Democrat Jen Jordan and Republican Chris Carr. (Official Senate office and Attorney General office photos)
ATLANTA — Georgia’s three candidates for the state’s top lawyer job sparred over abortion, guns, crime and even oil pipelines during a Tuesday debate in Atlanta.
Much of the debate focused on how each would approach the state’s controversial “heartbeat” abortion law, which outlaws most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy.
Democratic state Sen. and lawyer Jen Jordan of Atlanta has been a vocal opponent of the law. She has previously indicated she would not enforce it if elected attorney general.
During Tuesday’s debate, Jordan said she believes the Georgia abortion law violates the state Constitution.
“I think specifically what we have to look to is the right of privacy under Georgia’s state Constitution, which was first identified in 1905,” she said.
“I have stood up for the women of this state, fighting to protect human trafficking victims, fighting to protect victims of gangs, fighting for those that are being taken advantage of from an elder abuse standpoint ” incumbent Republican Attorney General Chris Carr said in response.
The Georgia abortion law does not allow a pregnant woman to be prosecuted, Carr said, and Jordan’s claim is a scare tactic.
“If anyone, it’s the [medical] providers that are provided for in this law,” he said. “It would be up to the district attorneys to make that determination.”
Jordan hit back, pointing out that the Georgia abortion law specifies that an embryo is a person and this new legal definition could allow prosecution of pregnant women.
“When we think about the homicide statute, the manslaughter statute … the child abuse statute, all of that would actually apply … to a pregnant woman if she were to harm the embryo,” Jordan said. “It’s ridiculous to say that this law does not let a prosecutor go after a woman because it’s clear that it does.”
The candidates also sparred over crime. Carr pointed to his track record in prosecuting human trafficking and gang crimes. He also said Jordan missed many key votes – including on laws about crime – while she was in the state legislature.
Jordan said crime has increased over 60% in the state and that Carr had done nothing to address the issue.
She said she is a supporter of the Second Amendment but believes in gun control measures such as red-flag and safe-storage laws.
“As the next attorney general, I’m going to work with local police departments and agencies to get illegal guns off the streets and out of violent street gangs,” Jordan vowed.
Carr also decried the role of federal overreach and touted his support for free enterprise and competition in Georgia.
“Number one, I believe in the power of the free enterprise system,” he said. “I believe in the rule of law.”
Carr pointed to his decision to join other states in a lawsuit over an executive order issued by President Joe Biden to stop construction on the Keystone Pipeline.
“I’ve tried to protect lives, livelihoods and liberty over the past six years,” Carr said. “In fighting for the Constitution, I’m fighting for American jobs, lower gas prices, and less reliance on evil regimes that hate us.”
In response, Jordan accused Carr of focusing more on filing lawsuits against the federal government than prosecuting crime.
“People in this state do not feel safe,” she said. “He’s actually sued the Biden administration more than he’s gone after gangs or sex traffickers.”
Libertarian Martin Cowen also weighed in, taking Carr’s position against federal overreach but agreeing with Jordan’s stance on protecting abortion rights.
Cowen, like Jordan and Carr, graduated from the University of Georgia School of Law.
“The next attorney general for the state of Georgia shall be a graduate of the University of Georgia law school,” Cowen said. “Go Dawgs!”
Early voting in Georgia continues through Nov. 4, the last Friday before Election Day Nov. 8.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
ATLANTA – The state Supreme Court Thursday heard arguments about the power of local referendums to change county government decisions – such as Camden County’s decision to purchase property to build a long-planned spaceport – under the Georgia Constitution.
The case pits Camden County voters opposed to the spaceport against their own county government in a case that could influence both the future of the plan and voter oversight of local elected officials in Georgia.
Camden County leaders have sought to build a spaceport for years, claiming it will bring jobs and economic development to the southeast Georgia region. The county commission agreed to an options contract to purchase the land needed for the space-launch facility from Union Carbide Corporation back in 2015.
Earlier this year, local opponents successfully led a petition drive asking for a referendum on whether the county’s approval of the land purchase should be repealed.
In a March special election, about 4,100 people voted against the county’s plan to purchase the land for the spaceport and around 1,600 voted in favor. The county appealed a superior court’s ruling that the referendum could proceed, giving rise to the case the Supreme Court considered Thursday.
Lawyers for Camden County argued the Georgia Constitution limits the authority of such local referendums. That authority does not extend to allowing voters to veto a county commission’s resolution.
“[The] referendum in Camden County was a legal nullity … the constitution did not authorize it,” said Pearson Cunningham, one of the attorneys for Camden County.
In contrast, lawyers for the petitioners who pushed for the referendum argued the vote was valid under a plain reading of the state constitution.
“The Georgia Constitution says what it says – the right to repeal a county ordinance is explicit… [Camden County] wants the court to determine that the Constitution does not mean what it says,” said Phillip Thompson, one of the lawyers for the people who led the petition drive to hold the referendum.
