determine legal obligations, clarity in the law saves time, prevents errors, and protects rights. This bill creates one term consistent across Title 16, 30, and 40, and I believe that's good legislating.

[1:34:23] For a veteran who has P- PTSD, a service dog is a lifeline. For a child with epilepsy, a service dog is an early warning system. A Georgian who is blind or deaf, service dogs are their eyes and ears. These animals are pr- precisely trained, often for two to or more years, at costs exceeding twenty-five thousand dollars per dog. They're working animals, and their role is irreplace- irreplaceable. Yet Georgia current law, if someone intentionally kills or harms a service dog, the legal remedy is largely limited to property damage statutes.

[1:34:55] I believe we can all agree a service dog is not a pl- piece of property, and harming one is not like smashing a windshield. HB 668 creates specific criminal offense for intentionally and knowingly causing the death of a physical harm to a service dog. In closing, my fellow members, HB 668 is about a veteran who depends on his dog to get through the day. It's about a child whose dog can't detect seizures before it happens. And it's about making sure that when Georgians play by the rules, the law backs them up. This b- uh, this bill passed committee with strong support.

[1:35:26] I've worked on, on a personal note, I've worked on this bill for five years. There's a young lady that's up in the gallery. Her name is Kasey Nicole Whitworth, and she has worked with me for five years to get this bill here to this day. If, if, uh, if everybody could please recognize her.

[1:35:47] And with that, Mr. Speaker, I'll take one question.

[1:35:54] With that, Mr. Speaker, I'll yield for one question out of respect for the time for my fellow members.

[1:36:00] Well, I have one, but I'll let Representative Seabaugh take my time. I'll yield to him. The gentleman's recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield? I do. Is it not true that these animals are life-changing for their handlers and just simply amazing animals all around? They are, and they make the big, a huge difference for the people that rely on them on their everyday lives. Karma's the name. Oh, and by the way, her dog's name is Karma. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield the floor. Gentleman yields the floor.

[1:36:30] We do have a speaker, Representative Park Cannon, has signed up to speak in favor of the bill. Lady has about five minutes.

[1:36:43] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am so incredibly thrilled that this bill has made it to the floor, and just wanted to add some context to what we're really working on right now. Of course, we understand that there should be crimes for falsely claiming a serve do- a service dog, but there should also be protections for individuals who actually need these service dogs. And so what are some of the benefits of having a service dog? Well, they can greatly improve the quality of life for individuals with either mental or physical disabilities.

[1:37:22] And there are a lot of factors to be considered here. One of those could be mobility assistance for individuals who have limited mobilities, people who use wheelchairs, or people who need help ambulating. This, of course, can help them to open doors. This can help them to press buttons, help them to turn light switches on and light switches off. And in real time, sometimes when items are out of reach, they can help them to get to them.

[1:37:53] This bill expands the definition of individuals who can utilize service dogs, and it actually moves beyond some of the areas that we used to include and makes it so that it's not only those who are physically disabled and blind or deaf, but actually secures rights for other accommodations. Did you know that service dogs can also help detect allergies? Many of you know that the pollen season is among us here in Georgia, and not only are there external allergies, but there are, of course, food allergies.

[1:38:31] And sometimes these food allergies or insect allergies can really wreak havoc and be potentially life-threatening for individuals. So when dogs are specially trained to be able to detect those allergies, it can be super helpful. As many of us know, we have pets at home. I have two small dogs at home. They are not trained service animals, but they certainly provide some level of mental health support.

[1:39:01] You know, specifically, service dogs actually can help with post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder. And for many of those individuals who could otherwise have self-injurious behavior, this could help them to move past it. As we close out in thinking about this important piece of legislation, I too want to thank Casey for the work that you have done. It's always a pleasure to see you in the community as a member of the LGBTQ community.

[1:39:36] Seeing you sometimes is really just a perk. And of course, you come with a really cute and wonderfully working dog too. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I encourage you to vote yes on this bill, and I yield the well.

[1:39:51] The lady's yielded the well. That completes our comments on House Bill 668. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[1:40:36] Have all members voted? All members voted.

[1:40:48] All members have voted. All right, get to it. Burning daylight. Oh, no, we've already burned all the daylight. There you go. All members have now voted. Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 668, the yeas are 168, the nays are zero. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Thank you.

[1:41:16] Thank you, Representative Thomas.

[1:41:25] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1166? 1166.

[1:41:38] House Bill 1166 by Representative Oliver of the 84th and others to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 66 to Title 36 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to zoning procedures as to pertaining to counties and municipal corporations so as to provide that zoning decisions shall not affect or be required for certain residential dwellings of 400 square feet or fewer. This bill having referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[1:42:10] Representative Tangie Herring is recognized to speak to the bill. Representative Herring.

[1:42:16] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members of the House.

[1:42:18] Gentle- gentlelady will suspend for a moment.

[1:42:26] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members of the House. House Bill 1166 is about families. It allows parents, grandparents, and adult children to stay together on the same property when life circumstances hit. The bill simply says that on residential property, a homeowner may build one secondary dwelling of 400 square feet or less without going through a zoning decision. That small space could provide housing for a grandmother who is no longer able to live on her own, an adult child getting back on their feet, or a caregiver who needs to live nearby.

[1:43:07] It also creates creative housing options for our workforce. That small unit can be rented to a first-year teacher just starting a career, a first responder who is serving our community, or another essential worker who may not yet be able to afford a home or an apartment. I was happy to work with the committee and other stakeholders to ensure that this bill works for all parties involved. This legislation is also about strengthening, strengthening property rights, economic opportunity, and it allows homeowners to responsibly use their property to generate supplemental income, support seniors on a fixed income, and help families build generational stability while expanding housing options for teachers, nurses, first responders, and service workers.

[1:44:02] Importantly, this bill maintains safeguards. Local governments will still control building codes, septic systems, floor plan protections, and other health and safety regulations. And it is limited to one secondary unit per parcel. Members, this is a market-driven solution that expands opportunity without raising taxes or requiring new government spending.

[1:44:33] I respectfully ask for your favorable vote, and I will be happy, Mr. Speaker, to take two questions out of respect for time, because I know there is a speaker to the bill.

[1:44:43] There is a speaker. Representative Flournoy, to your left.

[1:44:48] Thank you.

[1:44:49] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the gentlelady yield?

[1:44:51] I, I will to my dear friend.

[1:44:53] So just for, um, a greater understanding, with our aging, um, population, would this bill allow for another alternative for those families that instead of placing their loved ones in assisted living could just have them on their premises with them?

[1:45:10] Yes, it does.

[1:45:11] Thank you for the bill.

[1:45:14] Representative Washburn is recognized for a question.

[1:45:17] Uh, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[1:45:19] To your left.

[1:45:19] Will the gentlelady yield for a question?

[1:45:21] Yes, I will for my Maconite.

[1:45:24] Is it not true that this, uh, suggestion for this type of, uh, ADU unit has been, being suggested now for several years to address our housing shortage and housing crisis?

[1:45:36] Yes, it is. Thank you.

[1:45:37] Thank you so much for bringing this bill.

[1:45:40] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And with that, I will yield the well.

[1:45:44] Lady's yielded the well. She had a couple more questions, but, um, I wanna hear from Rep- Representative Mary Margaret Oliver. That's what I came for tonight. I've been missing her in the well. Representative Oliver is recognized.

[1:45:59] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. H- I'm very happy to join with Representative Herring in support of this bill. We had an excellent opportunity to discuss this issue in a wide variety of ways at Government Affairs. I thank the chairman for this opportunity. It's the first time really we had a very s- detailed and specific discussion from GMA and from home builders and from the realtors. Whether you're a small, medium, or large c- county, we know we need more housing options.

[1:46:30] And in many different ways, other housing options need to be brought forward to this body with all our diversity of ideas and participation in housing options for us to discuss this issue. I'm very grateful that we have an opportunity to move this issue forward. Thank you very much. A group of us have been working on housing options, uh, tenant rights enhancements, and other incentives to create more doors, more opportunity for housing options that could be more affordable, like small houses less than 400 square feet.

[1:47:07] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing this bill to come forward. And for all of you, I ask for your favorable support. And when this issue comes to your community, which it will, this bill will give you additional options. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[1:47:22] Thank you for your advocacy for this bill. It's a good proposition. That completes our discussion on House Bill 1116. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes.

[1:47:53] All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[1:48:21] Have all members voted?

[1:48:27] Yes.

[1:48:27] All members voted. If so-

[1:48:33] Yes

[1:48:33] ... Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1166, the yays are 111, the nays are 50. This bill having exceeded the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption of House Bill 421, 421?

[1:48:51] House Bill 421 by Representative Taylor and 173rd and others be entitled an act to amend Title 16 in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to crimes and offenses so as to establish the offense of traveling to meet a minor for indecent purposes. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Judiciary-Non-Civil, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[1:49:18] Lady will suspend just for a moment or two. Let's, uh, make sure the members can hear the presentation. Lady will proceed.

[1:49:30] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Member of the House, this evening I bring you House Bill 421, LC 4817 80S. This bill amends Code Section 16-6-5 relating to enticing a child for indecent purposes. This bill has been in the works for several years. In fact, our beloved Chair Lady Ba- Mandi Ballinger co-signed and dedicated time to get this bill passed. I'd like to thank the Judiciary-Non-Civil chairman and the committee for their help in perfecting this bill.

[1:50:04] It came to my attention several years ago by a detective who worked the case. It is the result of an unfortunate incident. A predator from another state contacted a young teenager on the internet. They communicated for several weeks, then the man came to town, went to the teenager's home, where he proceeded to make advances to the teenager. The father responded to some unusual noises and found the man in the boy's bedroom. Though his, um, intentions were obvious, no act had been committed.

[1:50:34] Law enforcement came and the man was arrested and charged, but we discovered Georgia had no law for traveling from another state. Our neighboring states like Florida and Alabama do. The judge dismissed the charges and the man was let go. He went on to commit the same crime in other states. The detective who worked this case is now our sheriff and has actually testified about this man in other states. To correct this matter, the bill adds in section one, a person commits the offense of enticing a child for indecent purposes when he or she solicits, entices, or takes any child under the age of 16 to any place whatsoever, and we are adding, or travels from another state for the purposes of child molestation or indecent acts.

[1:51:24] Mr. Speaker, members of the House, this is a very simple one-page bill, but it fixes a very serious issue. It will help to protect our children from sexual predators. If there are no questions, I'll ask for your favorable consideration-

[1:51:39] Gen-

[1:51:39] ... for House Bill 421.

[1:51:41] Gentleha- lady has one question. Representative Carmen Rice to your left.

[1:51:46] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentle lady yield?

[1:51:48] Yes, I do.

[1:51:49] Thank you very much for carrying this bill. Does this not, does House Bill 421 not ensure that predators that come to Georgia can be prosecuted for harming our children?

[1:51:59] Yes. Thank you.

[1:52:00] Thank you.

[1:52:00] That's exactly what it does. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[1:52:05] Representative Westbrook to your right, towards the back, is recognized for a question.

[1:52:10] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentle lady yield?

[1:52:12] Yes, I do.

[1:52:14] Will the Romeo and Juliet exception in OCGA Section 16-6-4B2 apply? So in other words, a 15-year-old and a 13-year-old across state lines?

[1:52:26] This does not ta- touch any other part of the legislation. It affects just here. That's all it does. Thank you.

[1:52:31] Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[1:52:33] Lady has no further questions.

[1:52:35] Thank you. I appreciate your favorable consideration.

[1:52:40] Lady's yielded the will. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee, committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now, shall this bill now pass? All in favor to pass this bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[1:53:25] Have all members voted? All members voted. If so, Mr. Clerk will

[1:53:37] lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 421, the yeas are 164, the nays are zero. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. All right. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption of House Bill 382? 382.

[1:53:59] House Bill 382 by Representative Stevens. The 164th and others to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 16-13-25 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to Schedule I controlled substances so as to revise a provision relating to psilocybin. This bill having referred to the Committee on Health, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[1:54:22] Chairman Stevens is recognized to present House Bill 382.

[1:54:27] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, the House, uh, House Bill 382, uh, is essentially the addition of two drugs that have not been released yet. Some of you may remember a couple of days ago we did the annual drug update bill.

[1:54:46] Gentleman will suspend just for a moment. He uses some technical terms here. Y'all need to be paying attention.

[1:54:56] Proceed.

[1:54:57] This is one of those cases where eventually something really good comes out of perseverance, even though you're told no time after time. Um, if you'll look on section two of the bill, it's, um, it talks about lysergic acid diethylamide, and also in section three, talking about psilocybin. Both of those drugs are class one narcotic drugs. They have no medical use. Highly addictive. But ladies and gentlemen, we had some research going on over the past few years from our very own Emory University.

[1:55:32] We've got these, both of these drugs about to be released, but they cannot be, of course, put on the drug update list prospectively. The first one you see here is gonna be a drug that hasn't been the newest drug to come in for this particular disease, post-traumatic stress syndrome, has been maybe a couple of decades. The second one there, psilocybin, is gonna be used to treat life-threatening, severe-type depression. Both of these drugs, th- thank goodness the, um, Drugs and Narcotic Agency, the Board of Pharmacy, worked with these pharmaceutical companies to work out a way so that the minute these drugs become approved by the FDA- the patients that need them so desperately will be available to them.

[1:56:18] In addition, there's a couple of things in there with pharmacy technician supervision, but I truly hope that you'll vote for this bill and let's send some hope to these families and folks that have suffered from PTSD, maybe as far back as the Vietnam War. The time has come, and if you'll vote for this bill, it'll, you'll be a hero but, to a lot of these folks. Mr. Speaker, I'll take any questions if there are any. Chairman Tarvin, to your right in the back, is recognized for a question. Gentleman yield? Yes, sir.

[1:56:49] Is it not true that there's research that shows that this is a very effective drug- Yes, sir ... for our military guys that, and it's almost like self-healing when they get in the, get into a mindset that they're n- don't have the fears and it clears their mind, and it's been proven to be a very good drug? The gentleman's correct, and I watched one of my good friends from- I, I thank you very much for bringing this bill. I think it's very important. Thank you, Mr. Representative. I watched my good friend that sat right over there for a whole lot of years that suffered with this disease, and thank goodness there's hope with this vote.

[1:57:22] Chairman Bonner, to your right, is recognized for a question.

[1:57:29] I yield.

[1:57:35] Thank you. Does gentleman yield? Yes, sir. I yield. Is, is it not true that this is an issue you've been working on for a number of years now, and each time that you've, uh, asked how this can best help our veteran community and access, uh, to these medications is going to help our brave men and women who suffer from these traumatic conditions? Thank you so much, Representative, and I am extremely honored to bring this forth to this body that can help some folks that need it. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I'll yield the well.

[1:58:06] Chairman Stevens, thanks for your persistence in getting this done. I think it's gonna do, make a big change, uh, opportunity for a lot of people to get well. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? The Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the commode- committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes.

[1:58:38] All those opposed will vote no, and Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[1:58:58] All members voted? All members voted. Chairman Blackmon, do you want to vote?

[1:59:08] All members voted.

[1:59:12] If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 382, the yays are 167, the nays are zero. This bill having received a requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed.

[2:00:01] Mr. Clerk, will you read, read the caption to House Bill 1116? House Bill 1116 by Representative Blackmon and the 146 to be entitled an act to amend chapters five and eight of the, of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to ad valorem taxation to property and sales and use taxes respectively so as to provide for the acceptance of tax digests in the event of a publication error made by a newspaper.

[2:00:31] This bill having been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by Rules Committee substitute.

[2:00:50] We're gonna stand at ease just for a minute and let the paperwork catch up with our pace. Y'all making a good pace. Thank you for that. Let's take a break. Take a deep breath. Go get a Coke. Maybe we can- Or a cup of coffee.

[2:01:14] Chairman of Rules.

[2:01:25] I'm running out of material, Mr. Chairman. How about if we stand at ease and let you go, uh, put another little supplemental rules calendar on? Would you be up for that? Why don't you tell them what you're gonna do? Um, if you would, please, would the members of the Rules Committee meet me over in 341 right now?

[2:01:47] Temporary pause. All Rules Committee members over to your haven.

[2:39:28] Members, we're hard at work passing out this c- this calendar. So if y'all will check if you have the rules substitute to House Bill 1116. Let me give you the LC number on it. It's 339902S. 339902S. Charlice has it. Does anyone not have? She has it. That row has it.

[2:40:02] Just got it.

[2:40:05] So we have some dedicated pages that are getting, helping us get things out.

[2:40:58] Rep- Representative Blackmon.

[2:41:32] All right. All members, all members, I think we have,

[2:41:37] I think we have, everything's passed. All good.

[2:41:45] No, he's in the Ho- in the aisle.

[2:41:51] All members will come to the floor. We'll, um, get this thing wound up and get started again. All members, please come to the floor. Ring the bell, Mr. Clerk.

[2:42:28] All members, please come to the floor.

[2:42:35] Mr. Clerk, how about read the caption to House Bill 1116? House Bill 1116 by Representative Blackmon of the 146 and others to be entitled an act to amend Chapters 5 and 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to ad valorem taxation of property and sales and use taxes respectively, so as to provide for the acceptance of tax digests in the event of a publication error made by a newspaper. This bill, this bill having been assigned to the Committee of Ways and Means, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by Rules Committee substitute.

[2:43:21] Chairman Blackmon is recognized to present the bill. He's gonna go over and make sure that everyone's on the right LC. So Chairman Blackmon, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, fellow members, bring before you House Bill 1116, LC339902S.

[2:43:47] I believe we have some slides. The second one, uh, this is, uh, again, the HOME Act, and I, just, just to be sure, I doubt we would be talking about this if property taxes were not and had not been on such an unsustainable path for our property owners, and particularly our homeowners.

[2:44:13] As you see the board, we've seen over the last few years, and this is '19 to 2024, a spike, uh, of 49%, whereas median household income is at a more modest increase of 29%, and then you see the 24%, uh, for what is CPI. The next, uh, slide looks at sales tax and a similar trajectory increase of up to 50%.

[2:44:49] And then again, uh, you see the median household income and our local, um, excuse me, the CPI at 29 and 24 respectively. So again, I think as we have discussed prior, that's, uh, $10 billion increases in, uh, local revenue from 2019 to 2024, and, uh, homestead property tax falls somewhere, uh, uh, on our estimates between $5 and $6 billion.

[2:45:21] With that, I, uh, I'm gonna try to run through the provisions of the bill, uh, answer a few questions. Um, uh, but again, our intent is to stem what is an unsustainable path for our homeowners and our property owners across the state. Part one is the, the name, the, the HOME Act, Home Ownership Opportunity and Market Equalization Act of 2026. Part two, three, and four have all kind of been brought to us by the organizations.

[2:45:53] Part two limits the local sales tax to the current five-penny cap. It leaves MARTA and existing MOSTs, um, as they are. Again, uh, part three is, uh, discusses the transition from existing, um, pennies to an LHOST which would allow, um, locals to reduce homestead property tax as opposed to just, uh, regular property tax across the board.

[2:46:29] It also enables the, uh, FLOST and it, uh, permits the same, uh, transition. Part four, again, largely written by those organizations, but it details the LHOST provisions very similar to other, uh, local sales tax used in that same space. Part five was in the original version, and again, I sh- I should go back, two, three, and four are all parts that were in existing transition from the existing version to this, uh, LC.

