Georgia State Legislative Updates

Get up to date...

  • You can visit the Georgia General Assembly official web site for information pertaining to Georgia state government
  • Track up-to-date House and Senate bills using a legislative search
  • Contact Tom Leslie, ACEC/G Director of External Affairs and licensed Lobbyist.

Legislative Update - Issues You Should Know About 

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

March 8, 2012 (Day 30)

Yesterday, March 7 was crossover day at the Capitol.  Bills must pass one chamber by Day 30 in order to be considered by the other chamber.  This procedural rule substantially culls the number of bills that are in play.  The next stage of the process is when a bill that did not pass by crossover is amended onto a bill (the vehicle) that did pass.  It must be germane, however, which means that both bills relate to the same part of existing Georgia code.  This tactic is usually reserved for the last few days of the Session.

 

The Legislature will reconvene on Monday for Day 31, which begins the race to adjournment.

 

4-year degree bill – did not pass by crossover

For the second year in a row, HB 166 was bottled up in House Rules Committee and did not get to the floor by crossover.  This bill imposes the requirement for a 4-year college degree to sit for the PE and/or RLS exam (after passing the EIT/LSIT exams and gaining the requisite years of experience).   The bill would essentially eliminate the “experience only” pathway to becoming a PE (or RLS).  Opposition to the bill in the House of Representatives was obscure, and the Rules Committee is the most effective place to kill a bill without visible opposition.  Thoughtful evaluation of a path forward on this bill should be on the off-season agenda.

 

Licensing Restructure - withdrawn

As you know, Secretary of State Brian Kemp withdrew his legislative proposal (SB 445) to radically reorganize the manner in which occupational and professional licenses are issued in Georgia.  There was just insufficient support to move forward.  This is another off-season question.  If the Secretary of State is interested in reforming the licensing process, which many feel is meritorious endeavor, are there suggestions we can offer that achieves the Secretary’s objectives in a way that can gain support from the engineering community. 

 

Government Fees for the Designated Purposes – passed by crossover

There is an array of fees charged by state government for various services.  In all cases, these fees go to the state’s general fund and must be appropriated for the agency/purpose.  In recent years the fees collected and the amount appropriated for the purpose for which they were collected have a wide disparity.  HB 811 stipulates that fees collected for the Hazardous Waste Trust Fund (from a solid waste disposal fee), Solid Waste Trust Fund (from a tire disposal fee), peace officer and prosecutor training (from a variety of fees), indigent criminal defense (from a variety of fees), and driver education must be spent for the purposes designated in general law.  If not, then the fee must be lowered such that the amount appropriated is at least 95% of the revenue collected.  The financial beneficiaries of HB 811 are largely local governments. Fees paid for licensing by the Secretary of State are not included in the bill.  Last year approximately 60% of revenue collected by the Professional Licensing Board Division was appropriated for its operation – 40% was diverted to other general government operations.

 

Geographic Preference Procurement – passed by crossover

Current law requires certain state agencies to give a preference for Georgia based companies when they are competing with out-of state firms where their home state gives a preference to companies in that state.  For example, South Carolina gives a preference to South Carolina companies.  If a South Carolina company competes for a state contract in Georgia, then the Georgia company is given the same preference that the South Carolina company would receive in its home state.  On the other hand, if an out-of-state company has no home state preference law, then a Georgia company competing with that company for state work would not receive any preferential treatment in the procurement competition.  The notion is a reciprocal preference – if ‘they’ do it to us in their state, then ‘we’ will do it to them in like kind when that come to Georgia.  SB 358 extends this preference to include preference ordinances by out-of–state local governments in other states.  For example, if a local government in Florida gives 10 “geographic preference” points in a QBS engineer procurement to firms located in that jurisdiction, then the Georgia state agency would give 10 preference points to a Georgia firm in a QBS engineer selection if there were firms competing that were from the Florida jurisdiction.

 

Design-Build at GDOT – did not move out of committee

Current law limits design-build projects let by GDOT to 30% of work let in the preceding year.  The cap reverts to 15% after July 1, 2014.  The award in these procurements must be to the low bidder.  SB 463 would raise the cap to 50%, eliminate the reversion to 15%, and allow contract award based on price and other factors.  No other state agency in Georgia has a cap in award volume and a requirement for awards for alternative project delivery procurements to be based on low bid.  SB 463 did not move out of the Senate Transportation Committee

 

Legislative Proposals that Could Impact the TSPLOST Referenda – none are moving

Several legislative suggestions/bills could have an impact on the outcome of the transportation referenda in July 2012.  The notion of changing (1) the date of the vote and (2) the language of the ‘question’ that must appear on the ballot have not gained any traction.  HR 1350 would authorize a vote on a constitutional amendment that would specifically allow regional referenda like the one at hand.  HB 938 provides legislative instructions on implementing HR 1350, should it pass.  The referenda would be delayed two full years and would have different procedures for selecting projects and vote counting.  Neither of these measures has moved out of committee.  Several measures have been introduced regarding transit governance in metro Atlanta. Identical bills in the House and Senate result from the Task Force that Gov. Deal appointed last year for this purpose.  A competing Democratic bill was introduced just yesterday.  None are expected to move in the 2012 session.  They are more likely placeholders for legislative debate in 2013.

 

 

To read these, and other, bills, go to www.legis.state.ga.us.  If there are bills of special interest please contact the office.