ATLANTA – Legislation legalizing online sports betting in Georgia cleared a committee in the state House of Representatives for a second time Monday.
The House Economic Development and Tourism Committee passed the measure almost three weeks ago, but it was sent back for further work and a second vote.
The biggest change in the bill since its original airing was an increase in the tax companies licensed to run sportsbooks in Georgia would pay.
The substitute bill approved Monday calls for a 20% tax, up from 14% in the original measure. A sports betting bill before the state Senate calls for a tax rate of 16%.
Tennessee, which legalized online sports betting last year, is already collecting 20% from sportsbook operators, said Rep. Ron Stephens, R-Savannah, the committee’s chairman and the bill’s chief sponsor.
Going from a 14% tax to 20% would yield another $20 million a year in revenue for education in Georgia, including the HOPE Scholarships program, Stephens said.
Under House Bill 86, at least six sportsbook operators would be licensed by the Georgia Lottery Corp. to run online sportsbooks in Georgia, paying application fees of $50,000 and annual licensing fees of $900,000.
Before Monday’s vote, Rep. Miriam Paris, D-Macon, criticized the bill for not guaranteeing minority-owned businesses would be able to participate in the sports betting industry in Georgia.
“[The Black community is] participating heavily in the lottery and gaming,” she said. “We need to know our communities are going to benefit.”
Rep. Becky Evans, D-Atlanta, said she’d like to see the legislation steer some of the proceeds from sports betting toward need-based scholarships. HOPE bases its scholarships on merit.
But Stephens said inserting any language in the bill dealing with minority-owned business participation or need-based scholarships could require a constitutional amendment. Going that route would subject sports betting to a statewide referendum next year, which would delay it from taking effect until 2023, he said.
Stephens said Georgians already are gambling on sports, but the state can’t get any tax revenue from it because it’s being done illegally using offshore betting sites.
Rep. Don Hogan, R-St. Simons Island, said legalizing sports betting in Georgia won’t change that.
“Sports gambling that goes on now will continue going on offshore,” he said. “We won’t have an effect on that.”
“We’ll compete with them,” Stephens shot back.
The bill now moves to the House Rules Committee to schedule a floor vote.
ATLANTA – A lawyer representing the state of Florida asked the U.S. Supreme Court Monday to order Georgia to use less water irrigating crops in order to restore Florida’s devastated oyster industry.
But Georgia’s lawyer told the justices the costs of a court-ordered cap on water consumption by farmers in Southwest Georgia would far outweigh the minimal benefits it would provide the Sunshine State’s oyster harvests.
“A 50% cut in irrigating would cost Georgia hundreds of millions of dollars to benefit Florida’s oyster industry by 1%,” Craig Primis said during hourlong opening arguments.
The tri-state “water wars” between Florida, Georgia and Alabama over water allocation from the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River Basin have dragged on for nearly three decades. But Florida’s lawsuit against Georgia heard on Monday dates back only to 2013, a year after the collapse of that state’s oyster industry in Apalachicola Bay.
Florida is seeking to cap Georgia’s water consumption to save an oyster industry that otherwise would be “irretrievably lost,” Gregory Garre, Florida’s lawyer, told the justices.
Georgia has countered that such a cap would bring growth in metro Atlanta grinding to a halt and devastate the state’s Southwest Georgia Farm Belt.
Florida blames the collapse of its oyster industry on historic low flows of water through the ACF system at its border with Georgia, which increased levels of salinity in Apalachicola Bay to harmful levels for its once-thriving oyster industry.
“One of the most unique estuaries in the Northern Hemisphere … essentially became a marine environment because of the increased salinity,” Garre said.
Garre confirmed what has been clear at least since a special master heard the dispute in late 2019: Florida is no longer focusing on the amount of water used in metro Atlanta to supply the region’s growing population. Essentially, Florida has conceded that Atlanta-area municipal water utilities have made such strides in water conservation that a case can’t be made in that part of the river basin.
Garre acknowledged in answer to a question Monday from Justice Amy Coney Barrett that Florida instead is targeting the amount of water uses for irrigation in Southwest Georgia. He suggested Georgia could fix the problem with steps that wouldn’t cost much, including halting illegal irrigation, eliminating over-watering, reducing farm-pond evaporation and doing a better job scheduling irrigation.
“Georgia’s unrestrained consumption is unreasonable,” Garre said. “Meaningful relief is available at little or no cost to Georgia.”
But Primis said the collapse of Florida’s oyster industry was a “self-inflicted wound” caused by overharvesting. He pointed to data backing up overharvesting as the cause of the devastation.
“The [sand]bars that were heavily fished collapsed, and the ones that were not heavily fished … thrived,” he said.