[2:47:06] The revenue caps were in a prior version, and what they do is they would, uh, actually cap property tax, uh, ad valorem property tax at 3% or CPI, the greater of the two. Again, if you go back to the previous slide on the $6.5 billion, you can see that that would've been a much more modest number if we're looking at, at these caps. It does include ex- exceptions. Um, 36 states provide for some sort of revenue cap at the local level, so this is not unique or new.

[2:47:38] Part six is an additional part that was requested. Um, we see this from the, the comeback in from the Tax Foundation and some, uh, some others, uh, AFP, which is part of Truth in Taxation. As they see it nationally, it actually enhances our Taxpayer Bill of Rights, so it, um, requires that any increases in sales tax, um, that they be, um, put up for referendum only two times per year.

[2:48:09] And then it requires notification if there is an increase over and above the rollback rate to each taxpayer by mail, or they can do, or they can ask for it electronically, and that, that would be, uh, provided.

[2:48:24] Finally, there are, uh, in part nine you have a non-binding ballot question, and part 10, it indicates that the intent of the legislature is as the sunset comes about of the, uh, high-tech data center technology, um, tax exemption, that those funds and that revenue would be used to backfill homestead property tax or to assist locals, um, to reduce homestead property tax I should say.

[2:48:59] Mr. Speaker, um, there are a couple other provisions that are cleanup. Um, I think one of them has to do with the duty to notify if you d- no longer have a homestead exemption, and then one referencing back assessments and how those would be handled. I'd be more than happy to try to answer any questions, but that is the summary of the bill once again. You have a couple of questions no doubt, and they're growing by the minute. Representative Drenner is recognized for a question over to your left.

[2:49:31] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Does the gentleman yield? Yes, I do. Mr. Chairman, is it not true that if Section 3-3 passes, that eliminating the EHOST, that it will eliminate the SPLOST program in DeKalb as well? I think there is a portion of their EHOST that goes to SPLOST, but they retain access to any of the SPLOST measures. None of those would sunset. This would transition it strictly for homestead property tax relief.

[2:50:02] But I did speak with someone in the hall, and they are concerned about that, and I'm happy to try to address that at, if, if the bill were to move forward, uh, in, in, a- as it moves through the process. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, in DeKalb they both are tied together. The EHOST and the SPLOST are statutorily connected. And so if this in fact passes as is, then the SPLOST program in DeKalb will be negatively impacted. And I appreciate the offer to work- Yes ...

[2:50:32] with you going forward. Thank you, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. Glad to, glad to entertain that change, as we have so many. Representative Kelly in the back to your right is representative for, recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the gentleman yield? I will. Chairman Blackmon, as we look at, uh, the provisions that now will require a mailing or an electronic mail, uh, for notification should municipalities and counties not roll back their millage rate effectively and create an increase, would that not provide more transparency to our taxpayers as to the spending levels of our local governments?

[2:51:10] Uh, I believe the gentleman knows of what he speaks. Uh, the newspaper nowadays is not circulated quite as widely and broadly, uh, and certainly is more electronic, and I, I think that provides some additional notification to our taxpayers. Yes, sir. Representative Jasmine Clark to your left is recognized for a question.

[2:51:30] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield? I do. So we just had a vote on House Resolution 1114 that is, um, did not pass the other day. And so now we have this bill, um, that I assume before was enabling legislation. Can you explain to me what happens if this bill passes but 1114 does not pass? Uh, this bill would be enacted as is. It, it, it does not have any measures that eliminates revenue, um, from a, for a homestead exemption for local governments.

[2:52:08] Th- this is strictly the measures that I laid forward and some options on sales tax, which I believe Representative Cannon will speak to later. So, uh, this would, would stand alone as a general bill by itself. Thank you. Thank you. Representative Burnell, to your left, is recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the chairman yield? Uh, ye- yes, ma'am, I do. Um, was it just last year that we asked, um, citizens to vote for the homestead, that bill, and then we had all this confusion, and so we keep changing and changing.

[2:52:49] And so if this one was to go, this would also crea- create a lot of confusion for our residents, because that one had a lot of gaps. So is there gonna be something different with this h- uh, Constitution amendment? Th- this is not a constitutional amendment. This is just a general bill. Um- But even with this, I mean, I just remember we told everybody to vote yes, and they did, and then we came back and told them their vote didn't count because you all the, changed all the rules.

[2:53:20] So I'm, I'm confused. I, I don't think anybody changed the rules. The ballot question provided for an, an opt-out, but I, I don't believe we thought if the citizens voted for it that that many local governments would opt out, and they did. And again, that keeps the property tax, um, increases, I think, at a, at, you know, at that same sim- or similar trajectory. Now, it does cap homestead property tax assessments, and then it provided for the FLOS, which remains intact, which is for all properties to be reduced.

[2:53:51] So again, these are supplementary measures, and, um, we continue to try to find ways to give homeowners and taxpayers relief. And we believe- Okay ... this would, uh, would long-term provide some guardrails and some guidelines that would assist in that. And again, that's from input from our, our, our locals, from our organizations, from listening for many, many, many months here now. And, um, obviously- W- ... I, I, I, I'd wanna thank even Representative- Would you yield for another question? Oh, yes, ma'am.

[2:54:21] Okay. So on these, uh, slides, we keep talking about things being expensive for our residents. So wouldn't it be easier if we just raised the minimum wage so people would make more money, and th- so then even... Things are going up, but our, their wages aren't going up. Yeah. I, uh, I, I'm sure there are plenty of different answers for that. I, I think they're two slides later. Um, maybe if we move to the next slide if possible, and then the final third sl- There.

[2:54:57] That, that actually reflects rent as, um, as a, a portion of the, uh, of, of where it has gone and how it measures up, uh, up against what property tax is doing. So you see, again, sales tax increases to 50%, property tax at 49%, rent to 45%. Again, I think our caps, if you look, are closer and gonna align with that CPI or median average income, and you may bring rent down with it. I think it stands to reason based on some of the feedback that we've received.

[2:55:29] So you would, uh, be helping some residents in that capacity as well. Thank you. Thank you.

[2:55:38] Gentleman, yield for another question? Yes, sir. I'd be happy to yield. Representative, Representative Angela Moore, to your left, in the back. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield? Yes, ma'am. Um, wanted to find out, I know that our chair for our delegation in DeKalb asked you about our ESPLOST, but it's also connected to the E- EHOST as well, SPLOST and EHOST. And this bill will be statewide. Have you considered every county in this bill, how it would negatively impact us?

[2:56:11] Have we, have we contemplated... Well, again, um, these provisions were in the previous legislation and were brought to us by the organizations. Very nice. So again, I'm gonna let Representative Cannon speak a little bit more to the, the, the sales tax, as he is a city administrator, and I think he has some, some things he wants to add to this. But we certainly have, and if we've missed something, I'd be, as I, as I mentioned to the gentlelady before, be happy to, to go back and take a look at it. And does the gentleman further yield?

[2:56:42] Yes, ma'am. Have you all considered that in some counties, the SPLOST and EHOST are connected, and by passing this bill, it will unconnect it? It would devastate many of us in, in the county. How many, uh, pennies, or if I may ask, how many pennies, uh, uh, do y'all have currently? I want to say two to three. We are one of the largest counties in the state.

[2:57:13] Um, and I don't... I think that we're at 3%, three pennies at the moment. What this would do is enable the LHOST to actually run without a referendum up to two different terms, so up to 2037, and then an additional 10-year period without a referendum. Mm. Um, so you would have that option, and then a SPLOST is, continues to be an option for all counties, so that could be put up for referendum. Mm. So- Thank you ... it, it, it actually-

[2:57:43] ... is, is potentially something that could be of benefit if that's what it is in fact you're looking for. So you get homestead property tax relief, uh, for your homeowners, which you have as a portion of that, and then you have the SPLOST that would be voted on. Right now, you have to vote on both of those together, as I understand it. But again, as I mentioned to, uh, before, be happy to take a look at that and try to make any corrections, uh, as, uh, your local delegation provides information to us.

[2:58:12] And just one more concern if you'll continue to yield.

[2:58:14] Yes, ma'am.

[2:58:16] There are many of the, of the counties that have opted out, but I represent one county that did not opt out. How will this impact the counties who did not opt out?

[2:58:27] This, the, the provisions here are, are independent other than what we see as the FLOST, so it, it enables further property tax reduction.

[2:58:37] Okay.

[2:58:42] Well, thank you.

[2:58:43] Jim, will you yield for another question?

[2:58:45] I think, uh, we've got a long evening here, and I, I am going to, uh, I know we'll be back in this well probably at some point, but I'm gonna yield the well and let some others have their say. Mr. Speaker, I ask for this body's favorable consideration. Thank you.

[2:59:01] Yes, we do have a number of folks signed up to speak up that are opposed, and those that are in favor. We have a minority report, and in chair's time. For those opposed, I'm going to allow 15 minutes total. For those in favor, 15 minutes total, and I'm gonna recognize Whip Park for the first speaker. Whip Park.

[2:59:24] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good evening, members, ladies and gentlemen who may be watching our proceedings. As we discuss this critically important issue of trying to provide property tax relief, how unfortunate it is to see the actions of the majority party at play today in which for weeks they talk about the importance of property taxes, and yet over and over and over again we have different versions that no one is truly able to understand what is in there.

[3:00:04] Given the importance of this issue, the minority party has simply requested the time to allow experts to understand the impact of this bill on our communities. And now here we stand on crossover day with House Bill 1116 recommitted earlier today, coming out in a completely different version that no one truly understands what is in here.

[3:00:35] Is this how the minority party governs, or majority party governs?

[3:00:47] Is this how the majority party governs on the issue of property taxes? In which again, an issue of such importance, we have a last-minute bill in which G- GM- GMA, that represents all the cities of Georgia, have raised significant concerns because they just received it. This is a bad bill because we don't know what's in here, and we don't understand the impact, the impact of this piece of legislation.

[3:01:22] Now, ladies and gentlemen, it is my understanding that this bill is also unconstitutional.

[3:01:31] Per Georgia's Constitution, Article 7, Section 2, Paragraph 2, laws that create or expand tax exemptions must pass by two-thirds, two-thirds of the member in each chamber. That means 120 votes have to be on that board if this is to pass in accordance with the Georgia State Constitution. This bill creates a new, establishes a Local Homestead Option Sales Tax, an LHOS.

[3:02:06] Again, the Georgia State Constitution requires a two-thirds vote on this bill that no one truly understands what is in. The people of Georgia deserve better than this politics.

[3:02:23] Amen.

[3:02:23] The people of Georgia deserve good public policy that has been vetted by experts such that we do not harm them. We saw in the prior version an effort that would've blown a multi-billion dollar hole in local government's budgets. I heard from this well those who supported that previous version that was voted down or did not re- receive the requisite number of votes talk about how...

[3:02:55] I just lost my train of thought. Apologies.

[3:03:00] Let me help you.

[3:03:02] Thank you. The last thing I want to mention on this bill is that, again, it's so bad I can't think. I want y'all to look on lines, the, page 31 of this bill that just came out, that no one has truly completely digested or read, in which they are putting, they are trying, the majority party is trying to put a question on the November ballot that says, "Should the State of Georgia provide complete property tax relief for homeowners by exempting homestead exemptions from ad valorem taxation by counties, muc- municipalities, and local school systems?" This is a clear reminder that the majority party is playing politics with the suffering of Georgians on the issue of property tax relief.

[3:03:57] So I urge every single member here in this body to vote no to this terrible piece of legislation. Vote no to preserve the integrity of the House and that this is not how we should be governing. Vote no to, again, the politicization of the challenges and suffering of everyday Georgians. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield.

[3:04:27] The gentleman has yielded the will. Representative Gissler is recognized to speak.

[3:04:41] The gentleman's recognized.

[3:04:47] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, um, when I signed up to speak for this, I had a real zinger of a speech all, all ready to go, but everything changed. I, I don't know what's in here. Um, so I'll start off with what I was gonna say anyway, and that is, you know, I talked to you guys the other day when we voted on the resolution. Um, you know, as a newly elected l- uh, legislator, I went around to county commissioners in my district, made sure to talk to them before I came up here and understand what they were looking for.

[3:05:25] One of the county commissioners looked me in the eye in this one-on-one meeting. He said, "No man, woman or child in the state of Georgia is safe when the General Assembly is in session." I think I understand why.

[3:05:44] So I went back up for a town hall the other day a couple weeks ago. That same commissioner... It, it wasn't even about this. It was about a, a SPLOST, you know, referendum coming up, um, and what the projects were on that. And when they stopped to take questions, the very first question from someone in the audience was about this whole property tax conversation going on here in this house. And that commissioner spoke up. He said the same thing. "No man, woman or child in the state of Georgia is safe when this body is in session." And then he looked at me since he saw me in the audience.

[3:06:20] I was just there to, to witness what was going on in the town hall. And he asked me, "Representative Gissler, is there something in this bill that says you're gonna, the state is gonna cover our sheriff's office budget?" I said, "No, Mr. Commissioner, I don't think there is."

[3:06:39] So here we are. We've got a whole new thing that, that just landed on our desk about a half hour ago, and I see language in here about calling for elections. I see, "Require the proposed annual operating budget resolution of a local board of education to be approved in a referendum election if such resolution would increase certain revenues raised by the local board of education by a certain amount." So now we have to call an election if the school board's budget is gonna increase by a certain amount.

[3:07:13] That's new. I, I don't think that was in the previous bill. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I don't know. Um,

[3:07:22] yeah. So, uh, what we're left with now, I mean, everything's changed. None of the stuff I was gonna say even applies anymore. Um, some of it does, though. This is certainly an ideological bill. You know, we, we heard conversation the other day about how the previous version was not political, but it is certainly ideological. It, it opens the door to drastically cut taxes for the wealthiest while increasing them on working families and renters. In this version, I still don't see how anyone that rents the, the home that they live in in our communities benefits at all.

[3:08:01] They get no relief whatsoever, and they're the ones suffering the most. They're the ones the whole affordability phenomenon appealed to. So yeah, uh, maybe this applies, too. We saw the example of Colquitt County the other day. It, the previous plan worked fine for them. My counties need two or three pennies, and they're already using four of the five that they've got. So we're talking about raising people's taxes, and when those local taxes are raised, that applies to people's necessities.

[3:08:37] It applies to food. So people who are struggling the most, we're raising their cost of living at a minimum, what, 2%, 3%, 4%, depending on where you are. How, how does that work? It doesn't make sense.

[3:08:59] So let me tell you something that, that does make sense. You know, we have 159 counties in this state. That's 159 different ways that this can be handled. In my home county, in Oconee County, two years ago, 2024, we had a, we had a ballot initiative. We voted on 10 different ballot items, and they all passed, and they all had to pass for this to happen. But the outcome was Oconee County expanded local homestead exemptions to $5,000.

[3:09:30] Automatically in 2035, that increases to $10,000.

[3:09:36] When you turn 65 years old without applying for a homestead exemption, you automatically get an additional $10,000 exemption, and when you turn 75, you get another $10,000 exemption. That works for Oconee County That's why local control is important. I get that, from what I've been able to understand from this new version, it, it gives local control, it doesn't mandate that we're g- gonna rip out, you know, property tax revenues from local governments.

[3:10:08] But I- I'm guessing, I don't know. It, it, it's a pretty thick document. I haven't read it all. Um, guess, I guess I'll stop with this. Uh, i- like I said, I'm beginning to understand why that county commissioner told me that when he did. And he looked me in the eye, you could tell he believed it, and I really get it now. I heard about coming here looking out for unfunded mandates, and I've seen plenty of those, and I've seen unintended consequences. And I have to say from looking at the previous version of the bill and what I've been able to decipher from this one, the consequences of this will not be unintended.

[3:10:47] It sounds like they're very intentional. So I will be voting at the, against this, mostly because I don't know what's in it. Um, and I actually reached out today to, to my Republican,

[3:11:04] uh, local officials and asked them, "Have you heard anything about this? 'Cause maybe you've got contacts, you got connections that I don't, and you might know what's in here." And, uh, and they all told me that this is too much change too fast, presented too late, not enough time to review it. We have no idea if this is a good idea or not. So there will be intentional consequences, but I guarantee you there will be unintentional consequences, too. And with that, Mr. Speaker, I will yield the will.

[3:11:40] Gent- gentleman's yield the will. Representative Davis is recognized to speak to the bill.

[3:12:01] Lady has, I'm gonna put some travel time back on the clock. You got three minutes.

[3:12:06] Only three.

[3:12:06] Only three. The gentleman took up your time.

[3:12:10] No problem.

[3:12:16] I'm-

[3:12:17] I, I just... I'm sorry. Uh, it's, uh, okay. Did you tap it?

[3:12:22] Yes, ma'am. Go ahead. L- lady's recognized. We're, we're gonna restart the, the timer to three.

[3:12:30] Lady's recognized.

[3:12:32] Okay. The title of this is The Devil is in the Details. Who in here know what an equalization and a sparsity grant is? Raise your hand. Okay. Uh, a lot of times people don't know what this stuff is, so I like to give an example. It's sort of like having a MasterCard and a Visa, right? It is a way of paying for services and for paying for what? Property and equipment, okay?

[3:13:04] When you look at the issue of equalization and sparsity grants, I want you all to just think for a minute. Do your county accepts equalization and sparsity grants? Do you know if your county or your school system is a donor county or a receiver? Do any of you know? So let me help you.

[3:13:36] We're gonna use the equalization and the sparsity grant to educate you. If you live in DeKalb, Fulton, Cobb, or Forsyth, you are a donor county. That means you are a property tax rich, okay? If you are property tax poor, then you probably live in Gwinnett, 'cause Gwinnett is a receiver.

[3:14:08] Now, how do you know? See, Gwinnett was paid over 23 million in equalization grants in 2023. And in 2024, Gwinnett was paid 88 million. How much was DeKalb, Fulton, and Cobb, and Forsyth paid? In 2023, they were paid zero. In 2024, they were paid zero. See, there's a lot of devil in the cu- in the details that we're not being told.

[3:14:43] If you go and you look up and google equalization grant and sparsity grant, and you ask, "How do we get those funds?" You will see that it is based on property taxes. So whenever you affect those property taxes, you affect those equalization and sparsity grants. But let me un- g- tell you what they don't want you to know. I want you to look at the One Georgia map, right? The One Georgia map up here is a great example of how the devil is in the details.

[3:15:18] You have that large green part that makes up 116 counties. Then you have the light green count, right?

[3:15:29] Lady needs to consider wrapping up.

[3:15:31] It makes up 35. The white, the white is eight. I am saying to you all, the population in the white counties is 4.3 million. The population in the light green is 4.4. You all are getting ready to vote on this property tax. And close to nine million of the people are going-

[3:15:57] It's time for the lady to wrap up. She's ex- her time has expired

[3:16:01] Thank you. Close to nine million of the people are gonna be hurt by this. The 116 make up two million. The devil is in the details and how we-

[3:16:13] The lady will wrap up.

[3:16:15] Thank you.

[3:16:15] Thank you very much.

[3:16:21] We'll move on to speak. Those in favor, they'll have up to 15 minutes. Representative Chas Cannon is rec- is recognized to speak to the bill.

[3:16:34] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know y'all are tired of seeing us up here talking about this issue, and, uh, to be honest, I'm tired of talking about it, too. Um, ready to go home and see my family and spend some time with them and, but before I head south on I-75, uh, I wanna one more time give this issue an- an another, another look. And again, I wanna thank Chair Blackmon for his work on this. I wanna thank him for listening to our local governments, to other members of this body, including myself, who did way too much talking to him.

