2024 Legislative Recap
A look back the Georgia General Assembly’s 2024 Legislative Session
Principled advocacy relies upon sound data and inclusive collaboration. With this in mind, the Georgia Conservancy's Advocacy team is under the Gold Dome every day of the Legislative Session working with partners in advocating for the protection of Georgia's land, water, and communities.
SIGN UP FOR OUR WEEKLY 2025 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
There are often many surprises during the three-month legislative session and 2024 was no different.
As the sun set on the 2024 Legislative Session on March 28, legislation affording the Okefenokee Swamp additional protections from mining proposed near its border did not receive a final vote, while a bill that threatened salt marsh protection never made it out of committee. These were just two of the many measures the Georgia Conservancy focused on during the session.
As the second year of a two-year session, the Georgia Conservancy had a clear set of priorities - monitoring any legislation introduced that could be of benefit or detriment to our state’s natural resources.
Principled advocacy relies upon sound data and inclusive collaboration. With this in mind, the Georgia Conservancy's Advocacy team was under the Gold Dome every day of the Legislative Session working with partners in advocating for the protection of Georgia's land, water, and communities.
If you are not already on our legislative email list and would like to receive our weekly Legislative Updates, which are emailed every week during the session, please click here to subscribe. In addition to the weekly email, you can also find the updates at: www.georgiaconservancy.org/advocacy/update
The Georgia Conservancy closely followed the following measures during the 2024 Legislative Session
Trail Ridge Dragline Mining Moratorium – Senate Bill 132
An amended Senate Bill 132, sponsored by Sen. Brandon Beach (R-21), proposed a 3-year moratorium (July 2024 thru June 2027) on the acceptance of applications by Georgia EPD for dragline surface mining permits of heavy sands minerals. The measure overwhelmingly passed the House on March 26 with a vote of 167 to 4, however on sine die, during a slow-moving process and an agenda full of bills of greater priority to the Lieutenant Governor, the amended SB 132 did not receive a floor vote by the Senate.
The moratorium language replaced language originally found in Senate Bill 132, a move supported by Speaker Jon Burns. The moratorium in Senate Bill 132 focused on the mining technique and minerals specified by Twin Pines Minerals, LLC for the proposed mine along a geological formation known as Trail Ridge in southeast Georgia. In essence, this statutorily named the Twin Pines project as a pilot project and sought to restrict their proposed mining technique to the pilot site until scientific data could be obtained to determine the effects of the mine on surrounding ecosystems.
Importantly, Senate Bill 132 offered what the Georgia Conservancy believes is a “clean moratorium” and did not include concerning language found in an earlier moratorium measure, House Bill 1338 - specifically language that would have limited judicial review of petitions and allowed for permits and/or rulings to be issued by default.
The effort to legislative pass a mining moratorium on Trail Ridge closely followed the February 9 announcement that Georgia EPD had issued draft mining permits to Twin Pines. The draft permits are specific to a 700-plus-acre demonstration site with 500-plus acres of mining activity on Trail Ridge in Charlton County. This site, known as Phase 1, would be the first step in Twin Pines establishing a larger 8,000-acre heavy mineral sand strip mine on Trail Ridge, along the southeastern border of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.
While the amended Senate Bill 132 did not expressly prohibit the modification of draft permits or permit applications already underway, Twin Pines’ Draft Mining Permit is the only permit or application that currently fits this definition. Section C.3 of this permit specifically prohibited the expansion of the proposed pilot project area under this permit. Section C.3 also stated that any proposed modifications to the operations proposed under this permit would have to be approved by Georgia EPD.
Of course, the Georgia Conservancy favored a longer moratorium or a moratorium that could be extended; however, we respected the wishes of the bill sponsors and understood that three years was the longest moratorium that they could support. Many things can happen in three years, including a shift in legislative agendas, a shift in corporate policy or interests, or the sources of necessary funding for a conservation option.
The proposed three-year moratorium would have provided breathing room to explore more permanent conservation options for Trail Ridge, while still respecting the private property rights deemed crucial to legislators. This legislation struck a compromise and sent a signal that the House was willing to act to protect the Okefenokee.
It typically takes many years for a mining permit to be issued, so if applications cannot be submitted until 2027, it is unlikely that any permits for dragline mining of heavy mineral sands would be issued in this decade.
“Georgia Conservancy is disappointed by the lack of Senate action on SB 132,” Georgia Conservancy President Katherine Moore said in an email to The Current. “Discussions over a moratorium as a critical pathway to long-term conservation resulted in overwhelming House support with a vote of 167 to 4. However, the bill was not a priority for Senate leadership during a slow-moving agenda on sine die.