While both lawyers were put on the spot with questions from the justices, as is usually the case before the Supreme Court, some justices appeared particularly skeptical of Florida’s arguments. Special Master Paul Kelly recommended dismissing the lawsuit after he heard from the two sides in 2019.
At one point, Justice Stephen Breyer supported Georgia’s argument that overfishing occurred.
“You did overharvest after the oil spill,” Breyer told Garre, referring to the explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. “You said, ‘Get them now or never.’ ”
Breyer also expressed frustration that the legal dispute between the states has lasted so long. Monday’s oral arguments marked the second time the Supreme Court has heard the Florida v. Georgia case.
“Has anybody ever tried to work out that Florida would pay Georgia to solve the problem?” the justice asked.
A ruling by the high court is expected by the end of June.
ATLANTA – The state will distribute more than $552 million in federal coronavirus relief aid to landlords and tenants affected by the pandemic, Gov. Brian Kemp announced Friday.
Gov. Brian Kemp
“The effects of COVID-19 have hit many Georgians hard financially,” Kemp said in a prepared statement. “In addition to protecting lives, we have to protect livelihoods so that Georgians can continue to have economic opportunity. I am pleased to be able to provide this rental relief to renters and landlords who have been impacted the most.”
The state Department of Community Affairs will administer the program under U.S. Treasury guidelines that are still being developed. The money will go directly to landlords and utilities.
In general, households that qualify for unemployment benefits or have suffered a reduction in household income or other financial hardship due to the pandemic will be eligible for assistance.
Those at risk of homelessness or housing instability also will qualify for the program.
Georgians with household incomes at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) will be eligible, while those below 50% of AMI will be given priority, as will people who have been unemployed for 90 days or longer.
Payments generally may not exceed 12 months, but some households may qualify for 15 months under certain circumstances.
The agency expects to launch a public application portal to the program next month. For more information on the program, click on GeorgiaRentalAssistance.ga.gov.
A federal eviction moratorium now in place has been extended until March 31. As a result, no one should be evicted solely for non-payment of rent at least until that date.
ATLANTA – How much water metro Atlanta will be allowed to pull from the Chattahoochee River for decades to come and how much Southwest Georgia can pump from farm irrigation wells will be at stake Monday.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a lawsuit the state of Florida filed in 2013 demanding the justices order Georgia to use less water. It’s just the latest episode in the so-called “tri-state water wars,” a legal battle over water allocation between Florida, Georgia and Alabama that has dragged on for nearly three decades.
The suit claims Georgia is taking so much water out of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin to meet the needs of fast-growing metro Atlanta and irrigate crops in the lower Flint that Florida isn’t left with enough freshwater for its once-thriving oyster industry Apalachicola Bay.
Georgia’s lawyers counter that the cap on water consumption Florida is seeking would cripple the metro region’s economy by halting growth and devastate farmers.
Georgia appears to have the advantage going into Monday’s hearing, said Chris Manganiello, water policy director for the Chattahoochee Riverkeeper. A special master the Supreme Court appointed to hear the dispute recommended in late 2019 that the court dismiss Florida’s case.
“Special Master [Paul] Kelly was pretty clear: Florida failed to make a compelling argument that Georgia was using too much water or that any harm to Florida’s fisheries could be traced to Georgia,” Manganiello said.
But Gil Rogers, director of the Georgia and Alabama offices of the Southern Environmental Law Center, is less certain. He pointed to the court’s decision in 2018 to assign the case to Special Master Kelly after an earlier special master already had sided with Georgia. That 5-4 ruling followed oral arguments held earlier in 2018.
“It’s a little hard to use [Kelly’s] recommendation as a predictor, particularly since the Supreme Court has ordered oral arguments again,” Rogers said.
Rogers said the court’s different makeup adds to the uncertainty. Two new justices – Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett – have joined the court since it last weighed in on the case.
Another key change since the last time the Supreme Court heard the lawsuit is an agreement Georgia signed with the U.S. Army Court of Engineers last month that for the first time authorizes the use of Lake Lanier as a water supply. While the federally managed reservoir has been supplying water for decades, its use for that purpose has been among the legal issues contested during the water wars.
Since the $70 million contract runs through 2050, metro Atlanta water policy planners and regional business leaders are celebrating it as safeguarding a water supply that has been under threat from the Florida lawsuit and others
“This contract will help secure our region’s long-range future by ensuring access to water from Lake Lanier to responsibly support long-term growth while protecting this vital natural resource,” Katherine Zitsch, managing director of natural resources for the Atlanta Regional Commission, said in a prepared statement.
While a Florida victory in the current lawsuit theoretically could render moot the new contract between Georgia and the Army Corps, Rogers doesn’t see it as a threat to the agreement.
“The Supreme Court, if it makes a substantive ruling on water allocation, is likely to stop short of directing how that would happen,” he said. “I don’t think the Supreme Court would throw out the contract.”