[3:17:08] Surprised he didn't kick me off the committee for talking so much about this issue. But I also wanna thank him for listening to our property owners, who have been the primary source of government revenue in this state for nearly two centuries. So if you will bear with me, I heard a lot of discussion about how this is gonna work, and I'm just gonna try to bring the temperature down a little bit and walk you through again with some PowerPoint prowess how this will work at the lo- at the local level with the... And this is primarily related to sales tax pennies and how we're managing them at the local level.

[3:17:40] It's about the sales tax pennies. There's no homestead exemption involved in this thing. It's just how you manage your sales tax pennies. So if you'll bear with me for a few slides, and if we can go ahead and bring them up here, um, I will walk you through this. So just bear with me, but all right. Scenario A, there's... I'm gonna walk you through three scenarios, scenario A, B, and C. Scenario A is a county with four sales tax pennies on the county city side. In that typical scenario, the school board would have one, which is the ESPLOST, but this is just a county city.

[3:18:14] We're just impacting county cities. So in this scenario, this county, scenario A, has a SPLOST, a TSPLOST, a LOST, and a FLOST. So that means they opted into 581, and they've passed the FLOST. FLOST is on the ballot. It passed. The SPLOST, no change to it. That's a capital penny. They're buying equipment. They're making building improvements. They're buying, you know, ambulances and pur- pursuit vehicles. TSPLOST, no change to it. They're building, they're building roads and resurfacing, building bridges and that kind of thing.

[3:18:46] There's no change to the TSPLOST penny. There's no change to their FLOST penny if they got a FLOST already in play. All this does is takes their LOST penny, which is already an O&M offset, and repurposes that to address their homestead property tax. There's no loss in revenue. It's the same revenue. They're just prioritizing offsetting a portion of their property tax revenue, and that's the homestead portion. That's all it does. Next slide, please.

[3:19:16] Let me go into that a little bit more. So there's your LOST, which is converted to the LHOST. That's in the language of the bill. That goes specifically towards your homestead property tax reduction. And then because of the FLOST, the FLOST is also offsetting in general property tax. So if there's any leftover from the LHOST, it can offset, offset property tax from what the FLOST does not. And then if there's any leftover after that, that LHOST penny can be used for O&M expenses, just like it is now as a LOST.

[3:19:53] That's the base, that's the gist of what's in this bill. All right, the FLOST is there. Again, if you've got a FLOST, no change. Fle- f- f- the F stands for flexible. If they wanna reclassify as an LHOST, they can, but it doesn't require it. And because that county has opted into 581, the homestead property owners in that county have a cap on their assessment values starting this year. So they're getting the benefit of the cap in the increase for assessments. They're getting the benefit of the OHO- the LL- LHOST offsetting the remaining homestead property tax for those homeowners, and then the FLOST is offsetting everything else: ag, commercial, industrial, resid- non-homestead residential, apartments.

[3:20:41] That's how that's working. Next slide, please. This is scenario B. There's one more after this. Scenario B is a county with three pennies. They've got their SPLOST, their TSPLOST, and a LOST. Okay, this county has not passed their FLOST yet. They've only got three pennies. So again, their SPLOST penny, capital related, no change. TSPLOST penny, capital related, no change. LOST, next slide, same exact thing as in the county with four pennies with their LOST. It's the same thing.

[3:21:13] They're taking that LOST penny, which is again an O&M offset, converting it to an LHOST, which is in the bill, and that revenue from that sales tax penny goes and addresses, prioritizes offsetting the homestead property tax in that county and city. The cities in that county also get the revenue to offset their homestead property tax in the cities. So you've got a city homestead property tax that's being offset. You've got a county homestead property tax that's being offset.

[3:21:46] So if you're living in a city, you're getting a reduction in your city taxes. You're getting a reduction in your county taxes. All right, we're going to the last scenario, scenario C. This is a county that has, again, three pennies, SPLOST, TSPLOST, and FLOST. All right? So there's no change to a county that has this setup. No change. The law, the, the law doesn't, except for the revenue caps on the back of this, the law does not impact this county at all.

[3:22:18] All right, they've got, next slide. This is the last slide. Again, very flexible. Locals can determine how it works. They can reclassify it as an ELHOST if they want to, and then the 581 provisions that county's voted on help cap the assessments on the homestead property in that county. Let me kind of finish up here.

[3:22:41] As I mentioned on Tuesday, I guess is when we talked, consistently the top concern I get about this is, from my constituents, is on property tax. This is a pragmatic, level-headed solution to the problem, and solutions are what we need and that's what the people are asking for. So, and lastly, during the floor debate on this topic in the week, the gentleman from Oconee and Clarke Counties, by the way it's Colquitt County not Colquit County, mentioned that if you live in a $2 million home then you don't, you don't need any property tax reduction.

[3:23:16] You don't deserve any property tax relief. Now I'm fine with having that debate and that discussion, no, no problem, but denying significant and real property tax relief to those who are less well-off just to prevent giving relief to those who are more well-off is not a pragmatic, level-headed solution. I don't have any $2 million homes in my district. My, the average home price in my district's $196,000. So with the last vote we had on that issue, we didn't give those homeowners a chance at relief.

[3:23:53] And like I said before, these are the very same people that we are subjecting multiple property taxes increases at the local government level every year. City, county, school board. So that's your young family just starting out, an older lady who lives alone on fixed income, or an older farmer trying to hold onto their family farm. Those are the everyday Georgians telling us, "Y'all have got to do something about these property taxes." So again,

[3:24:25] I ask you to consider voting in favor of this bill. It is level-headed. It's pragmatic. The locals will be able to manage this.

[3:24:38] The General Assembly, as we know, can make changes to it over time if needed, but the goal is this, the goal is for this to work out in a non-partisan manner.

[3:24:51] In a way that benefits the most people possible in your counties. And if you have questions about it, we have talked to many counties, many cities, many advocacy groups over and over again. If there's any questions about it, we'll be glad to t- to walk you through it one-on-one, or talk to your locals about it one-on-one. Well I think we've been pretty open about that, and as Representative Al Williams said earlier, this is some good news, and we need some good news. So Chairman Blackmon, thank you for your hard work on this.

[3:25:23] And Mr. Speaker, thank you for making this a priority during this session. I will yield the well. Gentleman's yielded the w- the well. Representative Crowe is recognized to speak to the bill. Gentleman's recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, first of all I'd like to make sure we're all singing from the same hymnal so to speak. Uh, this is LC339902S. An earlier speaker commented about what was on line 31.

[3:25:56] Uh, what line 31 actually says in this bill is it says, "Part 1." There is no constitutional question. There is no ballot measure. There is none in here. So you said line 31, so I'm just trying to make sure we're clear. Line 31 says, "Part 1." So, but on to the issue. And we've talked about this and, and Representative Cannon did a great job of explaining how this is gonna work, um, and yes it has changed a lot.

[3:26:28] It's changed a lot because we are trying to talk to the people. Every opponent of this legislation or this ballot measure or this issue we've dealt with over the last couple of days, every person that's come in here and spoke against it has said, "I've heard from my mayor. I've heard from my city councilman. I've heard from my county commissioners." And every time we went back and talked to the folks that represent them, GMA, ACCG. But who we've mostly been talking to are the taxpayers, the homeowners who have been begging for property tax relief in this state.

[3:27:02] We've been working on this. It hasn't been a short-term measure. It's not sudden. We've been working on it for at least the last three years. House Bill 581 I believe was three years ago. And then last year we came back with House Bill 92 to try to help make that even better for people. And this year we came back with a measure to try to give the voters the right to vote on what they wanted to see, and we could not get enough cooperation from the entire chamber to put a question on the ballot to allow the voters to tell us what they wanted to see.

[3:27:34] Well what we're doing now is we're giving the counties and the cities what they've asked for as we've talked to them about this. They've all said, "We would love to give property owners tax relief. We would love to lower property taxes, but we have to be able to offset that revenue." All this measure does now is give them more options, an alternative source of revenue with additional uses of pennies to offset homesteaded property taxes. That's all this measure does. It gives them the option. It gives them the local control to be able to decide how to use these pennies to offset homestead property taxes.

[3:28:09] That's all this measure does. It's a way to help people get into homes. I deal with people trying to buy homes every day.

[3:28:17] And I can tell you that on more than one occasion, a young couple's been trying to buy their first home and they can't get qualified, not because of the principal and interest on the mortgage, but because of the taxes and insurance in their escrow account. That makes them unqualified to buy the home. Or I've talked to an elderly lady who said she may need to sell her home because she can no longer afford to pay her property tax bill. Now, we've heard about how this is a stable form of revenue for the local governments, and it's stable because they can decide how much money they need and adjust the millage rate to raise whatever amount they wanna raise.

[3:28:53] The problem is that the widow who's on a fixed income, she can't change her income to pay that new increased tax bill. That's not right. It's not right that she should worry about losing her home. We are giving the cities and counties every foreseeable option that we can to generate revenue that they need from alternative sources rather than off the backs of property owners and their primary residence. I hope you will agree with us that this is a measured approach, this is a great alternative, and this is something that will help taxpayers get relief.

[3:29:27] Mr. Speaker, I yield the will.

[3:29:29] Gentleman has con- concluded his remarks. He's yielded the will. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? We're-

[3:29:38] Objection.

[3:29:38] State your objection.

[3:29:43] This is unconstitutional. It requires a two-thirds, uh, majority vote.

[3:29:52] That issue has already been addressed. It is not unconstitutional, and your objection's only being offered to slow it down, so we're gonna move on to the minority report. Minority report and the chair's time will have 20 minutes each. We'll start with, um, Representative Floyd Griffin.

[3:30:15] Then Representative Wilkerson.

[3:30:25] Representative Griffin's recognized. Give the gentleman your attention, please.

[3:30:31] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm gonna make my, my comments very short.

[3:30:40] I'm against the bill, and I'm gon- go... I'm gonna vote against the bill. But I want y'all to understand one thing. One thing I learned when I was in the, in the military, and y'all know I speak to that era so often, is something that's called the fog of war. F-O-G. The fog of war. And what that means is that things get so bad that nobody know what in the H is going on.

[3:31:17] Okay? And have you ever been driving in your car and you hit a big fog area, and what goes on? The pucker factor. You know what that means? That your heart start jumping out, you don't know what's going on. And I have been in the fog of war in my car, and I have been in the fog of war in the military, and, a- a- and that's because we don't know what's going on.

[3:31:47] We spent about an hour speaking on this bill a couple of days ago, and all of a sudden, only a few minutes ago, you put this on my desk. And I don't think I'm a dumb man. You know, I think I can do a little speed reading also. But at the same time, I gotta be able to comprehend what I read, and sometime it's more than within a less than an hour, 15 minutes or so.

[3:32:21] Now, I'm gonna finish this up by saying one other thing. Do y'all know what KISS means? Keep it simple, stupid. And this is not stu- uh, this is not, um, a keeping it, uh, simple, stupid. We should not be able to go back to our hometown and try to explain to our people what we have done tonight.

[3:32:52] And I ask you to please vote no on this bill. We come back next year, if we get reelected-

[3:33:02] Yeah

[3:33:03] ... and we do something to make this a better piece of legislation. Let's don't just do something just to do it and say we passed a bill, and we don't know what we've done. Mr. Speaker, I w- I, I yield the will.

[3:33:19] Gentleman's yielded the will. Representative Wilkerson

[3:33:26] is recognized to speak to the bill. Gentleman's recognized.

[3:33:32] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, and, um, today I rise to oppose House Bill 1116. Um, and I...

[3:33:47] Good thing I took a speed reading course when I first started working, 'cause getting a bill this, of magnitude and which never went through committee in this format is, is probably not ideal. Um, and I can understand why it was mentioned earlier why someone referenced a line that didn't exist, 'cause they just got the bill, but the same reason they probably mentioned the fact that there was no ballot question, there is at the end of the report. So I mean, I wouldn't expect that if you turn to line 748 through 753, you see clearly that there is a ballot question on there.

[3:34:19] But again, I don't blame somebody because we just got this bill. Um, I'm assuming we're doing this for property tax relief, right? If we're doing it for property tax relief, every day when you look at your local calendar, um, February 17th as an example, it will say, "Pursuant to Article 7, Section 2, paragraph four of the state constitution, the following local bills relating to homestead exemption require a two-thirds roll call vote for passage." So the reality is either we're giving relief, requires two-thirds, or we're not giving relief, which we are putting a ballot question on here just to make people think that we're doing something because at the end it says, Section 9, um, dash one, line 739 says, "It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to issue the call for a non-binding advisory referendum to determine whether the qualified electors of the state of Georgia that desire there to be complete property tax relief for the homeowners." All the polling tells us that already, because why we're here.

[3:35:26] Should the state of Georgia provide complete property tax relief for homeowners by exempting homestead properties from ad valorem taxation by counties, municipalities, and school systems, when I've been told multiple times this does not impact our schools? I can understand the confusion. You can understand the confusion, because this was done in a rush job. Just because we're walking the hallway and I mentioned that this might be good and you put it in a bill, does not mean it's my bill. Does not mean I agree to the changes. And I think it's unfair to those in the hallway who have made changes.

[3:36:00] And I understand the, the question about DeKalb County because the presentation we saw earlier did not mention eHost or rHost. DeKalb County is very specific where I talked to someone who... And again, let me re- let me start. You don't hear me talk about government. I say government eats. When I talk about people, I'm talking about the constituents that many of you had town hall meetings where we talked to the people that actually vote. And they may have talked to you, but I would love for you to say, "The people in my district want this." I mean, the only, you know, "The people in my district want this." I have not heard that.

[3:36:40] Um, and I'm gonna walk through some very specifics and, and I appreciate it because again, I know that the time is short, but, um, the LOST, the way the LOST works is it, it impacts both, my understanding is it impacts both commercial as well as residential property. The LOST goes away 'cause of sunset, so which means all your commercial property automatically goes up. So all your renters, again, we have another bill where renters are gonna be paying more in, in taxes. We mentioned farms earlier, and to my friend that called me the Cobb County farmer, no, I just don't think anybody who has a farm should be taxed because they will be increased on tax on this because again, we limit it to five acres.

[3:37:15] The average farm is well over five acres, even in Cobb County. So the farmers will be paying more. So it will probably be the largest tax increase we have on farmers because you have taken away that LOST from them, and 144 counties have a LOST. Let's go to line 367, Section 5-2. Code Section 20-2-167 deals with our schools. So we are now capping what schools can do. We're not giving them any new run- revenue sources for the schools and the parents that go there and the students that go there, but what we're saying is your budget cannot go by th- more than 3%.

[3:37:53] So if we hit another recession, which we will at some point, budget goes down, so you have to furlough. We all been when the teachers were furloughed. You come back, economy gets better, you will never be able to get back to where you were before and try to bring those teachers back. Your police get furloughed, you cannot bring them back when the economy comes back 'cause your budget can only go by 3% per year. Um, and again, I apologize, but we just got this bill. Um, with that, that's, you know, again, I'm not sure why the ballot language is on there because we're asking them something to my colleague that pointed out earlier that we asked them before they told us what they wanted and we told them too bad.

[3:38:35] So again, let's not make fake promises. Affordability is an issue. There's a number of bills that are out there. So I'm going to yield the rest of my time to my colleague. Thank you.

[3:38:47] Ladies, recognize and speak to the bill.

[3:38:49] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So I just wanted to share some data that I received from my city. Uh, the city manager sent me some numbers on the impact of what this bill will do. It is going to be a combined revenue loss to Sandy Springs of $52.4 million. You wanna talk about a defund the police bill, um, the total property tax lost, uh, with the, uh, lost is $29 million and between 2027 and 2032, and the annual operating deficits cumulative are actually $201.1 million.

[3:39:36] So these real world consequences, my city has great police officers. We treat them really well. I'm also, I've also heard from the city of Dunwoody. They are not excited about it. The city of Brookhaven. All of my cities are telling me that it is going to gut their operations. So we're talking schools, police. This, this is insane. And when your own slides talk about a reduction in the homestead, uh, exemption, I don't know how that's not a violation of the Constitution. This should require a two-thirds vote, and y'all know it, and you're going to put, you're, you're asking for litigation.

[3:40:14] So not only are the taxpayers gonna lose their services in their cities, they're gonna pay for this litigation that you know is unconstitutional. So please vote no.

[3:40:28] The lady has yielded the well.

[3:40:37] That concludes the minority report. Now we'll have chairman's time up to 20 minutes.

[3:40:45] Chairman Blackmon is recognized for whatever part of that 20 minutes he would like to take. Gentleman's recognized.

[3:40:54] I, I won't take much time. Um, Mr. Speaker, um, gosh, I'm, I'm not sure where to begin. Um, all the, all the parts that I went through have been put out there multiple times. Um, part six is truth in taxation. It enhances our Taxpayer Bill of Rights. That's a new provision, the only new provision.

[3:41:31] I, it does not raise sales tax. Nothing in this raises sales tax. Does not impact equalization or local fair share. There is no homestead exemption mentioned in here. This puts a cap on all property taxes. If we, going back to the, the slides, I think the most outrageous thing is what our taxpayers have been subject to over the last several years and why there is not more outrage about it.

[3:42:09] Let's, let's, can you advance the slides? There's, there's the, uh, additional sales tax. Again, 10 billion coming in locally. Next, next slide please. There you see rent and it is paced right along with property tax. Next slide. There's Gwinnett, 68%.

[3:42:39] Next slide. City of Atlanta, 65% increase

[3:42:47] from 409 million to 675 million. Okay. Next slide. Spalding County, there's your median income. There's your CPI. There's your property tax increase. Next slide. Henry County, again, 46% increase. There's CPI. There's median household income. That's the taxpayer. Next slide please. There's the sales tax. It does not change.

[3:43:18] Maybe another slide.

[3:43:23] That's what already has eight to nine cents. We cap that. Next slide.

[3:43:32] There's Athens-Clarke County Board of Education. I mean, these, these are numbers that I, I think are worth taking a look at. Again, we've been hearing from property taxpayers. We've been hearing from homeowners. People are concerned about losing their home. We would like to have given more tools to locals to reduce homestead property tax. This limits what we can do, but we do put some restrictions on the increases that can happen as we've seen over the last few years.

[3:44:08] Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your leadership on this issue and I apologize for my emotion, but, uh, we have worked on, on this quite some time. I, I certainly wanna thank all those that have provided input and feedback. Um, and I, I, I, I just want people to understand what this does and what it doesn't do. Um, but I wanna thank Representative Cannon. I wanna thank members of the Ways and Means Committee. I wanna thank Representative Camp and Representative Crowe and thank Representative Buckner for her feedback.

[3:44:44] She's given some very valuable feedback on what we've been doing. I wanna thank others as well, uh, Chairman Martin, Chairman, uh, Williamson. The hour's late. I'm gonna yield the well and ask for this body to please consider our taxpayers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[3:45:05] The gentleman has yielded the well. That completes our discussion on House Bill 1116. Previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to withdrawing the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is withdrawn. Is there any objection to adopting the substitute offered by the Committee on Rules? Hearing none, the Rules Committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of passing the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no.

[3:45:37] And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[3:46:03] Have all members voted? All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1116, the yays are 98, the nays are 68. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1142?

[3:46:36] 1142.

[3:46:50] House Bill 1142. Yes. By Representative Hagan in the 156th, and others, to be entitled An Act to Amend Titles 15 and 19 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to courts of domestic relations respectively, so as to require certain agreements for certain offenses to be eligible for pretrial intervention and diversion programs. This bill having heard in the Committee on Judiciary, Non-Civil, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[3:47:26] We have some more important bills we need to get to as well. Chair recognizes Representative Hagan to present House Bill 1142. The lady's recognized.