“Our organization is grateful for House support and courage in seeing the value of a moratorium. The chamber’s votes on a moratorium clearly indicate common ground can be found towards legislative considerations for the Okefenokee Swamp. It is imperative that this be understood by all.”
The amended Senate Bill 132 passed the full House but did not receive a vote when it returned to the Senate for approval.
The Georgia Conservancy strongly supported the passage of the House-amended Senate Bill 132.
Water Rights and Freshwater Access - House Bill 1172 and Senate Bill 542
During last year's session, House Resolution 519 established a House Study Committee on Fishing Access to Freshwater Resources to provide clarity around public access to particular freshwater rivers in Georgia and the rights of landowners with adjacent properties.
The Study Committee focused much of its efforts on addressing questions and concerns regarding Senate Bill 115, which passed during the closing hours of the 2023 Legislative Session and addressing the issues that led to the bill's introduction. Senate Bill 115 added a new subsection to the Georgia code as it relates to the rights of adjoining landowners in navigable streams.
After holding four hearings across the state during the interim, the Study Committee issued an 8-page report with the recommendations to House Speaker Jon Burns.
Two measures, House Bill 1172, sponsored by Rep. James Burchett (R-176), and Senate Bill 542, sponsored by Sen. Sam Watson (R-11) were introduced during the 2024 session as a legislative response to the findings of a House Study Committee.
While both HB 1172 and SB 542 sought to clarify the law as it pertains to state ownership of navigable stream beds and clarify language that expresses the public right of passage on navigable streams, SB 542 provided much stronger support for the rights of those boating, hunting, and fishing on such streams.
In the end, it was the House’s version that passed both chambers. The differences in the two measures will most likely be analyzed and discussed during Study Committee meetings held this summer and fall (learn more below).
House Bill 1172 passed the full House and the full Senate with a vote of 34-18. It will now move to the Governor's desk for signature. Senate Bill 542 passed the full Senate but did not receive a vote from the House Judiciary Committee.
The Georgia Conservancy supported the passage of Senate Bill 542 due to the measure’s strong support of boating, hunting, and fishing rights We had supported amending House Bill 1172 to mirror language found in Senate Bill 542.
House Study Committee on Navigable Streams – House Resolution 1554
House Resolution 1554, sponsored by Rep. Lynn Smith (R-70) establishes a House Study Committee to evaluate issues surrounding navigable streams and potentially recommend legislative actions determining which streams, or parts of streams, are navigable in Georgia.
The Georgia Conservancy has a long history of promoting, supporting, and advocating for recreational boating on Georgia’s rivers and streams, and will keep a close watch on this committee's proposed actions.
House Resolution 1554 passed the full House with a vote of 167-0. As a study committee resolution, HR 1554 did not need to pass the Senate to be adopted.
The Georgia Conservancy supported this passage of HR 1554.
Senate Study Committee on the Preservation of Georgia's Farmlands - Senate Resolution 470
Senate Resolution 470, sponsored by Senator Billy Hickman (R-4), creates a Senate Study Committee on the Preservation of Georgia's Farmland.
In referring to the Georgia Conservancy's Georgia Now and Forever Initiative, which determined that "Georgia lost approximately 2.6 million acres of crop, hay, and pasture land from 1974 to 2016", the Senate Study Committee's established purpose will be to decide if "additional legislative measures may be necessary to give local communities the ability to protect Georgia's farmlands as a vital state resource and to slow the permanent conversion of this resource to other uses."
During last year’s Legislative Session, the Georgia General Assembly overwhelmingly passed the Georgia Farmland Conservation Act, Senate Bill 220, to offer farmland owners a financial incentive to conserve lands facing development pressure. The legislation was created by the Georgia Conservancy in concert with Representative Richard Dickey, Senator Russ Goodman, and the Department of Agriculture. (Learn more about the Georgia Farmland Conservation Program)
SR 470 passed the full Senate with a vote of 47-1. As a study committee resolution, SR 470 does not need to pass the House to be adopted.
The Georgia Conservancy supported this passage of SR 470
Revising Maximum Penalties for Surface Mining Violations - House Bill 436
House Bill 436, sponsored by Rep. John Corbett (R- 174), sought to increase the maximum criminal penalties for certain surface mining violations from $1,000 to $10,000.
Language from the bill stated: "Any person who engages in surface mining in violation of this part or who willfully misrepresents any fact in any matter required by this part or willfully gives false information in any application or report required by this part shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than $100.00 nor more than $10,000.00 for each offense. Each day of noncompliance after notification shall be considered a separate offense."
