This bill prohibits any county or city from enacting zoning or land-use ordinances restricting a homeowner's ability to raise chickens, rabbits or milk goats so long as they are raised for personal consumption. There is no limit on how many chickens, rabbits or milk goats could be kept on one's property. 

This bill establishes a State Office of Public-Private Partnerships which will identify and report a list of all state programs, services and activities that could be privatized. Local governments are "encouraged" to participate, and funding may be available to them if they do; however, they would have to perform an extensive review and report of all the services they provide, including those already outsourced, that may be eligible. The Office, if funding is available, can provide advice and technical assistance to participating local governments to assist in their outsourcing efforts.

While ACCG continues to study the implications of this far-reaching legislation, it creates an exhaustive interbasin transfer permit requirement for all existing and proposed water withdrawals and wastewater discharges than involve transfers of more than 100,000 gallons per day and outright prohibits IBTs under certain conditions. Please note up front that current Georgia law already prohibits IBTs from outside the Metro Atlanta District to within.

While ACCG recognizes how controversial IBTs are, this bill would have a dramatic and costly impact on the over 20 communities already using incidental IBTs by expanding their permitting process exponentially. Other concerns ACCG has are that the bill:

• impacts all of Georgia, through stringent IBT restrictions on surface and ground water sources. Note that 94 Georgia counties lie in two or more river basins
• places a priority on maintaining certain environmental conditions before considering the need of human health, sanitation and future economic development (which are all lower in priority)
• categorizes the withdrawal of groundwater and discharging to surface water as an IBT
• contains myriad requirements in the permitting process which leaves room for environmental advocacy groups to challenge IBT permits at the costs to local governments and communities
• likely would require reservoirs across the state to artificially supplement natural flows to maintain certain volumes for downstream states
• appears to make current IBTs in over 10 Georgia counties illegal, leaving them high and dry in meeting their communities' water needs.

Under current law, counties must provide at least 24 hours notice to the legal organ of their special called meetings by either calling the legal organ or giving them a written notice. This bill requires the counties to provide a written "publication" of the meetings in the legal organ at the expense of the taxpayers.

Currently, if a citizen contacts the legal organ, the newspaper is required to inform them of county meeting notices. This bill removes that free access to local government for citizens. Newspapers would no longer be required to be a part of the open meetings team. They would no longer be required to tell citizens who contact them about any county meeting notices.

Current law also contains a provision allowing counties with a legal organ published less than four times per week to provide notice by posting a written notice 24 hours in advance of the meeting at the regular meeting place. If a local broadcast or media outlet located in the county requests it, the county would also have to provide notice by telephone or fax at least 24 hours in advance. HB 1303 would remove this provision from the law. Counties where the legal organ publishes less than four times per week would be subject to the same requirements as the other local governments.

Commissioners can have a special called meeting with less than 24 hours advance notice under current law when "special circumstances" occur. HB 1303 only allows a special called meeting with less than 24 hours notice if an emergency exists -- not merely for "special circumstances." The Attorney General or other citizen or entity could file an action in superior court to challenge whether an emergency actually existed necessitating a meeting with less than 24 hours notice. If the county loses, the taxpayers would be responsible for the attorney's fees and litigation costs of the other party.

For an emergency meeting, a county would be required to post a written notice for at least 8 hours at the regular meeting site and then provide written or oral notice to the legal organ.

The chairman or other presiding affidavit would also be required to execute an affidavit under oath certifying the type of notice given for a special called meeting. The affidavit would be required to be attached to the minutes of the meeting. If the chairman or other presiding officer knowingly and willfully makes a false statement in the affidavit, he or she could be convicted of false swearing under O.C.G.A. § 16-10-71, which is a felony punishable by one to five years in prison and/or $1000 fine.

Under current law, individuals have the right to attend public meetings of the board of commissioners but they do not have the right to address the board unless it is a zoning hearing or other public hearing. Citizen participation in commission meetings is subject to local policy. This bill gives citizens the right to speak at commission meetings for up to five minutes on official actions and other topics relating to county business. Although the board would be able to enact reasonable rules regarding decorum and identification of speakers, the counties would not be allowed to require citizens to sign up to speak any earlier than the beginning of the meeting. Many counties require citizens to sign up ahead of time with their proposed topic to make sure that the county is prepared with information helpful to the citizen at the meeting.

HB 1439 would exempt "farm buildings and structures" from the International Building Code and the International Existing Building Code.  "Farm building or structure" would be defined as buildings not used for residential purposes and not used primarily for public use, but, instead, used primarily or in connection with agricultural operations (e.g., storage, sheltering, raising, handling or production of farm products or waste by products; business or office uses relating to agricultural operations with an occupancy load of fewer than 11 people; use of farm machinery or equipment; maintenance or storage of vehicles, machinery or equipment; storage or use of feed, supplies or materials used on the farm; and implementation of best management practices associated with agricultural operations).

While the current state constitution limits the number of counties in Georgia to 159, these resolutions would provide an exception for the recreation of previously existing counties that merged with another county. Specifically, it is aimed at recreating Milton County north of I-285 in what is now Fulton County. It would also allow for the recreation of Campbell County in south Fulton County. At this point, we are not aware of any other counties that would be directly affected. Normally, ACCG does not get involved in opposing or supporting local legislation or general legislation that only applies to one county. However, both proposed amendments could potentially have serious negative impacts on other adjoining counties. Specifically, the enabling act could allow the legislature to slice off parts of adjoining counties, like desirable commercial districts, and move those areas to the new county. That being the case, DeKalb, Gwinnett, Forsyth, Cherokee and Cobb counties would be at risk. If Campbell County were to be recreated, Douglas, Coweta, Fayette, Clayton and Carroll counties would be at risk. Furthermore, the proposed amendment does not resolve funding for MARTA and Grady hospital which is shared by Fulton and DeKalb counties. While not in opposition to either resolution, ACCG has expressed concern about the proposals and what needs to be resolved to protect county taxpayers’ interests.

While ACCG continues to study the implications of this far-reaching legislation, it creates an exhaustive interbasin transfer permit requirement for all existing and proposed water withdrawals and wastewater discharges than involve transfers of more than 100,000 gallons per day and outright prohibits IBTs under certain conditions. Please note up front that current Georgia law already prohibits IBTs from outside the Metro Atlanta District to within.

While ACCG recognizes how controversial IBTs are, this bill would have a dramatic and costly impact on the over 20 communities already using incidental IBTs by expanding their permitting process exponentially. Other concerns ACCG has are that the bill:

• impacts all of Georgia, through stringent IBT restrictions on surface and ground water sources. Note that 94 Georgia counties lie in two or more river basins
• places a priority on maintaining certain environmental conditions before considering the need of human health, sanitation and future economic development (which are all lower in priority)
• categorizes the withdrawal of groundwater and discharging to surface water as an IBT
• contains myriad requirements in the permitting process which leaves room for environmental advocacy groups to challenge IBT permits at the costs to local governments and communities
• likely would require reservoirs across the state to artificially supplement natural flows to maintain certain volumes for downstream states
• appears to make IBTs currently being used in over 10 Georgia counties illegal, which would make it difficult in meeting their communities' water needs.