[3:47:39] Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[3:47:45] Before I get started, I want to thank someone who's sitting over here in the window for her help, uh, throughout this process, and the help in constructing this bill, and perfecting this bill, and for, for all of her input, and her name is Z Reyes Garcia. She is a very strong young woman. She is a champion for others, and she is a survivor.

[3:48:17] Thank you, Z, for your help.

[3:48:27] This bill creates a domestic violence offender registry for the state of Georgia. This registry would function similarly to our sex offender registry and would be maintained by the GBI. The purpose is simple. It's accountability for repeat offenders and awareness for those who are contemplating entering a relationship. Domestic violence is not always an isolated incident.

[3:48:57] In fact, it's typically a pattern of behavior, a pattern of abuse, and a pattern of intimidation, and a pattern of manipulation. Many victims only discover this pattern of behavior or the true nature of these violent individuals after it's too late.

[3:49:22] This bill recognizes that when someone has been convicted of domestic violence offenses more than once, we are no longer looking at an isolated incident. We're looking at a demonstrated pattern of harmful behavior. Under this legislation, offenders who are convicted of domestic violence offenses more than once after January 1st of 2027 would be placed on this registry.

[3:49:55] There is an automatic removal prevention depending on the number of convictions, um, and also if the conviction happens to be overturned. We've included a provision that it would be automatically remov- this person would be automatically removed from the registry.

[3:50:16] The registry would give many women and men entering a new relationship access to information that can help them make safer decisions and avoid becoming the next victim of someone with a known history of abuse.

[3:50:35] Just as Georgia has taken steps to protect our communities and all of us through the sex offender registry, it's time we take a similar step to address repeat domestic violence offenders. It's time we send a clear message, and that is that in Georgia, patterns of abuse will not be ignored, and the safety of domestic violence survivors and all Georgians matters. Mr. Speaker, that is the bill.

[3:51:06] Lady, yield for question? Yes. Representative Miller. Chair, Chair Miller is recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentlelady yield? Yes. Um, we had a brief discussion about this in rules, and I guess for the sake of the survivors in this chamber and our members who are survivors, was there a reason why we did not consider taking up the issue of domestic abusers having access to guns? In other words, an abuser might be on this registry that a person might search before they start dating, but an abuser on this registry would also not be precluded from having a gun, assuming they're off probation.

[3:51:49] Is that true?

[3:51:53] What I want with this registry is to provide a resource for people who are looking to form a new relationship. I would be content and very happy to leave up to the judicial system as it is, our judges, our prosecuting attorneys, to determine whether or not a person needs to continue to have access to a gun. That is, that's not the intent of this bill. I understand that, but does, does the lady further yield? Sure. Um, I, I appreciate this bill. I, I support it. I'm gonna vote in support of it.

[3:52:23] I, I guess my question is just might we consider moving forward, because as you said, it is time for Georgia to take a stand in support of survivors, considering legislation that prohibits folks convicted of domestic violence from owning a gun? I'm sure if that's something that this body would wanna take up, we would have some very good discussions about it. Thank you. Lady has no further questions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask you to carefully consider this legislation and vote in favor to provide this extra resource for the safety of all Georgians against these repeat offenders.

[3:53:01] Thank you. Lady is yielded the well. Representative Beckles is recognized to speak to the bill. Have up to 15 minutes.

[3:53:14] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When selecting members of my staff, I have always believed it is important to give to the next generation the opportunity to see firsthand how things work. One of those individuals is my intern, who also happens to be one of my constituents. She brought forward House Bill 1142 after conducting extensive research on domestic violence in our state.

[3:53:44] For her, this issue is deeply personal. From the ages of 15 to 19, she endured an abusive relationship. Instead of allowing this experience to silence her, she chose to turn it into advocacy and action. Her research highlights a troubling reality. In Georgia, one in three young women experience physical, emotional, or verbal abuse from a dating partner before the age of 20.

[3:54:16] This is not an isolated issue. Abuse like this is happening in our schools, our neighborhoods, and throughout our communities. What is most powerful about this moment is that a young person took the painful chapter of her life and transformed it into something meaningful, a call for awareness, protection, and change. This is exactly why opportunities for young leaders to engage in the legislative process matters. They come into our offices and hope that their voices can help shape what protects others and strengthens our communities.

[3:54:54] House Bill 1142 represents not only a step towards a greater awareness and protection for our young people in Georgia, but it also is a reminder that our future leaders are watching us. Thank God they are. They are participating in the process. Thank you for your time. I ask you for your favorable consideration of House Bill 1142. Mr. Speaker, I yield the well. The lady has yielded the well. That concludes our comments on House Bill 1142.

[3:55:26] Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee's substitute? Hearing none, the committee's substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no, and Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[3:56:08] Have all members voted?

[3:56:18] All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1142, the yays are 163, the nays are zero. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1254?

[3:56:43] House Bill 1254 by Representative Reeves and the 99th and others be entitled an act to amend various titles of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated so as to move the regulation of various professions from individual boards to the Secretary of State and to amend Chapter 14 to Title 10 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to cemetery and funeral services. This bill having referred to the Committee on Regulated Industries, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[3:57:15] Representative Reeves is recognized to present House Bill 1254. 1254. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House colleagues, I present to you House Bill 1254. This is a follow-up from last year's professional licensing reform in House Bill 579, which was a product of the joint Blue Ribbon, uh, Professional Licensing Study Committee in 2024, chaired by our appropriations, uh, chairman, and, uh, they heard from about 300 citizens. There were three licenses that requested more study, and since we adjourned sine die, the, uh, governor's office appointments, uh, director, as well as regulated industries, uh, reviewed issues.

[3:57:56] Uh, this bill is a result of communication, give and take, uh, and it completes the job of that Blue Ribbon Study Committee in 2024. And, uh, we have three licenses moved from boards to the Professional Licensing Division.

[3:58:10] And two boards are being consolidated. Um, it retains the rules and regulations and consumer protections for the benefits of Georgia, and it fits in with the landscape of these licenses nationwide. So with that, I r- I respectfully request your favorable consideration of House Bill 1254. And Mr. Speaker, I yield the floor. You have a question. Representative Sanchez to your right is recognized for a question. W- Burchett, will you ... Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[3:58:40] I do. No worries. It's just a quick question. Uh, so, um, will ... W- I know that, that we're combining a bunch of boards into one department. Will there be any additional resources or staffing for that pur- purposes of combining everything? No, this is an efficiency measure. Uh, all four of these licenses have a low volume both of regulation and discipline, so this, uh, is something that will not require more personnel. It's a matter of efficiency. And then one more question. Do you yield? Yes. I know there's been some stuff around licensing issues.

[3:59:12] Uh, are, will this help with this at all, or- Absolutely. That is what that joint blue ribbon study committee did. It, uh, has made the licenses get issued quicker. It has, uh, decreased the number of constituent service needs. Uh, what we are doing is serving the people of Georgia better and keeping them working. Thank you. Thank you. Gentleman has no further questions. I yield the floor. Thank you. Gentleman's yielded the floor. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute?

[3:59:45] Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All those in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:00:19] Have all members voted?

[4:00:26] All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1254, the yays are 163, the nays are three. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed.

[4:00:57] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1415? 1415. House Bill 1415 by Representative Seabaugh of the 34th and others being titled an Act to amend Part 4 of Article 6 of Chapter 3 of Title 12 and Article 1 of Chapter 16 to Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to Stone Mountain Memorial Association and public property of the state generally respectively, so as to require such association to hold all real property obtained before January 1st, 1971 in trust.

[4:01:29] This bill having been referred to the Committee on Game, Fish, and Parks, that committee recommends that this bill do pass. Representative Seabaugh is recognized to present House Bill 1415. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. I bring you House Bill 1415 on behalf of Governor Kemp. This legislation preserves and protects the original footprint of Stone Mountain Park that was assembled between 1959 and 1970.

[4:02:01] By doing so, we ensure the historic boundaries of this treasured state asset remain intact and predect- protected for generations of Georgians to enjoy. Second, the bill provides flexibility f- for the responsible management of certain non-core properties that were acquired in later decades, properties that are outside the original footprint and not essential to the park's primary mission. And third, this legislation strengthens transparency and accountability by bringing Stone Mountain Memorial Association real property transactions under the review and approval of the State Properties Commission.

[4:02:40] This aligns the association with the same oversight and standard practices that apply to other state entities when managing public assets. So the purpose of this bill is to protect the park for purpose for which it was originally intended. It strengthens oversight, and it promotes responsible stewardship of this important and treasured public resource. So Mr. Speaker, if there are no questions, I'll yield the floor. Gentleman has a question. Representative Carter to your left.

[4:03:14] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield? I do. Could you tell me what was the original intent of this particular property? The original intent was to protect the original boundaries of Stone Mountain Park that are be- that, that are in trust to the people of the State of Georgia. Does the gentleman further yield? I do. Now, what exactly are we concerned about that's no longer protected? So we're protecting the original boundaries of the park. Over the decades since 1965, they've a- they've acquired additional properties.

[4:03:49] This law allows the, the Memorial Park Association along with the, um, commission to sell those properties if needed, but they cannot sell the original boundaries of the park. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Gentleman has no further questions. I yield the floor. Thank you. Ask for your favorable consideration. Gentleman yields the floor. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered.

[4:04:14] Is any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:04:48] Have all members voted?

[4:04:56] All members voted.

[4:05:05] We got you. Take your time.

[4:05:11] Have all members now voted? If so, clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1415, the yeas are 138, the nays are 24. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1470?

[4:05:33] House Bill 1470 by Representative Kelly of the 16th and others being a title an act to amend chapter seven of title 51 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and abusive litigation so as to create a cause of action for abusive litigation based on alleged website access violations under federal and state law. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Judiciary, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[4:06:05] Representative Trey Kelley is recognized to present House Bill 1470.

[4:06:11] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. I come before you with House Bill 1470, LC 630140S, which is a measured approach to stem, uh, some frivolous lawsuits that have been brought against some of our small business in Georgia, uh, as it relates to their websites being in compliance with the ADA, uh, at the federal level. Nothing, uh, in this legislation will stop valid claims from being brought, and in fact, this is language that came as compromised language from our trial bar as well as our business community, uh, and passed unanimously out of the Judiciary Committee.

[4:06:50] It's pretty simple, Mr. Speaker. It puts some penalties on those who bring these, uh, unreasonable claims, and I'll be glad to stand for any questions.

[4:07:01] You have a couple of questions. Leader Hugley, right in front of you, is recognized for a question.

[4:07:07] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[4:07:10] To the leader, of course.

[4:07:11] Can you share the extent of the problem that, uh, necessitates us taking this action?

[4:07:20] What we're seeing is in our state, our small businesses, we've heard on numerous occasions, there's these multiple media stories where out-of-state lawyers are targeting our small businesses, bringing claims which are later dismissed or adjudicated against the merits as they were brought. And they are simply being done in a way to try and hold our small businesses hostage for settlements, small settlement amounts. And so what we're trying to do here is put a stem to those by putting penalties on those who are bringing those claims.

[4:07:50] Gentleman, you yield to, uh, another learned jurist over there, Representative Holcomb.

[4:07:55] Yes, sir.

[4:07:55] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[4:07:58] I'll be glad to.

[4:07:58] Isn't a lo- Is it not true that I've long admired your commitment to tort reform when it promotes business interests and injustice?

[4:08:07] I appreciate, uh, the friendly question there, and I appreciate your support for this measure in committee as well. And I think this is a measured but serious approach to tort reform.

[4:08:19] Representative Parsons. Chairman Parsons, to your left, is recognized for a question.

[4:08:24] Thank you, Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[4:08:27] I'll be glad to.

[4:08:28] Yes, sir. I just wonder if you could provide a, an example of, of what you just described here. I'm reading the bill. What is an example of a, uh, a website that violates the dis- the Disabilities Act?

[4:08:40] Well, I think that's the question we're trying to address here, because we're getting these complaints that are making false allegations, and then they are being dismissed. Nothing in this legislation will stop a valid ADA claim from being brought. I take that very seriously. I grew up with a grandmother that was blind, and I, I remember the struggles that she had, uh, living her daily life. And I wanna make sure that we protect those claims that can be brought when a website truly isn't in compliance with the federal ADA law. We're not touching those valid claims.

[4:09:11] We're still allowing a judge to make those decisions as the case progresses. But if they get dismissed for lack of standing or for lack of bringing the merits, uh, then they will be dismissed, and there will be an opportunity for that business owner who's been held hostage to recoup some of their cost.

[4:09:29] Well, thank you. I'm not sure I still understand what an example of it would be. But, uh, I mean, how, what... If I may, if you, if I may ask another question.

[4:09:37] I'd be glad to.

[4:09:38] Can you provide... I mean, I'm just wondering, what, what is an example? I mean, I have a website. I imagine most of us do. I wouldn't have any idea what I might be doing that would be in violation. I can't, I can't imagine what it would be. What would be something you could do with a website that would be in violation of the ADA?

[4:09:54] I am, uh, not a website expert myself, Mr. Chairman, but I can tell you there are rules and regulations for what websites should have to comply.

[4:10:02] Okay. Thank you.

[4:10:03] And this does not change when those websites are out of compliance for individuals to be able to bring claims on those merits.

[4:10:11] Thank you. Appreciate it.

[4:10:13] Thank you.

[4:10:14] Representative Lim is recognized for a question.

[4:10:19] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Do you yield?

[4:10:21] I'll be glad to.

[4:10:22] So I, I wanted to assist with the last questions, uh, because Chairman Parsons brings up an excellent point. While our campaign websites are not necessarily subject to the ADA, there is something called the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines that address things like font size, closed captioning, font, uh, color contrast to make it readable. And I would encourage all of us, and I know some of our members have ensured that our own websites are indeed compliant, and I would certainly encourage all of us to do so, despite the fact that I do not believe that we, our, our websites are under the jurisdiction of the ADA.

[4:10:55] I appreciate that question.

[4:10:59] I'm having fun, Mr. Speaker. How much longer can we go tonight?

[4:11:03] You're getting close. Representative Jasmine Clark is recognized for a question. She waives. Rep- Representative Sanchez is recognized for a question.

[4:11:15] Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman yield?

[4:11:18] I'll be glad to.

[4:11:19] Let's do it. Um, I mean, I'm just wondering why we're having such draconian penalties for unsuccessful ADA lawsuits if other civil lawsuits don't have the same kind of penalties.

[4:11:29] Well, you are, we do have frivolous litigations statutes that do penalize people for bringing frivolous litigation. And we are seeing our business owners being held hostage, and we're seeing real small businesses in Georgia being hurt, um, as a result of out-of-state lawyers bringing these frivolous claims. And we need to drop a hammer on them because we don't need our state being the number one state in the nation to do business to be compromised.

[4:11:55] Thank you.

[4:11:55] Thank you for the question. Mr. Speaker, that's a good one to end on. I know there's a lot of people with good legislation they want considered, so I'm gonna yield the well and ask for this body's favorable consideration.

[4:12:05] The gentleman's yielded the well. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:12:56] Have all members voted? All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1470, yeas are 144, the nays are 22. This bill having received requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption of House Bill 1132?

[4:13:18] House Bill 1132 by Representative Franklin of the 160th and others in it, to be entitled An Act to Amend Part 1 of Article 1 of Chapter 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions relative to state sales and use tax so as to exempt from state and local sales and use tax taxation materials used in construction, renovation, and rehabilitation of affordable housing. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[4:13:51] Representative Franklin, Lehman Franklin is recognized to present House Bill 1132.

[4:13:56] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, I'm very happy to be able to present this bill to you today, House Bill 1132. I'm a big supporter of Habitat for Humanity, which I know many in this chamber are as well. I support it financially back home, and this is just another way that we could do this throughout the whole State of Georgia. My affiliate came to me and, uh, was requesting that some way that we could be able to benefit them and be able to produce more affordable living, affordable homes in their area, and this bill does just that. What it will do is give a tax exemption for the construction materials of these homes and these houses, um, which equates to about $7,000, more or less, $6,000 or $7,000, depending on each unit that, um, that they construct.

[4:14:40] But half of that will come from the state, and half of that will be on the local level. The exemption only does, uh, construction materials. It's not supplies, it's not labor, nothing like that, only materials that are permanently in the house itself. And Mr. Speaker, that's what the bill does. I'd be happy to take any questions if there are any.

[4:15:03] The gentleman has a question. Representative McQueen, to your left. The lady's recognized.

[4:15:09] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[4:15:11] I yield.

[4:15:12] Uh, is there any reason why this is limited to single-family homes and first-time buyers?

[4:15:18] Well, it's, it's more limited to the, uh, the qualifications that Habitat for Humanity would adhere to. So we use that pattern. I'd be happy to, um, in the future look at other bills to expand this, but this one's tailored just for that organization.

[4:15:32] Thank you.

[4:15:33] Mm-hmm.

[4:15:34] The gentleman has no further questions.

[4:15:36] Colleagues, I ask for your considerable, uh, uh, vote on this bill, and I yield the well.

[4:15:41] The gentleman's yielded the well. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:16:31] All members voted.

[4:16:35] All members voted. If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1132, the yeas are 163, the nays are three. This bill having exceeded requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed.

[4:17:08] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption of House Bill 1413? House Bill 1413 by Representative Martin of the 49th and others to be entitled An Act to Amend Part III of Article VII and Chapter 3 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to the Georgia Student Finance Authority so as to establish a needs-based scholarship program for students at eligible pub- public and private post-secondary institutions. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Higher Education, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by Rules Committee Substitute.

[4:17:50] Representative Martin. Chairman Martin's recognized to present House Bill 1413. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There's a lot I could say about this bill and a lot I wanna say about this bill, but I'll do it another day when we're not on day 28 with an hour or so left in the session. I'm bringing you House Bill 1413, which will implement the scholarship program that the governor talked about in his State of the State address. $325 million has been placed in funds that will be used for the first needs-based scholarship, comprehensive needs-based scholarship, uh, for students in Georgia.

[4:18:29] Um, on page three of the bill lays out the requirements for the students. I'm gonna be brief here, Mr. Speaker, uh, and not go through it point by point. It, uh, at the bottom of the page li- l- lays out the maximum amount, as the governor, uh, talked about in the State of the State, of $3,000. Uh, it talks about what the student needs to do and, uh, the progress they need to make. The second portion of the bill on page four lays out the Dream Scholarship Endowment Fund.

[4:19:00] That's where funds will go, and they will be used for this specific purpose. That fund will have three accounts, a principal account, a scholarship account, and the transitional account. The first two years' funds in the transitional account will be used to provide for the scholarship while private donations are solicited to match the principal account. That is all set up on page four and five of the bill. I would then call to, to attention, uh, r- the reporting requirements we have on page six of the bill that will be reported back to this House, the Senate, the governor, chancellor, and the commissioner of the Department of Technical and, uh, Adult Education.

[4:19:42] I also want to a- talk to you on page seven, a new scholarship program that will also be funded out of lottery funds for graduate medical education. That scholarship is outlined on page seven, eight, uh, of the bill with the, uh, final page of the bill, um, having the implement- implementation dates. This can start this fall if this House will move this forward this year. We will get concurrence from the Senate, and the governor will sign it.