House Bill 436 passed the House last session and passed the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment during the 2024 Session. However, it did not receive a vote by the full Senate this year.
The Georgia Conservancy supported the passage of House Bill 436.
Issuance of Water Permits to Private Companies – House Bill 1146
House Bill 1146, sponsored by Rep. Ron Stephens (R-164), requires Georgia EPD to issue water permits to private water suppliers in Coastal Georgia to provide or expand potable water supply services and facilities within the service area of a local government or utility without their concurrence if the local agency cannot provide water supply to the area in question within 18 months.
This measure only applies to water service and not to sanitary sewer service. Without sanitary sewer service, the provision of water leads to sprawling subdivisions due to the limitations on residential density required by septic systems.
We believe that House Bill 1146 incentivizes the development of decentralized, small private systems, contrary to the Coastal Georgia Plan to Manage Saltwater Intrusion and contrary to the regional approach of the Georgia Coastal Regional Water Plan. A proliferation of small water systems will have an uncontrolled, cumulative impact on saltwater intrusion in the Floridan Aquifer, which could be significant.
Local governments and utilities plan for water and sewer supply capital improvements and expansion of services over many years and build their economic proformas based on the future provision of services and future customer base. The idea that a local government or utility can serve a new development within 18 months, just because the request was made demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how large utility systems operate. Additionally, if private utilities are allowed to invade a local government or utility service area based on this timeframe, then this could affect the master plan, the rate structure, and the bond repayment schedules that are based on the pro forma of that utility system.
As written, House Bill 1146 can fundamentally erode a local government’s ability to plan for and direct growth through the provision of utility services. Furthermore, it runs contrary to the purpose of Service Delivery Strategy rules (Chapter 70 1 of Title 36) that require local governments to assign responsibility for the provision of utility services.
House Bill 1146 passed the full House and passed the full Senate on Sine Die with a vote of 32-22. It will now move to the Governor's desk for signature.
The Georgia Conservancy opposed HB 1146 due to its negative impact on local government’s ability to plan regionally for water and sewer supply and the development that would be served by those utilities.
Determining Ownership of Salt Marsh - House Bill 370
Earlier in the session, a substitute to House Bill 370, sponsored by Rep. Matt Reeves (R-99), narrowly passed the House Judiciary Committee with a vote of 6-5. The House Rules Committee then recommitted HB 370 to the House Judiciary Committee for further discussion and/or changes. As was the case with the previous version of House Bill 370, the substitute measure sought to alter the process of determining the private title of coastal salt marsh in Georgia by way of a crown grant or state grant. The amended measure provided greater details into what this proposed process would look like, and in doing so, further cemented our position that House Bill 370 was a bad bill that could be detrimental to our state's celebrated coastal marsh resources.
The vast majority of Georgia's nearly 400,000 acres of salt marsh are owned by the State of Georgia and are protected by the Georgia Coastal Marshlands Protection Act (CMPA). The CMPA has provided Georgia with consistent and "constant political and regulatory enforcement of marsh protection measures" for nearly 55 years. Thanks to this enduring legislation, Georgia's expansive network of salt marsh is intact and remains one of the most protected ecosystems on the eastern seaboard.
House Bill 370 sought to allow private parties who claim ownership of salt marsh through a centuries-old crown grant or state grant to present their evidence via abstract of title to the State Properties Commission. Under HB 370, if the State Properties Commission failed to issue a determination within 180 days, then it would be deemed an admission by the State that the petitioner has a clear title, and the salt marsh in question would no longer belong to the State of Georgia and the public.
House Bill 370 presented several concerning issues relating to the continued protection of Georgia's salt marsh ecosystem. Of these, the Georgia Conservancy had some key issues of concern:
Salt marshes are held by the State pursuant to the common law public trust doctrine. This legislation could disrupt a pillar of protection for these valuable coastlands by shifting the responsibility for proving ownership from private parties to the State Properties Commission and establishing an incredibly small window (180 days) in which the Commission must do so. This is too short of a time frame to assess property documentation dating back 250 years and before the founding of the United States.
Under current law, the State Properties Commission must receive legislative approval from the Georgia General Assembly (a public action) for the sale of property owned by the State of Georgia, as well as grants of easement rights on State-owned property. This bill sought to cede this authority from the Georgia General Assembly to the State Properties Commission, which may not have the resources to handle and administer such determinations. Furthermore, the State Properties Commission was not involved in the drafting of House Bill 370.