Water conservation a key legal argument
Metro Atlanta’s ability to grow its population while reining in water consumption has been one of Georgia’s major arguments in defending against Florida’s lawsuit.
Since 2000, total water use in the region has dropped by more than 10%, even as the population has increased by more than 1.3 million.
“Given our region’s excellent record on water conservation through the years, I am confident that our communities will make wise use of this essential resource going forward,” added Katie Kirkpatrick, president and CEO of the Metro Atlanta Chamber.
In fact, metro Atlanta’s water conservation efforts have been so successful that Florida’s lawyers for the last couple of years have focused more on the amount of water farmers in the lower Flint use to irrigate their crops.
But Gordon Rogers, executive director of Albany-based Flint Riverkeeper, said farmers also have made great progress reducing their water consumption.
For one thing, an initiative to install meters on all irrigation wells measuring how much water they use has been completed, he said.
Also, when Hurricane Michael tore through Southwest Georgia in 2018, it forced farmers to replace a lot of their old infrastructure with more modern equipment that uses less water, Rogers said.
Georgia’s lawyers also have cited the state’s long-running moratorium on new well permits in 23 counties drawing from either surface or groundwater in the lower Flint as evidence of a good-faith effort to save water.
“People can’t get permits for the Floridan aquifer or a creek,” Rogers said. “I’m enough of a constitutionalist to say that’s a usurpation of property rights … It’s not a solution. It’s a defense in court.”
Gil Rogers said no matter which state wins the current case, the tri-state water wars will continue. Alabama is still a party to the dispute, specifically through its appeal of the 2017 decision by the Army Corps of Engineers that led to last month’s agreement with Georgia over Lake Lanier.
Ultimately, the solution lies outside the courtroom in cooperative water management among the states, Rogers said.
“Until the states agree on some kind of commission or authority to look after the health of the system, we’ll have ongoing litigation,” he said. “[But] it will be interesting to see how this decision changes the dynamic among the three states.”
ATLANTA – Legalizing sports betting could divert an estimated $4.8 billion a year Georgians now spend wagering on games illegally, tax it, and put a portion of the proceeds toward education, supporters said Thursday.
The state Senate Regulated Industries and Utilities Committee held a hearing on legislation that would legalize online sports betting in Georgia under the jurisdiction of the Georgia Lottery Corp.
“Over 2 million [Georgians] are doing it now,” said Sen. Jeff Mullis, R-Chickamauga, chief sponsor of Senate Bill 142. “Do you know who’s in control of it? The bookies.”
Mullis’ bill is similar to sports betting legislation before the Georgia House of Representatives.
Both measures would put the state Lottery Commission in charge of licensing at least six operators such as FanDuel or DraftKings to run online sports books in Georgia. The companies would pay annual licensing fees of $900,000.
But the bills also feature some key differences. While the licensed operators would pay a tax of 14% of their adjusted gross revenues toward Georgia’s HOPE Scholarships and pre-kindergarten programs, the Senate version calls for a tax of 10%.
The House bill would limit bettors to using debit cards, a provision intended to keep potential problem gamblers from getting in their over their heads.
The Senate measure, however, would allow both debit cards and credit cards.
Josh Mackey, an Atlanta-based lobbyist representing FanDuel and DraftKings, said illegal offshore sportsbooks typically allow customers to use credit cards to place bets. Not allowing credit cards when placing bets legally under a new Georgia law would act as a disincentive, he said.
“We’re trying to get people to move away from [illegal bets] to legalized betting,” he said.
Sen. Lindsey Tippins, R-Marietta, a member of the committee, said legalizing sports betting would divert revenue away from the lottery.
“[Sports betting] does not return the state nearly the amount of money the lottery does,” he said. “I think we need to take that into consideration.”
But Mullis said most people who play the lottery don’t engage in sports betting.
“It doesn’t take away from the lottery,” he said. “It’s extra money.”
The bill’s opponents argued sports betting cannot be legalized in Georgia without a constitutional amendment.
Virginia Galloway, regional field director of the Duluth-based Faith and Freedom Coalition, cited a 2016 opinion from the Georgia attorney general’s office to that effect.
But Robert Highsmith, a lawyer representing the Atlanta Hawks, said the state Constitution only expressly prohibits casino gambling. Sports betting only requires the legislature to pass a statute authorizing the Georgia Lottery Corp, to add sports betting to its current operations, he said.
Going the constitutional route also would delay sports betting because it would have to go on next year’s statewide ballot for Georgia voters to decide, Highsmith argued.
“It would be cleaner and eliminate that debate,” Highsmith acknowledged. “But if we do that, it would be at least 2023 before it could be effective.”
Committee Chairman Bill Cowsert, R-Athens, suggested that Mullis prepare a constitutional amendment to introduce next week in case lawmakers decide it’s necessary.