[4:20:14] With that, I know I've been brief. There's a lot of people to thank. We'll do that a different day, Mr. Speaker. I- if there are questions, I'll try to answer a couple. Um, but it, otherwise, I would ask the House to move forward this bill and provide the first comprehensive needs-based scholarship program for our students in, uh, Georgia. Representative Glaize to your left. Lady is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Chairman, for bringing this bill. I just see that maybe we had an updated change. Were we allowing private post-secondary schools, uh, to, uh, participate in the scholarship?

[4:20:51] Or am I reading that incorrectly? No, no, ma'am. At this time, um, the, the private post-secondary inst- uh, institutions are not included. That was the way the governor had originally provided that, and they are not included in this, um- Okay. So this is- ... portion of the bill ... a misprint. So we are only USG- W- w- ... TCSG. Yeah. Yes, ma'am. What, what version are you looking at?

[4:21:17] I mean, no, what, what line numbers? I'm sorry. Well, it actually designates it on the rule calendar, so it's incorrect here. No, I, I mean just- Yeah, that's what I'm asking. Oh, I'm, I'm sorry. Uh, the, the title of the bill I don't believe changed. A- as it travels through the system, I think the title of the bill, um, may stay the same, but the, the bill was modified, uh, when it was first presented in committee and does not include private post-secondary institutions. So are we still at the 300 million for the trust fund and then the start 25 million to start this year if this is passed tonight?

[4:21:58] Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you so much for bringing the bill. Yeah, the, the transitional account of 25 million will fund the scholarship for the first two years. Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much for bringing the bill. Representative Barrett is recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield? I do. Chairman, would you say it's worthwhile to stop and pause for a minute? Would you say that this is a truly historic moment in Georgia history, that this program will exist long after many of us have left this earth, and that countless Georgia children would be, will benefit from it?

[4:22:34] I, I agree with the gentleman on all those points. I don't like to think about any of us leaving that Earth, this Earth that soon. But, uh, I do, um, take the gentleman's point that this would be an endowment fund and we would hope would live long past us. Yes, sir. Any further questions? If, if- You have a n- we have a number and you, we have a speaker, and, as well. I, I will try to answer those in the interest of time. I will, uh, be right over here and answer those questions during the, the speaker. And if, if we can't get those done, do so the parliamentary inquiry.

[4:23:05] In the interest of time, Mr. Speaker, I encourage everyone to support this measure. And, uh, as Carter Barrett said, uh, Representative Barrett said, this could be a truly historic m- uh, moment for Georgia. I yield the well. Gentleman's yielded the well. Representative Stacey Evans is recognized to speak to the bill, in favor of the bill. The lady's recognized for up to 15 minutes. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I rise in support, strong support of House Bill 1413, and I come to the well because I could not come to the well to talk about the greatness that is House Bill 1413, but also 'cause I wanted to prove to y'all that I also enjoy speaking in favor of bills and not just against them.

[4:23:47] Um, this bill matters so much. Uh, as a first generation college student who, uh... We don't write checks anymore, but I bounced so many checks to get through college. Um, it was month to month, week to week whether I was gonna be able to stay, and that stress is real and our students feel it today, and we are able to make a change with this bill. Um, we've heard about the nuts and bolts and we've talked for a long time, for many years, some of us in this chamber, about needs-based aid, and I just wanna talk about why it matters so much.

[4:24:24] It matters to our students, it matters to our families, but it matters to our workforce. And just real quick, if I can get a little wonky with a couple of numbers. 60% of the jobs in our state right now need some form of higher ed credential, whether that's a certificate, an associate's degree, a bachelor's degree. But less than 50% of our young people have those credentials, so we are not, we're not producing what we need for the jobs that we have and that we wanna attract.

[4:24:54] And so let's look at who's in higher ed right now. If you are in the top quartile of household incomes, 90% of those kids will enter onto a college campus of some kind. 90%. So if you are in the top quartile of household income, it is very likely that you are going to college. 75% of those kids graduate. So it's very hard to squeeze more students to go get higher ed credentials from the top 25%.

[4:25:26] Let's look at the bottom 25% of household incomes. 50%, only 50% of kids that grow up in a household income in the bottom quartile will ever set foot on a college campus. Less than 50% will ever go. 9% will graduate. 50% will go, 9% will graduate. Because it, because it is freaking hard to stay in college and stay focused and do what you need to matriculate if you're running out of money.

[4:26:01] And we have done wonderful things in this state through Hope, and there's other programs that get your tuition paid for, but that's not the only thing that c- folks have to pay for. They have to feed themselves, they have to house themselves. You have emergencies that come up. This bill will make a difference, and because we will be able to keep more of those students in school, hopefully we'll be able to get more to go in the first place, and we will reach that 60% of folks with credentials that we need. That's where we're gonna grow our workforce. And so I'm very excited to stand here and say please join me in voting yes to House Bill 1413.

[4:26:37] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the well.

[4:26:43] Lady's yielded the well. We wanna make sure we get all the information out, so I'm gonna recognize the chairman to come back for, uh, some brief comments during the chairman's time. But you'll need to hold just for a second. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Now it's time for chairman's time. The gentleman's recognized for up to 20 minutes. Well, we won't be here that long, Mr. Speaker. I, I wanna thank the lady that came down and a- asked the question, and I, I, I was trying to be brief.

[4:27:16] In my brevity, I failed to mention exactly how the scholarship would be administered. The Student Finance Commission will be administering that money, and that will be, if you will, block grant, uh, granted out to our institutions in TCSG and USG. The question was made about the work requirement and how that would be done. That's gonna be very individualized. The financial officers at these institutions are gonna do that on a indi- individualized basis. That's why there's reporting. So I wanna, to, to tell everyone that we're gonna get comfortable.

[4:27:48] If you will remember, the completion grant has been back before us a couple of times as we've perfected that over the years, as we learned and we made that work for our students. That's what's gonna happen here. We're gonna lean very heavily on our technical college system and our university system, and those people that work with our students every day to administer the grants, to report on the grants, and make sure this is working. I would remind everyone that 95 to 96% of the coursework that's being done with completion grants is productive and passing.

[4:28:19] That's very successful, and we look to, for similar numbers out of this. With that, Mr. Speaker, uh, I will yield the h- the well and ask the house's favorable consideration on HB 1413. Gentleman's yielded the well. Previous question is ordered.

[4:28:37] Is there any objection to withdrawing the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is withdrawn. Is there any objection to adopting the substitute offered by the Committee on Rules? Hearing none, the Rules Committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:29:32] Have all members voted? For what purpose does Representative Barnes rise?

[4:29:47] We'll get you. Hold on just a second.

[4:29:52] You should be on now.

[4:29:54] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Parliamentary inquiry.

[4:29:56] State your inquiry.

[4:29:58] Is it not true that, uh, us on higher ed worked through the work, uh, arrangement that is, um, required for this bill, and it's very broad, so it can be volunteering. Um, I just wanted to make that clear to the House.

[4:30:13] The lady knows of what she speaks, and thanks for your work on that bill. For what purpose does Representative Holland rise?

[4:30:20] Parliamentary inquiry.

[4:30:21] State your inquiry, ma'am.

[4:30:22] Mr. Speaker, is it not true that we are one of only two states in the United States that did not have a needs-based scholarship, and this is a giant leap forward for higher education access for our citizens?

[4:30:33] The lady knows of what she speaks. I'm gonna take one more from Representative Berry.

[4:30:38] Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[4:30:38] For what purpose does the gentleman rise?

[4:30:40] Parliamentary inquiry.

[4:30:41] State your inquiry.

[4:30:42] Is it not true that this is historic legislation we're passing today, but also it's important that we meet the whole student needs of food insecurity and housing for our students as well?

[4:30:52] The gentleman knows of what he speaks. I wasn't clear on the end, but I appreciate your thoughts. Have all members now voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1413, the yeas are 165, the nays are two. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed.

[4:31:23] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1465?

[4:31:27] House Bill 1465 by Representative McCollum of the 30th and others to be entitled An Act to Amend Chapter 2, Title 40 in Code Section 48-5C1 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to registration and licensing of motor vehicles and alternate ad valorem taxation of motor vehicles and title ad valorem tax fees. This bill has been referred to Committee on Motor Vehicles. That committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[4:31:56] Representative McCollum is recognized to present House Bill 1465.

[4:32:01] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm gonna try not to mess this up and amend my amendment. Mr. Speaker, members of the House, I rise to present House Bill 1465 HC395015S. House Bill 1465 removes the requirement of Georgia drivers to s- display an, an annual registration decal on their license plate. Vehicle registration will still be required each year, but verification will be done electronically through systems already used by the Department of Revenue and Law Enforcement.

[4:32:33] This bill modernizes our registration system and saves the state $5 million annually, and elim- eliminates unnecessary steps in the process, process for our constituents. Mr. Speaker, HB 1465 keeps registration requirements in place while updating our system to today's technology. I'll stand for any questions.

[4:32:56] The gentleman has no questions.

[4:32:58] I respectfully ask for your favorable consideration on House Bill 1465. And in the wisest words of Forrest Gump, "That's all I got to say about that."

[4:33:10] We appreciate that as well. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. Those opposed will vote no, and Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:34:01] Have all members voted?

[4:34:06] All members voted? If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1465, the yeas are 158, the nays are eight. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed.

[4:34:25] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1409, 1409?

[4:34:33] House Bill 1409 by Representative Camp of the 135th and others to be entitled An Act to Amend Article 1 of Chapter 7 of Title 19 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to provisions relative to parent and child relationship generally. So as revised, mandated reporting of child abuse. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Juvenile Justice, that committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[4:35:01] Chair Lady Camp is recognized to present House Bill 1409.

[4:35:06] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you members. I bring to you today House Bill 1409. This bill, this bill is about strengthening and modernizing Georgia's child abuse reporting system so that concerns about child safety reach the po- proper authorities very quickly and securely. Under our current law, mandated reporters such as teachers, doctors, nurses, and counselors, and law enforcement typically report suspected child abuse by calling a hotline and waiting for a while to talk to someone or sending an email.

[4:35:39] HB 1409 keeps that system in place, but it also allows reports to be submitted electronically through a secure web-based reporting platform to DFCS. This provides another option for professionals that we rely on to protect our children, while also creating a clear and documented timestamp report that helps DFCS evaluate the situation and determine whether that child is at risk. The bill also establishes a secure c- and compliance standards for any platform used to submit reports, ensuring sensitive information is protected and handled responsibly.

[4:36:13] At its core, this legislation simply improves how mandated reporters and reports communicate concerns about the child abuse and the appropriate agencies that need to respond quickly. Members, protecting children is one of the most important responsibilities we share in this chamber. House Bill 1409 helps strengthen that process. Mr. Speaker, I ask for favorable consideration, and I'm willing to answer a question if there is one.

[4:36:38] Representative Burnell is recognized for a question to your left.

[4:36:44] Thank you, Mr. Spe- Speaker. Does it, do you yield?

[4:36:48] Yes, ma'am. I yield.

[4:36:49] Um, is, how is, is there gonna be a person on the other end? So how fast will they receive that information if somebody calls in to report?

[4:37:00] Well, the call-in system still exists. Um, what we want everyone to do is also put information within a secure platform so there's a narrative as well. Um, if someone pushes a, submits a narrative and pushes the button, it should instantly go to DFCS to be reviewed immediately, and there's timestamps. So we know the time differential that's involved from the time, let's say, that you submit a report till it's opened, till the response of how it's opened. So we're gonna have a lot more transparency in the system.

[4:37:34] Can I ask one more question?

[4:37:35] Yes.

[4:37:36] Okay. So given that DFCS, um, does not have enough employees, um, how are we gonna ensure that, um, those responses are in a timely manner?

[4:37:46] Well, first, in our supplemental budget, we have a great deal of money available to them to make up for the shortfall from the previous year. Secondly, this system has been funded in the supplemental budget partially. So we have money in place to make sure we have people in place to answer the calls.

[4:38:08] Thank you.

[4:38:08] Thank you.

[4:38:10] The lady has no further questions.

[4:38:11] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the will and ask for the favorable consideration of the members.

[4:38:16] Representative Camp has yielded the will. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no, and Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[4:38:58] Have all members voted?

[4:39:06] All members voted. If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1409, the yays are 166, the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore

[4:40:12] passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to HR 450?

[4:40:30] What's his number?

[4:40:33] House Resolution Number 450 by Representative Reeves, a resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Georgia so as to authorize the Georgia General, General Assembly to provide by general law for sports betting in this state.

[4:40:50] This resolution having been referred to the Committee on Higher Education. That committee recommends that this resolution be adopted.

[4:41:01] Representative Reeves is recognized to present the resolution. Thank you, Speaker Burns. House colleagues, I present to you HR 450, which is the referendum for online sports betting. It is verbatim what has been on file for a year. It has passed out of higher ed at least twice. The ballot question is three lines long. "Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to authorize sports betting in this state to provide additional funding for pre-kindergarten and HOPE Scholarships?" Uh, by, uh, putting this on the ballot, we have the opportunity to let the people of Georgia decide whether to join 39 of our sister states, including neighboring states, Florida, North Carolina, and Tennessee, in authorizing and regulating online sports betting.

[4:41:55] Just a few weeks ago, or months ago, when the Peach Bowl occurred, we had fans from Indiana and Oregon here in Atlanta, just like millions of people come every month through the airport to sporting events, to various things with people out of the state as well as in the state. And in, in, uh, that case, those fans could bet in their own states, Indiana and Oregon, for educational purposes, but not here. This legislation is narrowly tailored. It's been carefully studied. We have a track record of other states.

[4:42:27] This is only online sports betting. The money will go to pre-K and to the HOPE. Uh, we've read the ballot question. Based on the income from other states, uh, we estimate that about $200 million per year, $2 billion over a decade, would come in for the benefit of pre-K literacy. And of course, pre-K has a workforce component as well. If, if the parents have their kids in pre-K, they can work and, uh, while their kids are learning. So I respectfully request your approval of HR 450 to let the people of Georgia decide this issue that has been carefully studied and that 40 states have enacted.

[4:43:07] Mr. Speaker, I yield the well.

[4:43:13] The gentleman has yielded the well.

[4:43:17] Okay.

[4:43:21] We're getting some more people signed up.

[4:43:36] We have a number of folks signed up in opposition and some signed up in favor, so we're going to... Let's see, how many is that?

[4:43:57] So those, I'm gonna give 15 minutes to those opposed and to those in favor, so you'll need to, uh, monitor your time. We'll start with Chairman Todd Jones, and then we'll have Representative Hagan. You will be on deck.

[4:44:21] Up to 15 minutes, I hope you'll share. And the gentleman's recognized. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Uh, this is a great opportunity to realize that we, when we did the THC bill, we did almost the exact same thing and created a commission to determine who should do what. Basically, we determined winners and losers. That's not what this body is about, determining winners and losers. We ended up in five or six years of litigation because we were determining winners and losers.

[4:44:56] By basically putting a cap on the free market and basically saying there is no free market, we're saying there is no innovation, there is no opportunity for innovation. 30 years ago, imagine saying, we said only Kmart, only Woolworth. Think about that. Only Sears can be retail operators in this state. We would not have what we have today in innovation. Innovation makes the market better. Innovation makes the customer experience better. By literally capping at 16, we are saying we are not going to be innovative.

[4:45:31] Second, the sponsor just said $200 million a year, two billion over a decade. If you sign the front of the check instead of the back of the check, you understand that you have to not just look at revenue, you have to look at cost. We know that for every dollar it brings in, we know that just conservatively speaking, we're talking $4 to $5 of cost. So if we're talking 200 million a year, we're talking a billion a year in cost, and that's 10 billion a year in cost, or 10 billion over the decade.

[4:46:03] We have to be thinking about, first and foremost, how in the world should we be picking winners and losers? Finally, on the winners and losers front, respectfully to the, to our professional pro teams and respectfully to certain individuals that run golf tournaments, NASCAR, and things like that, every day those organizations work to get into the playoffs and win their championships. Every day they compete against competing professional sports teams, but yet they wanna tell us that they should have an automatic bid not just into the playoffs, but into the World Series and into the Super Bowl.

[4:46:41] That's not what we're about. We weren't elected to pick winners and losers. We were elected to say, "No, we're gonna make the Roman Empire, we're gonna make the Roman Colosseum. It's gonna be a flat, level playing field. Go for it, but we're not gonna tilt the field."

[4:46:57] I will assure you of this, I know that the other members are gonna be talking about a lot of other things regarding mental health, regarding addiction, regarding the, the basically the burden that we're placing onto the taxpayers, but I'm gonna let them do that. So I will now yield my remaining time, I believe, to Representative Hagan, but I think the Speaker needs to do that, so I yield the well. Thank you.

[4:47:16] Representative Hagan is recognized. The gentleman's yielded the well.

[4:47:20] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, upfront and honestly, I'm always gonna be n- a no on gambling of any type, including online sports gambling, and the reason why is because my two sons asked me to say no. You know my kids. You've met them, many of you. These are fun-loving, reasonable guys, but they have asked me to fight this because they have seen what it does to their friends in high school, in college, their roommates, who are addicted to online sports gambling.

[4:47:52] And I hope they can become un-addicted to it. I hope they can get help, but who knows if they will. Um, however, I have let the interested parties know that I could be much more comfortable with online sports gambling in certain circumstances, and that is if we ensure that the industry that is potentially causing serious gambling and other addiction issues p- put money on the table to address them.

[4:48:26] I feel like that's reasonable. And I've also asked that we study the addiction implications of legalizing this. It's not hard. We can look at the other states where they've done it and see the damage it's done there. So why not study it and have the industry that's gonna cause the problem, if we find that they're gonna cause the problem, put the money on the table. Now, you will hear that in the enabling legislation that there is money to address this, unless they took it out. They've taken it out in past years after they told me it was in there.

[4:48:56] But, um, what I always ask them is, "How do you know if it's enough?" Because you haven't studied it. So that's, that is my issue with this now, is we haven't studied it, and we don't really know what problems we're talking about. All right. Um, and I think it's interesting that it, that it is touted that this, this would, if, if made legal, would benefit our young people, interestingly the very people that it will harm.

[4:49:30] So I, I, that's not, um, tempting to me at all. But friends, ultimately I just don't think we're ready for this. If we're gonna do it, it needs to be done right because it is going to impact young people. It already is impacting young people and minorities, and we need to consider them first. So I ask you to join me in voting no until we take the time to get this right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[4:50:00] Gentleman's lady has yielded the well. Representative Al Williams is recognized to speak to the bill.

[4:50:15] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I must admit that that was one of the longest walks I've made since I've been in this legislature.

[4:50:25] I believe that there is a great need for gaming in this state. I honestly believe that. 73% of Republican voters said let us vote just a little bit ago. My problem is this, and this has not come easily. I've gotten calls from all over the United States today. Uh, the fellas outside have done a good job of getting calls through to me.

[4:51:00] But there are some principles involved that go bigger than short-term. Here is something that has no reason in the world that it couldn't work if worked together.

[4:51:17] This is n- in need of bipartisan support, and to get bipartisan support, you need to let the folk on this side of the aisle have some say on how the money is going to be divided. The last time I was handed a plate of food and told, "Eat this," I was quite young and didn't have any choice. Since then, I get to decide what I eat that's on the plate.

[4:51:48] And all I'm saying is, while it grieves me to a point, it also tells me that the conversation we've had in the last two hours was a conversation we needed to start having in January, where the needs of the minority caucus could be heard working with the majority caucus to come up with a workable plan. But when you tell me to leave the table, because the last time anybody I heard of doing that was Queen Elizabeth.