Under House Bill 370, the evidence that the petitioning private party must present to prove ownership was flimsy, at best. The petitioner would only need: (1) to show evidence of the mere “existence” of a crown grant for the property in question, but not proof of the chain of title, only that the title can be traced back 40 years; and (2) that that property has visual evidence of manmade disruption or manipulation. Much of our salt marsh retains the visual scars of decades upon decades of manmade manipulation prior to the CMPA. This does not mean they are not being actively and successfully conserved by the State.
This bill was framed as a conservation measure, though such properties in question are currently conserved under State law through the CMPA. Marshlands disturbed centuries ago before the 1970 passage of CMPA currently provide excellent ecoservices and wildlife habitat and do not need to be disturbed by private parties for “conservation purposes”. If the State finds restoration necessary within state-owned salt marsh, there is currently an established process through which restoration can be undertaken.
By the end of Crossover Day, the amended HB 370 had not received a vote in the House Judiciary Committee and therefore did not move forward during this session.
The Georgia Conservancy strongly opposed the passage of House Bill 370 due to our numerous abovementioned concerns.
List of Navigable Streams – House Bill 1397
Introduced as unofficial companion legislation to House Bill 1172, House Bill 1397, sponsored by Rep. James Burchett (R-176), sought to establish a list of streams or parts of streams that are presumed to be navigable in Georgia.
The Georgia Conservancy has a long history of promoting, supporting, and advocating for recreational boating on Georgia’s rivers and streams, and we continue to have questions regarding portions of this proposed list. As shared by concerned parties during the Environmental Quality Subcommittee of the Natural Resources and Environment Committee on 2/26, the list excludes sections of river that have a historically-proven record of public use by recreational boaters.
House Bill 1397 did not receive a vote in the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment before the end of Crossover Day, and therefore did not move forward during this session.
The Georgia Conservancy hopes that our concerns can addressed during the House Study Committee on Navigable Streams in anticipation of similar legislation being filed during next year’s session.
Okefenokee Protection Act - House Bill 71
House Bill 71, sponsored by Rep. Darlene Taylor (R-173), sought to prohibit the Georgia Department of Environmental Protection (EPD) from issuing, modifying, or renewing any permit or accepting any bond to conduct surface mining activities on the geological formation known as Trail Ridge along the eastern edge of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.
This measure did not advance out of the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment during the 2023 Legislative Session and was not heard by the committee during the 2024 Legislative Session.
Beginning in late 2020, Alabama-based Twin Pines, LLC applied to the EPD for permits to surface mine on Trail Ridge near the southeastern boundary of the Okefenokee NWR.
The Okefenokee is a federally-protected wilderness and a globally significant wetland bordered by Trail Ridge. The ridge itself is a complex of hydrogeological settings—essentially a saturated sandhill. Forming an eastern barrier to the swamps and wetlands of the Okefenokee, Trail Ridge is not only ecologically important in and of itself, but also serves as scaffolding for the health of the Okefenokee.
House Bill 71 did not receive a hearing in the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment during the 2024 Legislative Session.
The Georgia Conservancy supported the passage of House Bill 71, and while it proved unlikely legislative action on HB 71 would occur during the session, the Georgia Conservancy continued to support legislative measures and other avenues to permanently protect Trail Ridge and the Okefenokee Swamp.
Georgia Conservancy Advocacy Program
For a statewide nonprofit organization, there are more barriers than incentives to including an Advocacy Program in its mission and work.
Advocacy work is difficult to resource. It takes a special disposition to balance various relationships with elected officials and between partners, and an interest not only in policy but also in politics, process, and strategy.
Last year’s session demonstrated again why the investment in an effective and engaged Advocacy Program at the Georgia Conservancy is so important – it’s necessary!
Please consider a tax-deductible donation to the Georgia Conservancy. We couldn't do this important work without you!
House and Senate Committees
The Conservancy works closely with members of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment, House Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment, House Committee on Game, Fish and Parks, and the House Committee on Ways and Means. Bills that originate in these committees often have the greatest impact on Georgia's natural environment.
Please advocate for sound environmental policies that benefit all of Georgia by reaching out to your elected officials. This is our Georgia.
QUESTIONS?
Please contact Georgia Conservancy Communication Director Brian Foster at bfoster@gaconservancy.org with any questions regarding the 2024 Legislative Session.
The Georgia Conservancy is a donor-supported organization. Learn more about how you can support the Georgia Conservancy and be a part of our mission to protect and conserve Georgia's natural resources.
Click here to sign up for our weekly legislative updates.
Click here to sign up for our monthly newsletter, ePanorama.
Thank you for your support!