[4:52:24] She fixed the menu, and if you didn't like what she ate, you went hungry. Well, it ain't like that here. This is an issue that's very popular in my community, I know it. But I came up here to make sure I stand for principles that are bigger than just me. I have to consider the benefits. There's nobody that supports pre-K more than I do. And all I'm saying is we w- might not need this if Hope Scholarship had stayed like it was intended when Zell Miller passed it.

[4:53:00] It was a need-based program. And the money would've been here had it been left alone and left to what it was intended to do. I love the Hope Scholarship. And, but I'm tired of folk with a dollar and a dream. The, the, the, the dollar folk don't get to share in the dream. This has to be perfected.

[4:53:31] It has to be perfected from many directions. First and foremost, we all have to talk about it, and both caucuses have to come to an agreement. And it's not that I'm against sports betting. I'm against the way this was handled. The conversation really started Monday, heated up by Wednesday, and got red hot tonight. We went from zero to 100 degrees, and I didn't have a chance to take my winter clothes off. We need to have a real conversation.

[4:54:03] There has been much good effort, and I appreciate Representative Reeves's efforts. They have been outstanding. I appreciate it. But it's a very simple explanation. Too little too late. There's nothing wrong with asking me to have some say in something when we have got to have the votes to make this happen. You either got respect for your caucus or you don't. And when, when we, when I have to tell my caucus members, "Well, what you got out of it, Al?" Nothing, because there was no conversation that ever said, "What you want?" I have folk walk by me every day, and they've been walking since January, and they didn't get to know my name until a week ago or less.

[4:54:52] It's time. I have studied this probably more than most here, and I know it can be perfected, but it must be per- perfected by two sets of ideas. Those on the right, those on the left, those in the middle. But I don't like to be told the night of that, "Here is your meal. You either eat it or go hungry." But I've been hungry before, and I had some good peach ice cream.

[4:55:23] It'll take me through the night. All I'm telling you is, let's get serious about sports betting and stop playing games. Everybody is playing games. Now, tonight, I got everybody on the ropes upset. I got everybody up. You should've been upset in January, and we would've worked something out. I refuse to be given something that I have had no say in, and we've had no say. My leaders asked me to be the point, trying to be the point, trying to keep my word.

[4:56:00] I can't go back and tell you we got nothing out of this. But we can clean this up and make it happen. Won't happen this year. I don't believe. It won't happen. And the world is not gonna end. The sun's gonna come up in the morning or the day after when we get home, but it's coming up. Don't give away that that's yours. You've got a responsibility to not only listen to your constituency, but to stay together.

[4:56:34] And together, we can come together, and we can come together with the majority caucus, and we can come up with a bill that everybody can be proud of. And go home and tell your constituents, "Well, what did y'all get? Here's what we got." And any time you can't say that, then you fell for the rope-a-dope, and I ain't a rope-a-dope fighter. Not gonna fall for it. Let's talk early, let's talk sincerely, and let's make sure that what we're talking about, we're gonna do.

[4:57:08] And the only way we can do that is we gotta have the language in that CA. It's gotta be in that CA. We ask for two things. Really, one thing. We ask that infant mortality be included. We also ask that we backfill some of these hospitals who are being eaten alive from the cost of emergency care. Put some money in there to help offset their losses.

[4:57:39] I don't wanna go home with the law just to say we tried. I'm gonna tell my constituents I have been for gaming for years, and I don't gamble, but I know we need the revenue. I don't wanna go home and say I voted yes because the pressure got too heavy. I ain't crashing over this, and I've been everything short of physically threatened. But you can't threaten a person who laid on the floor to keep from getting shot by shotguns.

[4:58:10] How you gonna threaten me? I've been there and done that. Don't worry about tonight. It ain't the end of the world. It's going to happen, but it needs to happen in a concerted effort. We need to look at the pros and the cons and see what we can do. We need to look at the worst that's happened in this country and make sure we don't make the same mistake. I have the information, but nobody wants to talk about it. Everybody wants to talk about can we win tonight.

[4:58:41] We will have a win tonight, but it will be called dignity and standing up for what's right and standing up in spite of pressure, in spite of pressure. We're here to speak truth to power, and if you're scared of either one of them, you're in trouble.

[4:58:59] Mr. Villabona.

[4:59:00] And I love you to death. Let's vote no and get serious as soon as this session's over in discussing how we're going to pass gaming in Georgia. It's way past due. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the floor.

[4:59:15] Gentleman's yielded the floor. Representative Bonner. Chairman Bonner is recognized to speak to the bill.

[4:59:22] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Unlike traditional gaming environments, online betting places a casino in every pocket. With just a few taps of a smartphone, individuals, including young adults and those already vulnerable to addiction, can place bets at any hour of the day or night. The constant accessibility and speed of digital wagering dramatically increases the potential for problem gambling, financial distress, and addiction. And how do we know this? Because in the, in the enabling legislation, it plainly states on line 319 that it comes with its own warning label.

[4:59:57] It actually cites the 1-800-GAMBLING addiction line. Research from states have already legaliz- that have already legalized online sports betting shows troubling trends. Increases in gambling addiction cause higher levels of personal debt and greater financial instability for families. When losses accumulate silently on the phone, the consequences can quickly ripple through households, affecting marriages, mental health, and even workplace productivity. The pitch of the bill is a financial windfall for HOPE and pre-K.

[5:00:30] Friends, we do not have a revenue problem in Georgia. However, we must ris- we must weigh the social cost. The addiction treatment, family hardship, and regulatory enforcement are left for our communities and our taxpayers to address. As lawmakers, we must weigh not just the promise of revenue, but the long-term impact on families and communities. For these reasons, I believe we should approach online sports betting with great caution and prioritize the well-being of the people that we serve.

[5:01:01] In closing, I'll refer you to line 73 of the enabling legislation, where it states the purpose of the bill is, in part, to enhance the public welfare. I ask you, will it do that? All I can say is this, Mr. Speaker. I would not bet on it. Thank you.

[5:01:20] Representative Gambill is recognized. You have a couple of minutes to share with some other folks.

[5:01:25] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the most important responsibilities that I have is to be the father of James Gambill. James Gambill is nine years old, and he's in the third grade at Cartersville Primary School. And much to my surprise, and probably many of you in here, one of the q- uh, seminars offered at our church recently was how to help parents deal with young kids that are dealing with pornography addictions at eight years old and addiction to cell phones.

[5:02:01] We just banned cell phones in middle school and high school. These are kids that are not like many of us who grew up without a device in our hands all the time. We know how to set these things down, and it's not the end of the world to us, but these young people don't see it that way.

[5:02:18] And I'm not for expanding this, opening this up. Uh, I have to be a guardian for my kids at home. Their friends are dealing with this. Y'all know the work I do in addiction and recovery, and I just don't think this is good for Georgia. We're a great place to be. This does not make us any better, so I'd ask for you to not support this legislation. Representative Townsend, recognized to speak to the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Real quick, just wanna let you know, one major thing that Representative Jones brought up just a few minutes ago was about the pro teams.

[5:02:53] Think about that. That's the fox guarding the henhouse, guys. The fox guarding the henhouse. They control these games, control these players. Think about it. I yield the will. Representative Powell is recognized as Chairman Powell. Speak to the bill. You have a couple of minutes. Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, uh, ladies and gentlemen, I guess I'm gonna be quick after my friend, uh, filibustered a while ago. I find myself in the unholy situation that, uh, I'm joining hands with my good friend, uh, Mr.

[5:03:26] Bonner, Mr. Gambrell, in opposition to something that I don't have a problem with. But what I have a problem with is sports betting is only one part of the gaming. Seven years ago, this very House had a committee, and we went around the state, and it was Representative Stevens, Representative, uh, Harold at the time, and myself, and a s- and a committee, and we looked at gambling, and we got into the weeds on it. We learned about it. Sports betting, and you hear all this pie in the sky about how much money they're gonna raise.

[5:03:57] No. At that time, it was very little. $30 million, if you think that's much, it's not. Because most of these sports betting are offshore, out of the state. You can't audit them, and that's the way it is. For those of y'all who want horse racing, you can have horse racing right now. That's a billion dollar a year industry for this state. But you can't have it because somebody's not gonna make the investment if they ain't got, uh, the ability to do pari-mutuel betting. We came up with a plan, and that was for destination resorts, not gambling boxes, but for destination resorts.

[5:04:34] Seven years ago, six destination resorts at the average gaming tax of 19% would bring in $4.5 billion. $4.5 billion. Triple that amount possibly on sales and use tax. Folks, if you're doing it for money, that's where it is. If you're doing it for tourism, that's where it is. If you're doing it for economic development, that's where it is. But the real gist of this whole is where's the money gonna spent?

[5:05:05] My friend over there always wants it to go to HOPE, all about education. You've got a glut of money in the HOPE fund right now. We have other things in this state to deal with. Healthcare. We've never had enough money in the past, we don't have it now, and we won't have it in the future. If you dedicate that money to go to something that's a benefit, I don't care what party you are, reach out there and help people. Healthcare is the answer. Putting sports betting on this ballot is a sin not to put the whole question on.

[5:05:41] People have a right to vote. They voted in the polls two years ago that they wanted the right to vote. Give them the right to vote. Turn this down and move forward to something more important. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. I have a one-minute time limit for Chairman Jasperse and a one minute for Rep- Representative Lim, and we'll be done on the, those opposed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Real quickly, you think about who has done this before. In 2021, the state of Ohio legalized sports gaming.

[5:06:13] Their governor, who signed that bill in 2021, has repeatedly said his remorse on signing this bill. As soon as two weeks ago or a month ago, he said it was the biggest regret that he ever had for signing that bill due to the predatory nature of these gaming people on their young people. Mr. Speaker, that's why you should vote no on this bill.

[5:06:41] Gentleman's yielded the will. Representative Lim. We'll move on to those in favor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In one minute, I will address one aspect of the problem with this resolution, which is the public health argument. I get the argument is on its face that this is already happening, so states should essentially tax and regulate it. But among the many problems is that focus is at the expense of an alternative focus on the fact that when legalized, betting will exponentially increase and pervade our lives. To be absolutely clear, this is not harm reduction.

[5:07:14] Decriminalizing this is not like decriminalizing alcohol or marijuana. Per the FBI, in 2021, there were almost a million drug offenses reported in the US and 500 betting/wagering offenses. The industry would not be pushing for legalization if legalization would not massively expand the number of sports bettors. This comes down to the fact that for this to be successful for them, a good deal of people must be hooked to keep coming back. We should not stand for this. We should stand for public health.

[5:07:45] In gambling, the house always wins, but with this form of gambling, this House will absolutely lose. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the will. Gentleman's yielded the will. That concludes our conversation from those opposed. Representative, we'll move on to those in favor. Representative Ballard. Lady's recognized.

[5:08:12] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, I'm not a gambler at all. I rarely even fill out a Final Four bracket. So when we started talking about online sports betting, I knew nothing about this issue. So I got curious. I began looking online, um, and what I found-

[5:08:33] At these betting sites is sports betting is indeed illegal in Georgia, and sports betting is ha- online sports betting is happening in Georgia. In fact, my children were, when we were discussing it at the dinner table one night, were surprised to find out that it was illegal in Georgia. So how is it happening if it's illegal? And what I can tell you, I found there are two types of online betting sites.

[5:09:04] One type follows Georgia law. Those sites ask for age and location verification. And y'all, I have set, I have set up accounts on all of these sites. I've never gambled in my life, but I get a lot of interesting emails now. Um, as soon as I selected Georgia in the reputable sites, it locked me out. Wouldn't let me set up an account at all. Just locks me out, said, "You're not able to participate." The second type of sites I got in with no trouble at all.

[5:09:40] I said I was from Georgia. I put in a fake birthdate of 2010, so I was very obviously a minor, and, um, I was able to create an account on these sites, and I was able to bet. If I was a teenager, I would have been betting on these sites. Um, any teen can create an account on these offshore and unregulated sites.

[5:10:12] They don't follow the law. They get away with targeting our kids because of our lack of regulation. So sports betting is happening whether we like it or not, so let's lock down these bad actors by creating a well-regulated marketplace like our neighboring states. Y'all, let's just get this done. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the will.

[5:10:37] Lady's yield of the will. Chair Lady Camp is recognized to speak to the bill.

[5:10:43] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. All right. I'm gonna tell you, I bet $20 30 years ago in a game, and I still miss that $20. Gambling does nothing for me. It has no interest for me whatsoever. But this measure has nothing to do with whether I like gambling or not. It has to do with whether we support the people in Georgia to have the opportunity to vote yes or no on this measure. In the last primary, voters overwhelmingly indicated they wanted a chance to vote on this issue.

[5:11:16] This constitutional amendment simply gives them the opportunity. Now, Georgians voted on a referendum about 30 years ago that established the lottery. And the very first election I voted in in n- 1992, you can do some math and figure out how old I am, I voted yes. I had no idea that my child would benefit from this going forward. She went to pre-K, a good pre-K, because pre-K existed because of the lottery. Additionally, she went to college on Zell Miller, which paid 100% of her tuition to the University of Georgia because this existed.

[5:11:54] I had no idea the ramifications when I was a teenager of how this would end up being for my family. But going back to the sports betting part, this is already happening. This happens all the time in our state. It's just unregulated. And it's happening primarily in offshore platforms that are gonna do the things that Representative Ballender, Balland described. They don't care that you're under 18. They don't care that you're in Georgia and it's not legal in our state. With no regulations in place, there are few safeguards to prevent our children from gaining access to these sites.

[5:12:30] At the same time, these offshore operators pay no taxes to Georgia. I think that's an important fact here. Whether, no matter where the money goes, when, in the end, they're not paying any money to Georgia. This means dollars that could be helping programs like pre-K and HOPE are being lost every single day. But perhaps more concerning is we have no idea who owns or operates many of these offshore platforms. It could be foreign adversaries. It could be violent criminal organizations. There's just simply no accountability right now.

[5:13:01] Members, this measure does not authorize online sports betting. It simply allows the people in the state of Georgia to determine whether they want it and how they want it regulated. Let's ask the voters what they think. That's my perspective. But addressing a couple of things that have been mentioned, in the enabling legislation, there's $22 million available for mental health funds. I deeply care for individuals. Mental health is a very high priority for me. There is money available in this.

[5:13:31] Right now, there's no money available for the individuals who are addicted to gambling, because we're not collecting any of the funds. Additionally, North Carolina actually brought in $116 million the first year that this existed. Mr. Speaker, I, I ask that the members consider the good people of the state of Georgia and let them make the decision. Thank you.

[5:13:54] Lady's yield of the will. Representative Anissa, Anissa Jones recognized. Give the lady your attention, please.

[5:14:03] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I do rise, uh, today in support of House Resolution 450. Uh, colleagues, this legislation's ultimately about something that's very simple: letting the people of Georgia decide. For years, we have watched our neighboring states modernize their gambling laws and capture billions of dollars in economic activity. Meanwhile, Georgians are already participating in sports betting. Only they are doing it through platforms in other states or through unregulated markets.

[5:14:38] This reality is that this e- economic activity is happening whether we acknowledge it or not. H.R.450 simply places questions before the voters of Georgia, allowing them to determine whether or not sports betting should be legalized in our state through a constitution amendment. And colleagues, I believe that is the most important part of the conversation. This general assembly should not be afraid to trust the people we represent. If passed, this legis- this legislation could create new revenues of string- of revenue streams for important priorities if it were to go into effect.

[5:15:20] In my opinion, the prior- the priority should have been affordable housing. It should have been affordable childcare. It should have been being able to have our children in a better situation than what they are right now, all without raising taxes on hardworking Georgia families. It is also an opportunity to capture revenue that is currently leaving our state and redirect it towards strengthening our communities. Now, let's not make this a moral issue or a health issue concerning addiction, because a addict is an addict.

[5:15:58] A addict is always gonna be a addict because of their addictive nature, or boast about what gambling expansion actually does to Georgia families when our state currently has the lottery that is played on a daily basis. For Georgia, this additional revenue could mean stronger investments in our schools, economic development opportunities and resources that could help families thrive. But again, this bill does not impose anything on the people of Georgia.

[5:16:31] It simply asks a question and allows voters to answer it themselves. Colleagues, today we have the op- opportunity to embrace transparency, responsible regulation, and trust in our citizens. This bill is money for pre-K and scholarships, and crea- increases the budget for our children to be ready and prepared for success so that they can be productive, tax-paying citizens of this great state.

[5:17:02] Now, if the people of Georgia wanna do this, I'm quite sure you know that there are security measures in place to make sure that there are no harm to those who should not be participating as a player. It requires face ID, all of that good stuff that must be j- must, uh, match your driver's license address, and they have to be 21 year old and have two-point authentication, all of that great stuff. Now, I wish I was in the well right now talking about my bill that would decrease m- m- maternal, maternal mortality by providing mental health screening, but hey, that's for another year and another time.

[5:17:38] But today, I wish that those dollars were going to rural hospitals. I wish that those dollars could go and feed our children so that they can have the brain capacity to learn in school and purchase books so that we could support the speaker's initiative for literacy. But personally, I am in favor of this bill, but I will be respectfully voting however my caucus so decides. And thank you, Speaker. I do now yield my time in the well.

[5:18:11] Ladies yield their time. Representative Tran is recognized to speak to the bill.

[5:18:17] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, I rise today in support. I heard a gentleman say, "We do not pick winners and losers," but we do that every day. In this chamber for the last three years, I have heard foreign adversary. "We cannot have foreign adversaries buy our farmland. We cannot have foreign adversaries do this or that." And yet here we are letting foreign adversaries get our children, our young men addicted to gambling and getting access to their data.

[5:18:51] It's time that we realize that this is a real thing that happens, and we need to regulate it, and the best way to do this is to legalize it. So let's give it to the voters. Let them decide where we go as a state, if we're ready to address the issue and make our kids fully accessible to pre-K funding so that they will not fall into a cycle of poverty in which they would one day require gambling as a way out of poverty.

[5:19:26] We need to let the voters of Georgia decide where they want to go with this. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[5:19:33] The gentleman's yield, yield the well. Representative Carpenter is recognized to speak.

[5:19:41] I am an addict. I started picking, uh, football games when I was eight years old.

[5:19:50] This, to me, is about safety. If you've never been involved in gambling, you're chasing. When you lose, you're chasing. You keep doubling to- till the end to try to get back to zero. You're always chasing. Legalizing sports gambling eliminates the chase. You got $100, you can bet $100. The bookie, he gives you till Monday, so you lose 100, then you turn it to 200, then you turn it to 400.

[5:20:21] Next thing you know, you're down 1,200. This eliminates that, and that's why I support this legislation. It's a problem. I got kids at UGA. It's a problem. There's no question about it. It's happening right in front of our eyes. If you go down, if you go down to UGA, every, every kid there, 89% of them, all the boys are gambling Let's provide an opportunity for d- for them to do this safely and allow the people to vote.

[5:20:52] Thank you.

[5:20:54] Gentleman's yielded the will. That concludes our comments on House Resolution 450. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the adoption of the resolution? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this resolution now be adopted? All in favor of the adoption of the resolution will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no, and the clerk will unlock the machine.

[5:21:49] Have all members voted?

[5:21:56] For what purpose Representative Jason Ridley rise?

[5:21:59] Parliamentary inquiry.

[5:21:59] State your inquiry.

[5:22:01] Is it not true that a man I really respect didn't tell exactly the truth? As long as was gonna put bingo on this bill, he was for it.

[5:22:11] I didn't hear what he said.

[5:22:12] I didn't either.

[5:22:14] I'm sure the gentleman believes what he spoke. I couldn't quite get it all straight. For what purpose does Representative Holly rise?

[5:22:23] Parliamentary inquiry.

[5:22:24] State your inquiry.

[5:22:25] Mr. Speaker, is it not true that for the sat, past several cycles, I've been in support of gambling to give it, put it on the ballot for people, but out of res- sheer respect for Representative Al Williams, of his conviction and the fact that he's actually been the most studied on this matter, I'm voting no. And sadly to say, because I know it'll bring a lot of money in for Georgia, and it'd be a great bipartisan issue, but even though for the entirety of this session, it certainly seems like folks have been gambling with my community's interest for too long.

[5:22:59] Have all members voted? All members have voted. Yes, so Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Resolution 450, the yeas are 63, the nays are 68. This, excuse me, 98. Yeas 63, na- yea- nays 98. The resolution having res- failed to receive the requi- requisite constitutional majority, therefore fails.

[5:23:34] Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 947?

[5:23:39] House Bill 947 by Representative Momtahan of the 17th and others being entitled an Act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 4, Title 49 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions of public assistance so as to prohibit the purchase of certain food and beverage items with Federal Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program benefits. This bill has been ref-

[5:24:03] this bill have been referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Consumer Affairs. That committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[5:24:17] Representative Martin Momtahan is recognized to present the bill.

[5:24:24] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. Today, I rise to present House Bill 947, legislation focused on strengthening the administration and integrity of Georgia's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as SNAP. SNAP is a federally funded program that provides food assistance to families in need. But that program is administered by the states, and with that responsibility comes an obligation to ensure that the program is operating accurately, efficiently, and most importantly, that it's acting in compliance with federal law.

[5:25:08] Right now, Georgia SNAP payment error rate is 15.5%, which is the third highest in the nation, and it's well above the federal threshold of 6%. If that error rate remains this high, Georgia taxpayers will face substantial, substantial federal clawback penalties. So let me be very clear about what this bill does. And I think as we've moved through this legislative process, we've seen different iterations of this bill.

[5:25:45] We've seen it include and not include things, so it's important that we know what it does. House Bill 947 does not change in any way who qualifies for SNAP under federal law. We don't control that. It doesn't take benefits away from eligible families. And it does not interfere with the federal requirement that expedited, expedited applications receive benefits within seven days.

[5:26:18] What this legislation does is strengthen the way the state verifies eligibility and administers the program. It modernizes data checks, improves verification procedures, and introduces several administrative safeguards to reduce eligibility errors before benefits are issued. In short, this bill ensures that SNAP benefits are going to families who truly qualify while protecting Georgia's taxpayers from federal penalties.

[5:26:52] Again, it does not change who qualifies under federal law, but it clarifies subpoena authority for SNAP fraud investigations. It shortens certification periods for those households who have zero income. It ends broad-based categorical eligibility for SNAP programs, but it also adds safeguards. It says if you're elderly and you're disabled, you're exempt from these additional enhanced checks.

[5:27:28] But the whole point of this is to try to catch these verification and accuracy errors earlier than we are now. Guys, it's a metric, gals, it's a metric ton of data that our state is having to pour through on a day-to-day basis, and we have to take that data that we are pouring through, analyzing, that we are required to manually hand type and enter.

[5:28:07] It sets some rules, and it says that those rules have to meet those same new federal guidelines that are under the big, the one big beautiful bill.

[5:28:19] But beneficiaries still get benefits within seven days, but we have to make sure that if we're giving benefits out, that those beneficiaries are having that information verified. It's super important, because if we're not verifying that information, it's gonna add to our error rate. We put in this bill that households that are receiving this kind of benefit and assistance, that they have to receive specific notification, just as it says under federal law, of what they need.

[5:28:59] If they're missing documents, it requires now that the state tells them exactly what they're missing. Guys, it's important. Look, I know the hour's late.

[5:29:10] I think I got here sometime about 6:00 AM. I, I, I added up all the hours of 180 members, and it's about 3,000 hours that we've spent in work hours today on this crossover day. But y'all, it pales in comparison in the tens of thousands of hours that, that, that DHS spends every day to try to compute this data. And the, and the data that they're having to compute today, it doesn't align with the new federal standard, and so that's why we have to have House Bill 947.

[5:29:50] Mr. Speaker, uh, I know it's late. I'll yield for questions. I know folks are gonna have some specific questions. Uh, and, and we'll... Uh, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I'm sorry.

[5:30:02] Do you yield for questions?

[5:30:03] I yield for questions.

[5:30:04] Uh, the chair-

[5:30:05] Mr. Clerk

[5:30:05] ... recognizes Representative Clark for a question.

[5:30:10] Thank you, Madam Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[5:30:12] I do.

[5:30:13] Um, could you tell me, um, DHS, who would have to do a lot of the labor, um, that is outlined in this bill, the administrative labor and burden outlined in this bill, are they in support of this bill?

[5:30:28] Yeah, DHS has said they're neutral on the bill. They, they're willing to do anything, uh, that we need to do to make sure that they meet these new federal guidelines.

[5:30:37] Thank you.

[5:30:38] Chair recognizes Representative Sanchez for a question.

[5:30:43] Thank you, Madam Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

[5:30:45] I'll yield.

[5:30:46] Do you believe in nanny states?

[5:30:50] I don't believe that's got anything to do with the bill, Representative.

[5:30:53] If I follow up, any further yield?

[5:30:55] No. Well, then, M- Madam Speaker, I'll yield the well.

[5:31:00] The gentleman has yielded the well.

[5:31:07] Several members have signed up to speak to the bill. The opposition will have 15 minutes. The chair recognizes Representative Lim to speak to the bill.

[5:31:28] Thank you, Madam Speaker. I did not intend here to be so much tonight. I oppose this legislation, to be clear, not because we should not be attempting to address our SNAP error rates, but because this bill would actually exacerbate these error rates and even waste the tens of millions of dollars that both the governor and this House during this budgeting process so far have seen fit to address those error rates. I stand as someone who last fall stood with my colleagues requesting our state auditor to audit our federal eligibility benefit services under DHS, not because, to be clear, as I've told them, that they're not trying their best with the resources we give them, but because I believed then, as I still do now, that H.R.1, regardless of how we individually feel about that bill, created an opportunity that I felt we should take.

[5:32:17] Make our federal eligibility benefit services administration the best in the nation rather than one with some of the highest SNAP error rates and that because of H.R.1 would cost us in the future if we continue to go down this trend. To be clear, if you don't know, H.R.1 will require states with the highest SNAP eligibility determination error rates, i.e., at or above 13.3%, to bear 15% of the cost of SNAP benefit allotments themselves beginning fiscal year 2029. We know that Georgia had the third highest error rate in the nation in fiscal year 2025 at 15.6%.

[5:32:53] These error rates also, to be clear, cons- constitute oversights administration and include not just overpayments but also underpayments. Because of H.R.1, again, this will cost us more if the right, emphasis on the word right, changes are not made. So I believed then, as I do now, that we have an opportunity to make SNAP, along with all of our other federal benefit programs, as efficient as possible and actually save money from any wasteful bureaucracy and ineffective administration and then, in my hope, inject those savings back into the actual benefits and programs that people receive rather than administration.

[5:33:30] To be clear, these SNAP error rates are not primarily because of fraud on the part of applicants. Rather, it is because it is an undertaking, to say the least, to administer any means-tested federal program. I speak from someone who has done several run-throughs of Gateway, our entry point application system for programs like SNAP, Medicaid, TANF, CAPS, to communicate the UX or user experience of good, honest people, i.e. my constituents, who aren't looking for a perpetual handout, but looking for safety nets to get back on their feet.

[5:34:04] From my experience with these constituents, many for whom I've served not just as a state representative, but as formal so-called authorized representative, for example, a few years ago during Medicaid redetermination and after the launch of Pathways, I know that even for people with extensive documentation and for staff at DHS with extensive experience, these are not easy programs to administer when we don't fund them with adequate resources and when we add additional unnecessary bureaucracy. Unfortunately, this is what this bill would do, add additional bureaucracy that makes it harder both for applicants and staff, yet without any requisite benefit.

[5:34:43] This particularly happens, uh, for many reasons, but I'll address just one given our limited time, because in this bill, we are limiting so-called categoral el- categorical eligibility. That is permitting people, as federal law does allow, to substitute means testing and other eligibility verification already completed from other programs like TANF to serve as verification when people then apply for SNAP. Categori- categorical eligibility reduces bureaucracy, unnecessary duplication, and unnecessary additional administrative costs, and ultimately improves the user and staff experience.

[5:35:21] Conversely, removing this aspect of SNAP administration will increase bureaucracy, but not necessarily decrease, again, error rates, but likely increase it. So by passing this bill, we are creating additional hurdles to entry, yet not because people won't submit documentation. Again, most SNAP error is not fraud on behalf of applicants, at least. These applicants will submit documentation because they have them. But because duplicativeness of documentation will make twice the work for them, it will also make twice the room for error.

[5:35:53] For these reasons, I ask that you oppose this bill. Again, not because we should not be addressing our SNAP error rates, which we should be, be doing regardless of H.R. 1, but because this, again, will make it worse. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I yield the well.

[5:36:09] Gentleman has yielded the well. The chair recognizes Representative Willis to speak to the bill.

[5:36:22] Thank you, Madam Presum. Good evening, colleagues. I rise in opposition

[5:36:32] to House Bill 947.

[5:36:36] I've spoken in committee about this bill, proposition, purchasing restrictions, administrative burdens, and the removal of agency flexibility. But tonight, I want to step back and address the broader question of what this bill does to the fundamental purpose of SNAP, which is to ensure that Georgia families simply have enough food to eat. SNAP exists because hunger is, in fact, a solvable problem.

[5:37:10] We have the resources, we have the infrastructure, and the administrative capacity to ensure that no Georgian goes without food because they can't afford it. The program is not perfect. We can all admit that. But I've never argued that it is beyond improvement. But improvement means expanding what the program can accomplish for the people it truly serves. HB 947 moves in the opposite direction.

[5:37:44] It restricts, limits, and constrains, and it does so without guaranteeing that the people affected by those proposed restrictions will have better options available to them at all. Let's be specific. This bill prohibits SNAP recipients from purchasing prepared hot food, hot beverages, and cold beverages mixed or blended on site. It restricts purchasing at food service establishments, and these restrictions fall hardest on the recipients least equipped to absorb them.

[5:38:23] Who are we to micromanage how people do poor? A family in a rural Georgia county with no grocery store within 20 miles does not have a straightforward alternative when the bill removes the options they currently rely on either. An elderly recipient who cannot drive and depends on a nearby deli counter for a hot meal does not have a simple substitute waiting for them. A working parent in an urban food desert who purchases prepared food because their schedule and circumstances do not allow for home cooking is not making a frivolous choice.

[5:39:00] They are making the best choice available to them given the constraints of their everyday lives. How dare we? What this bill does not do is change those constraints. It does not build a grocery store in the food desert community. It does not add transportation routes to underserved rural communities. It does not create new farmers markets or require that they be accessible to low-income neighborhoods. It does not mandate that healthy, affordable food options be available to recipients before their current options are taken away.

[5:39:37] It simply removes options and leaves recipients to manage the consequences. I also want to address lastly the underlying logic of the purchasing restrictions directly. The implicit argument is that SNAP benefits should be directed toward healthier food choices and that restricting prepared and restaurant foods advances that goal. But that doesn't hold up when you examine who actually bears the cost. Wealthier Georgians who do not rely on SNAP can purchase whatever food they choose, including restaurant meals, prepared beverages, without any restriction on their spending.

[5:40:18] SNAP recipients alone are told that their food choices are subject to state supervision and limitation. That's not a nutrition policy. That's a policy that applies different standards to people based on their income, and it does so without evidence that these restrictions will actually improve health outcomes for the people affected. The math isn't mathing, and the data doesn't show improvement for our outcomes of our citizens. If we want to improve nutrition among our lowest income Georgians, the evidence points towards expanding access, more healthy options, more local produce, more support for food infrastructure in underserved communities, not toward reducing the choices available to families who are already navigating significant hardship.

[5:41:10] But I suppose the cruelty remains the point for many. Restricting access is not the same as improving outcomes, and this bill confuses the two. It is for that reason that I am asking my colleagues and anyone with a piece of dignity and a heart for those, because people get up here and quote Jesus Christ every morning. Every single morning we have a pastor of the day.

[5:41:41] Every single morning people get up here and talk about Jesus. But what would Jesus do for the least of these? Did Jesus feed the hungry? Did Jesus serve the least of these? So how do we get all out of sorts when we deal with the least of those in this state? All of a sudden, we get to micromanage poverty. We get to tell people what they can and cannot have and what limitations must be placed upon them for the best of their outcomes when their children are hungry.

[5:42:15] What would you do for your children? What would you do to feed your children? And I don't know about your district, but in District 55, I have constituents grocery shopping out of gas stations. Out of gas stations, out of Texacos and QuikTrips. There is no produce. You wanna starve people and call it humanity? Not on our watch. Thank you, Madam Pro Tem. I yield the well.

[5:42:47] The lady's yielded the well. The chair recognizes Representative Cannon to speak to the bill. There are three and a half minutes left.

[5:42:59] Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. You ever been to a poetry event? When something really interesting starts happening, what do people do? They start snapping, right? It typically means, "I don't wanna interrupt you right now, but I want you to know that something you're doing is feeding my spirit." And it feels so much to the antithesis of our time this early morning to be restricting access for people who are looking for food in food deserts in Georgia.

[5:43:44] I want to direct you, if you have not ever helped a constituent or a close neighbor or friend apply for SNAP in Georgia. I wanna take you through the process. So you go to the website. If you go right now to the website, and let's say that you have not yet applied. You reach this 11-page document, Form 47.

[5:44:17] When you get to Form 47 and you click on when and where and how do you apply, what comes up? 404 not found. So you go back and you choose another link for it. It says, "The portal is down. Thank you for visiting. Georgia Gateway is currently unavailable due to maintenance. It will be available 8:00 PM EST on 3/8/2026." So if somebody sees us right now debating, wants to apply, is unable to.

[5:44:55] But let's skip to the fact and say maybe somebody has already applied, and they just need to go and check how much money they have left of the $200 they got. So you go to the website. If I click it right now, at the top here, what does it say? "EBT IVR temporarily offline. Click here for more information." You click here. "Clients who need assistance troubleshooting their EBT card can contact the card vendor via this web form." So you submit a, a web form?

[5:45:30] No one to even call. You can't even apply right now. The time is really short, and there's so much to say about this legislation. It feels so urgent.

[5:45:42] But I want to leave you with the understanding that our constituents are so hungry for more right now. They need us to be courageous in this moment where we have been here eating dinners and had food trucks and donuts are leftover, food is left stale every day. I invite you to please consider voting no on the passage of House Bill 947 and give our families who right now have no access to this a better chance.

[5:46:20] I yield the well. The lady has yielded the well. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? The chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. There is a minority report. The chair recognizes Lisa Campbell to speak to the minority report.

[5:46:50] Thank you, Pro Tem Speaker.

[5:46:55] Members of the House, I rise today in opposition to HB 947.

[5:47:02] I have some prepared remarks, but I just wanna start out by talking about the profile of a family member in Georgia who receives help to eat. These are the people that we're talking about that we should jump through additional hoops, just like my esteemed colleague just shared, on websites that are frequently broken. This person must have a gross monthly income at or below 130% of the federal poverty level, which ranges from $1,600 for one person to $3,400 for a family of four.

[5:47:52] We are talking about people in deep poverty. We are talking about making sure they do not starve.

[5:48:08] And I think it is the height of hypocrisy for all of us here to have free access all day long to food under a gilded dome.

[5:48:28] And I'm not gonna start off by talking about the fact that the benefit restrictions are paternalistic like so much of the legislation and action in this chamber. I'm gonna start off by talking about something else that runs through every section of this legislation. And this is the idea that adding administrative complexity is somehow going to produce better outcomes for the people that it serves.

[5:49:00] I don't think this is well-founded, and I think we should examine it carefully before voting. I also wanna address really quickly the error rate that was mentioned. Yes, Georgia has a high error rate. About 15.5% is what I saw. But what is the cause of that error rate? Is it the people who are receiving the benefits who are somehow defrauding the system? Evidence tells us that it is largely due to administrative mistakes.

[5:49:34] These are not errors made by the family members. So what is this bill going to do to solve this problem? Well, it establishes an extensive web of data matching requirements. The Department of Human Services would be required to cross-reference recipient information against records from the Department of Public Health, the Department of Labor, the Department of Corrections, the Georgia Lottery Corporation, the United States Social Security Administration, the National Directory of New Hires, the FBI, and the United States Postal Service, among others.

[5:50:04] It's gonna improve the process.

[5:50:08] Some of these checks would occur monthly, others quarterly. The bill also mandates verification of all elig- eligibility criteria within 30 days of the application. It requires expedited service applications to complete verification within seven days. And listen to this, it prohibits issuance of second-month benefits until all verifications are complete. I wanna be clear about something. Data matching and eligibility verification are, those are legitimate program integrity tools, and I don't oppose the principle of verifying that recipients are eligible or using the data to identify changes.

[5:50:49] But what I'm questioning is whether this particular set of requirements at this frequency and scale will produce the outcomes we want, or whether it will primarily produce delays, errors, and unnecessary hardship for those families, those families who need help to feed their children.

[5:51:11] Administrative systems are not infallible. Data matching across multiple agencies introduces now multiple points, new points of potential error. A record in one database may be outdated. A name may, may be entered differently across systems. Has this ever happened to you? My name's Lisa Gail Campbell. Sometimes it's in Lisa G. Campbell. Sometimes Gail is misspelled. Now the entire record is thrown out. A name may be entered differently. An employment record may not yet reflect a recent job loss. And when an automated system flags a discrepancy, a caseworker must investigate.

[5:51:46] That takes more time and more staff resources, and DFCS is not an agency with unlimited capacity, as we know.

[5:51:56] The consequences of the burden of this bill fall directly on the families in need. A family that applied for expedited benefits because they have no food and no income now waits while the agency works through a verification backlog. A household that has been receiving benefits for years loses its second month's issuance because a document wasn't processed, not because they're ineligible, but because the system is overwhelmed.

[5:52:28] And these are not edge cases. They are the predictable consequences of layering complex administrative requirements. We've seen this in health insurance administration onto an agency without a corresponding investment in the capacity to meet them.

[5:52:48] I want to focus a little bit also now on how this bill prohibits the use of these benefits at food service establishments and bans the purchase. Talk about playing daddy here. It bans the purchase of hot and cold beverages that if they're prepared on site.

[5:53:11] The stated goal of this program is to prevent error. The practical effect, effect of doing this significantly limits food options, as have been shared, to some of Georgia's most vulnerable residents, and it does so in ways that are not fair, not justified, and not rooted in evidence.

[5:53:34] This bill tells a SNAP recipient, a family that's hungry, "You cannot use this benefit to purchase a prepared meal at a restaurant." Think about a hot soup at a deli counter or a blended drink at a grocery store.

[5:53:49] Georgia has food deserts. This is not a political claim. It's a documented geographic reality, and there are communities in all of our districts where a grocery store is not within a reasonable difference, distance. And yes,

[5:54:07] these families must rely on convenience stores, gas stations, prepared food counters, and yes, fast food restaurants as their primary or only accessible source of food. And for those without a vehicle, without reliable transportation, and without a grocery store nearby, a restaurant or a prepared food counter, it's not a luxury. It's just the food that's available. When we prohibit SNAP use at these establishments, we're not steering those residents towards healthier options.

[5:54:38] We're simply reducing their access to food.

[5:54:48] SNAP benefits should be used for food, and there are reasonable arguments for defining that category care- carefully, but restricting where benefits can be spent is a blunt instrument that falls hardest on the people with the fewest alternatives.

[5:55:06] This bill is not a balanced bill rooted in any evidence about preventing fraud. This bill is a cruel bill that will make getting food and helping Georgia families not starve that much more difficult.

[5:55:27] It's a program that's failing the people that it was specifically designed to serve, the hungry families in Georgia, and I urge you to vote no.

[5:55:37] The lady has yielded the well. The chair,

[5:55:44] the chair recognizes Representative Romman to speak to the bill.

[5:55:50] Good evening, colleagues. I know the hour is late, and usually when the hour is late, I get incredibly restless, and I start doing laps around the, the hallways. And as I am walking the hallways, one thing that really struck me is how few friends in the hall are here to help starving children. The reality is the majority of our friends in the hall are not here on behalf of those who need it the most, because those people do not have lobbyists on speed dial to come help them advocate for themselves.

[5:56:28] They do not. And for those who are watching at home to really, really hone it in, the reality is that this place runs through a lot of stakeholders. There are those of us here in this chamber. There are staff behind us. There are people coming in and asking us to vote on certain bills in certain ways. That's the way this chamber works, and we debate ideas, and we work these ideas, and oftentimes the voices we hear the least are the ones that need us most. And it's strange to me that when we debate bills like this, we kind of get lost in the technicalities of what a program is, what it does, portals, systems, and yet I rarely see anger.

[5:57:11] I am shocked that it isn't infuriating people that what we are doing is preventing people from getting food. It's food. This program costs us as much as tax breaks for data centers. Let me repeat that. This program costs Georgia as much in tax revenues as the tax breaks that we give to data centers. That is what we're talking about, and yet I haven't seen a single data center bill about regulating those entities, even though it is the one issue we've heard about from all around the state.

[5:57:49] Instead, we're adding more hurdles to hungry people. Someone explain that to me. I understand wanting to go after fraud and abuse, but if we actually had effective and efficient systems, then I can understand adding more layers like this. But our websites barely work, and our portals barely work, and our paperwork is so redundant that I don't even, I can't even wrap my mind around it half the time. Now imagine if you're hungry.

[5:58:20] This is a program to feed people, and it has more requirements than tax breaks for data centers, and I don't understand it, because there are children who go to bed hungry, and this is their only source of food. There are families who go to bed hungry, and this is their only source of food. And I know y'all are tired. I know y'all just want this debate to be over so you can vote and pass this bill, but I refuse to let this go down without a fight, because I think we should feel a little guilty for the things that we do to people. I really do.

[5:58:51] I think that if we are gonna play politics with people's lives, and especially what they put in their stomachs when they need it most, I think we should feel a little guilty about it, and I think we should spend a little time thinking about it. I don't care how late in the night it is. I don't care what any of this has to do with some talking point about efficiency, about going after corruption, when again, we have given 10, 100 times in tax breaks to corporations, and we've never once clawed it back.

[5:59:23] We've never even asked a question about those tax breaks.

[5:59:28] We are commanded to care for the least among us. It doesn't matter what faith tradition you are, every faith tradition that I have had the honor to learn about has taught us the same thing. We are taught to feed the hungry. It is one of the most universal commandments given to all of us, regardless of faith tradition. There is no exception for government in that commandment. None. And there are ways to prevent waste and fraud that does not involve preventing hungry people from getting food.

[6:00:02] I wish we had this... I wish we had a tenth of the oversight on corporate tax breaks that we do on the things people need, like healthcare and food and housing. I wish we treated those people with a tenth of the dignity and respect that we do when any of these corporate and special interests come in and ask us for a favor. I've shared this before. I have heard from people who feel deep shame for needing a little bit of help, for cents on the dollar. Shame. They, they feel absolute shame, but they need the help.

[6:00:34] And again, we have people descending down in this chamber, completely shameless, demanding billions in tax breaks so they can make a little bit more money, and then turn around and use those tax breaks for ads for their next campaign. It's unacceptable. We need to learn to get as angry about taking what people need from them as we do on all of the other things that we debate in this chamber. Just because those people don't have the same amount of power to influence politics the way everyone else does, does not mean we should care any less about them.

[6:01:07] We are commanded to care for the least among us. It is a direct and clear command regardless of faith tradition. And yet, we audit them, we target them, we treat them with disdain. I have never understood it. I have never understood why we treat the w- people the way that we do. And it feels good. It feels good to convince ourselves that they don't deserve it. It feels good to convince ourselves that these people are nothing more than fraudsters trying to take advantage of the system.

[6:01:39] Yet study after study after study has shown that the ratio of those people is minuscule compared to those that use these programs, temporarily, by the way, and then are able to get back on their feet. Because when people need things like food, the sooner you give it to them, the sooner they're able to focus on other things, like getting their life back together. And yet today in our world, we are nickel- nickel-and-diming children and families right here in Georgia as we spend a billion dollars a day bombing them overseas, and I haven't seen a single person blink about that.

[6:02:18] Again, I, we just passed I don't know how many bills to support I don't know how many companies today. This is really how we're gonna end our night? Nickel-and-diming families? I know that these people will not have political consequences for you. I'm aware of that. But I hope tonight for anyone who's going to see this debate, if they're gonna watch this debate, I hope folks understand the massive imbalance of power that gets worse every session that I've been here. Every session that I've been here.

[6:02:50] We have an obligation to help those who need it most, and if we're gonna brag about our surplus, if we're gonna brag about our conservative budgeting, if we're gonna brag about our fiscal spending, we cannot be bragging about those things if people are going hungry in our state and if they are dying from, from preventable reasons. That is the equivalent of bragging about your savings account when your kids don't have enough to eat. I'm tired of it. I'm tired of the propaganda. I'm tired of ignoring the people who don't have the same kind of voice in these hallways.

[6:03:21] And I actually sincerely believe that until we fix... And by the way, the amendments presented on this bill were incredibly basic. I think there was a total of four or five of them that would have made this bill better. And to refuse those amendments because there weren't enough powerful people pushing it is unacceptable.

[6:03:43] It is easy. It is easy to hit the yes button to pass this bill because those people cannot come up here the same way that everybody else can. But I think we owe it to them for once to have their back. I think we owe it to them for once to fight on their behalf.

[6:04:03] Because the amount of money that we have spent on so many other things instead of feeding people makes this look like the equivalent of cents on the dollar. I think we should be good stewards of every penny that we use. I deeply believe that. But I want my money to go towards helping people and investing in our present and our future instead of just another tax break that's gonna make an already wealthy person wealthier. I do not see a path towards a better future in that direction. It just does not work.

[6:04:35] So colleagues, tonight I urge you to find your conscience. I urge you to please vote no on this bill.

[6:04:45] Because at the end of the day, there are kids all around the state depending on us, and I think we owe it to them to do the most basic thing of feeding them. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I yield the floor. The lady has yielded the well. The chair recognizes Chairman Dickey for the chairman's time.

[6:05:05] Thank you, Madam Speaker. Uh, it's late. It's, uh, almost, uh, going toward 1:00. I was, I was gonna really get up here and, uh, give our time back to the author. But, um, it really disappoints me the prior speakers up here obviously have not read what's in this bill. I, I get it. It's, it's, uh, hunger is an emotional issue. And, um, but this bill does not eliminate SNAP benefits, and it does not take food away from families who qualify.

[6:05:41] This bill is about verification and eligibility checks, checks that would make this program

[6:05:53] eligible, not at... This p- this bill is about keeping us out of federal f- um, penalties. And if you want money for these children and for families that need it, this bill is needed so we do not fall into the trap of hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars going back to Washington because our error rate is high. We have one of the highest error rates in the country.

[6:06:26] We have to get it down, and that is what this bill is about. It is about making us compliant, and it protects the long-term sustainability of this, of this program. And I know all about this program. I live in a county that does not have a grocery store. We- my farm a few years ago added fruits, vegetables, meat, and other things that would be eligible for people in my county to come use their SNAP benefits.

[6:06:59] I know all about it. I send peaches to farmers markets where they get double stamps, double benefits in our, uh, farmers markets. This program is essential. It's essential for the, uh, economy of many of our, uh, counties and, and municipalities through the grocery stores. They depend on this program, on these eligible participants spending their money, their benefits in their stores.

[6:07:32] We have to protect the integrity of our SNAP program here in Georgia. We have got to turn the tide from high error rates that are on both sides. It's not just trying to... It's trying to get p- more people eligible as well as people not eligible. I urge you, and I'm gonna t- I urge you to vote for this bill. Please, let's not get to a point in a year or two where we're sending 4 or $500 million back to Washington, DC.

[6:08:11] That money can be better used for the programs that my previous speakers here talked about that are needed in Georgia. We've got lots of other social pro- programs in this state that we could use that money for. And that's what this bill, uh, that's what this bill is about. And so stay, stay f- be focused on what this bill does and what it does not do. That's all I'll say. It's late hour. I'll, uh, leave the rest of my time, uh, for the author of the bill.

[6:08:46] Thank you. Chair recognizes, uh, Chairman Momtahan to speak to the bill.

[6:08:56] Thank you, Madam Speaker. Y'all, this is about fraud. This is about verification. This is about accuracy. We just heard from the minority party that this is gonna add layers of complexity that we can't figure out. Well, let me tell you, 83% of errors come from broad-based categorical eligibility. How about that? How about when states have removed broad-based categorical eligibility, 40% of their errors vanished overnight, 40% in the states that have already done it.

[6:09:29] So how could that be that way? We talked about food restrictions. Guess what, y'all? It's not in the bill. But if you take a moment and read it, you'll see that we don't have food restrictions on Cokes or candies or anything like that. That's in the minority report. Let's keep going. No Georgian goes without food. I agree. We want the Georgians who are duly entitled to these benefits to get the benefits and nutrition they deserve. And let me tell you why. 'Cause I don't know of another member in this chamber today

[6:10:04] that dug through dumpsters to get their food like me when I was a child.

[6:10:14] Let me tell you, I remember going to the grocery store when my mother would hand me a $1 food stamp, and me and my two brothers would scour the whole store to find some sustenance for the week. And we didn't buy candy, we didn't buy junk food. We bought food that mattered to us, 'cause that's what we needed. And you wanna talk about hot foods. Y'all, hot foods are federally banned. They're banned right now. You can't buy them. You know why?

[6:10:44] 'Cause the feds say you can't buy them. If you're buying hot foods now, you weren't supposed to anyway. You wanna talk about food counters. Starbucks, they're banned federally. There ain't nothing we can do on state level to change that today. You wanna talk about fraud? It's why we added the chip card program to this bill. Now, who brought that to us? The minority party, so we can make sure that our families aren't getting their food stamps stole from them over the internet by people in foreign countries.

[6:11:28] No second month benefit. That's because we're giving them expedited benefits. We're giving it to them within seven days. Y'all, if these error rates hit us in this state, it's gonna cost us $500 million. And when I say us, I mean these families in Georgia who need this nutrition. That's what this bill's about. It's about fraud, it's about accuracy, and it's about making sure that these Georgians have the food that they need and that they're entitled to.

[6:12:07] Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[6:12:27] The gentleman has yielded the well. For what purpose does Representative Jackson rise?

[6:12:34] I wave.

[6:12:36] He waves. For what purpose does Representative Burnough rise?

[6:12:43] Parliamentary inquiry.

[6:12:44] State your inquiry.

[6:12:46] Is it not true that Georgia, if Georgia would improve their technology, we would not have all these errors?

[6:12:57] Well, the chair has, has heard a presentation on the error rates, and it was, uh, quite a bit more than the technology. But the lady, uh, certainly is entitled to her opinion on this. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? The chair hears none. The committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? The chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And the clerk will unlock the machine.

[6:13:57] Have all members voted? All members voted?

[6:14:03] James. James.

[6:14:05] All right, we're gonna wait on you. There you go. All members voted as so. Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 947, the yays are 95, the nays are 66. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1285? 1285. We're about done.

[6:14:34] House Bill 1285 by Representative Cheokas of the 151st and others to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to sales and use taxes, so as to revise provisions limiting the number of local sales and use taxes by authorizing counties to collect an enhanced homestead option sales tax as well as at a local option sales tax. This bill having been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, that committee recommends that this bill do pass.

[6:15:04] Chairman Cheokas is recognized to present House Bill 1285.

[6:15:17] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, ladies and gentlemen, I bring to you House Bill 1285. This measure would remove the current prohibition that prevents counties with local option sales tax from also having an enhanced homestead option sales tax. This gives counties that want to eliminate the homestead ad valorem tax an alternative source of funding, and this measure is currently being used in DeKalb County. If there are no q- further questions, sir, I ask for a favorable consideration.

[6:15:50] This was brought to me by my Sumter County folks, uh, and I got a unanimous, uh, r- resolution from all the county commissioners.

[6:15:59] The gentleman has no questions.

[6:16:01] Thank you, sir. I please ask for a favorable consideration.

[6:16:05] Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? The chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the p- report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. All those opposed will vote no. And Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[6:16:42] Have all members voted? For what purpose does Representative Stinson rise?

[6:16:51] Oh, she waves. For what purpose does Representative Wilkerson rise?

[6:16:56] Parliamentary inquiry.

[6:16:57] State your inquiry, sir.

[6:16:58] I apologize. It's late in the night. Did he say a homestead exemption?

[6:17:04] It's late. I didn't hear that either.

[6:17:05] You didn't say-

[6:17:05] I don't think so. You didn't say... Gentlemen, you didn't say homestead exemption, did you?

[6:17:09] So does this does, needs a two-thirds, I'm assuming, if it's a homestead, or no? No, it doesn't? So you don't need my vote. I-

[6:17:25] I, I don't-

[6:17:26] Okay. I, I don't, I don't know. It doesn't apply

[6:17:34] ... Sales and use tax. It's not homestead.

[6:17:38] And then what about the members?

[6:17:39] All members voted. If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1285, the yeas are 98, the nays are 58. This bill, bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. All right. This is one we've been looking for. I've certainly been looking for it. Mr. Clerk, will you read the caption to House Bill 1208?

[6:18:03] House Bill 1208 by Representative Gunter, the 8th and others to be entitled An Act to Amend Article 5 of Chapter 11 of Title 9 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated Relating to Depositions and Discovery so as to require depositions in the state to be taken before a certified court reporter. This bill has been referred to the Committee on Judiciary. That committee recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute.

[6:18:26] Chairman Gunter is recognized to present the bill.

[6:18:30] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, really easy bill, ladies and gentlemen. What this is about is modernizing the code for, uh, court reporters and what they transcribe. The testimony at a dep- deposition shall be recorded by a certified court reporter, uh, and may also be recorded by sound or sound and visual means. That's what it does. That's all there, there is to the bill. I'll stand for any questions.

[6:18:59] Gentleman has no questions.

[6:19:00] Thank you. I yield and ask for your favorable consideration.

[6:19:04] Gentleman has yielded the will. Is there any objection to the previous question being ordered? Hearing none, the previous question is ordered. Is there any objection to adopting the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there any objection agreeing to the report of the committee, which was favorable to the passage of the bill? Hearing none, the report of the committee is agreed to. Shall this bill now pass? All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote yes. Those opposed will vote no, and Mr. Clerk will unlock the machine.

[6:19:42] Have all members voted? All members voted. If so, Mr. Clerk will lock the machine. On the passage of House Bill 1208, the yeas are 138, the nays are 17. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed.

[6:20:04] Members, we have some privileged resolutions we'll get to real quickly, and then we have two afternoon midnight orders that we'll hear as well.

[6:20:21] Mr. Clerk will read the caption to a group of privileged resolutions.

[6:20:24] Honoring the life and legacy of Harold Franklin Reice. Honoring the Metropolitan Atlanta Baptist Ministers Union upon 141 years of service. Recognizing for its longstanding service and contributions to Douglas, Paulding, and Carroll Counties. Recognizing and commending the Bobby Dodd Institute. Commending and congratulating Grant Penner. Commending and congratulating Jonathan Sandberg. Congratulating and commending Judy Carlson for receiving the 2026 Yellow Rose Nikki T.

[6:20:59] Randle Ser- Leader Award. Congratulating and commending Sheila Edwards for receiving the 2026 Yellow Rose Nikki T. Randle Service Leadership Award. Commending the Vietnamese American community of Georgia and recognizing March 11th, 2026 as Vietnamese American Community Day at the State Capitol, and for other purposes. That completes the reading of the privileged resolutions.

[6:21:30] Is there any objection to adopting the privileged resolutions? Hearing none, the resolutions are adopted. We have some afternoon orders. We'll begin with Representative Olaleye.

[6:21:47] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I intend to keep my streak going. The two children you see on the screen are looking to be adopted. Their names are Curtis and Gary. Both have an immensely strong bond, being brothers and frequent trampol- and they frequent tramp- trampoline parks, create music together, and intend to attend college together. Itsmyturnnow.dhs.georgia.gov is where we can make their adoption possible. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the will.

[6:22:14] Thank you for keeping your string alive. Representative, Representative Sanchez, you got some work to do, bro. Let's hear it. The gentleman's recognized.

[6:22:24] It's that time again, y'all, the most important day of the year for me. Uh, now is my wife's birthday as of midnight, and so I wanna wish her a very, very happy birthday. Anna- I love you so much. I know you're not here with us in the building, but from home, I love you, and we'll be celebrating a lot tomorrow and tonight. Thank you.

[6:22:49] Good work.

[6:22:53] I think you'll be fine. Representative Santos is recognized for an afternoon order.

[6:23:00] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to wish my 18th, um, birthday for my daughter. She is 18 years old, so I'm very excited to come up here. I know I've been with you all day. I just wanna remind her that she matters, her voice matters, and young leaders like her are the future of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield the floor.

[6:23:29] Okay, we have some birthdays today, actually, since we stayed here to the, after the midnight hour. Representative, uh, Oliver, Mary Margaret Oliver, had a birth- has had a birthday today, and Representative David Jenkins has a birthday today. On Sunday, March the 8th, Representative Sandy Donatucci has a birthday. Happy birthday. Okay, we have some pages that have been with us all day long.

[6:24:01] Y'all come on down.

[6:24:11] I knew one of 'em was gonna stay with us all day 'cause his mama wasn't gonna take him home till Rep- Rep- Wasn't that correct, Representative Holland?

[6:24:25] Well, members. And, and also thanks to our staff that's been around with us all day, had a long day as well. Thanks to all the staff members.

[6:24:38] Members, I know that y'all will help me remember those of this family that are suffering and have loved ones that are hurting over this weekend as we take a f- a good day off until Monday. So let's keep them in our prayers, if you will. With Gerald's sister, excuse me, Representative Greene's sister, uh, R- Retta, and also, um, Angie O'Steen's father-in-law. So I know y'all will remember them as well. So, thank you for your work today. We had a great day, got a lot done for Georgia, and we look forward to working with you next week.

[6:25:09] Majority Leader of this House is recognized for a motion.

[6:25:11] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that this House stand adjourned until Monday, March 9th, 2026 at 1:00 PM.

[6:25:19] On the motion of the Majority Leader, this House stand adjourned until 1:00 PM, Monday, March the 9th, 2026. All those in favor will say, "Aye." Aye. All opposed, "No." No. What do y'all think? The ayes have it. Ayes have it. We agree, the ayes have it. This House stands adjourned.