Earlier this summer, Union Carbide, the land’s current owner, said it no longer intends to sell to Camden County and noted the referendum results invalidated the previous options contract the county held to purchase the property. Camden County is suing Union Carbide about its decision to back out of the property deal in a separate lawsuit in state courts.
Camden County has spent $11 million pursuing the proposed commercial spaceport on a 4,000-acre tract of land in southeast Georgia, which officials say will drive economic development in the region. The county commission approved an options contract to purchase the land from current owner Union Carbide Corporation back in 2015.
But opponents say firing small rockets from Spaceport Camden over populated areas of Little Cumberland Island, just off the coast, would pose a major safety risk. Earlier this summer, an independent consultant found the project would pose a low safety risk.
The National Park Service – which operates the Cumberland Island National Seashore – and environmental organizations worried about the spaceport’s impact on a fragile coastal ecosystem have also expressed reservations about the project.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision within the next six months.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
ATLANTA – Local development authorities have been at the heart of the biggest business deals in Georgia, including the record-breaking incentives that lured electric-vehicle manufacturers Hyundai and Rivian to the Peach State.
But such huge incentives packages as the $1.8 billion that went to Hyundai and the $1.5 billion doled out to Rivian have given rise to concerns that local governments and schools are losing massive amounts of tax revenue to development authorities without sufficient state oversight or demands for transparency.
A state Senate study committee has begun a series of meetings to look for ways to require more accountability from development authorities without sacrificing the jobs they help create.
“Our objective is to support economic development in this state,” said Sen. Max Burns, R-Sylvania, the study committee’s chairman. “[But] it’s important that we understand the ramifications of our development authority decisions … and the impact they have on our state.”
About 1,300 local government authorities have cropped up across Georgia since 1995, when the legislature passed a law authorizing cities and counties to form authorities, Kyle Hood, director of the state Department of Community Affairs’ Community Development Division, told members of the study committee late last month. Of those, 575 are development authorities or downtown development authorities, he said.
Sen. Steve Gooch, R-Dahlonega, who formerly served as a Lumpkin County commissioner, said local development authorities are critical to economic development when corporate prospects come calling.
“Without these authorities, county governments would have to go to taxpayers and put out a referendum,” he said. “It’s the only development tool they have.”
Despite the jobs development authorities help generate, the General Assembly has put some controls in place to monitor their activities.
In 2018, lawmakers passed a bill requiring authorities to register with the state annually and undergo financial audits.
This year, the legislature passed a measure capping the per-diem allowance for directors of development authorities in counties with populations of 550,000 or more. The bill also gave the state ethics commission jurisdiction to handle complaints aimed at authority directors.
But state Rep. Mary Margaret Oliver, who sponsored this year’s legislation, said more needs to be done.
Oliver, D-Decatur, introduced a bill last year giving cities, counties, and school districts the right to participate in bond validation hearings. However, the bill failed to gain traction in the House.
Bonds typically underwrite incentives packages development authorities offer companies they’re trying to attract. Once approved by a judge following a hearing, authorities can issue bonds to purchase land for a project or finance construction, resulting in either full or partial abatement of property taxes.
“Abating school taxes without schools being part of the discussion is problematic,” said Oliver, who despite being a member of the House is on the Senate study committee.
Oliver’s bill giving local governments and school districts the right to take part in bond validation hearings has the support of the Association County Commissioners of Georgia (ACCG), which advocates on behalf of counties at the state Capitol.
Kathleen Bowen, associate legislative director for the ACCG, said development projects that contain a housing component are particularly concerning because they bring residents who rely on taxpayer-funded services.
Tax abatements deprive local governments and schools of the revenue they need to provide those services, she said.
Oliver said her efforts are not aimed at the Hyundai and Rivian incentives packages.
“I think those are major state-controlled projects,” she said. “My focus is more on the day-to-day [offering] of tax abatements without much discussion or accountability.”
While Oliver’s bill didn’t pass, Bowen credited the lawmaker’s push for the legislation with drawing attention to the issue. That focus could pay off during next year’s legislative session, Bowen said.
“There’s going to be robust discussion on tax abatements. I consider that a win,” she said. “These deals need to be for the public good. It’s up to those affected by the taxes to be part of the conversation.”
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
ATLANTA – The risk of a fire on Cumberland Island from a launch failure at a proposed commercial spaceport in Camden County is “so low as to not be credible,” according to a new study.
ARCTOS, an engineering consultant with more than 60 years of experience in launch and reentry risk analysis, found only two scenarios in which a failed launch could result in a fire on Cumberland: a low-altitude breakup resulting in a fireball or debris hot enough to cause a fire.
In the first case, according to the study, a mid-air explosion could not create a fireball large enough or lasting long enough to cause a ground fire. In the second, the likelihood of debris hot enough to cause a fire is low.
“Opponents of Spaceport Camden have said that ‘[their] biggest concern is fire’ that ‘destroys cottages and the natural environment, and possibly kills or injures inhabitants,’ ” said Gary Blount, chairman of the Camden County Commission. “The ARCTOS study conclusively proves that these fears are unfounded.”
The county has been the main driver behind Spaceport Camden as a potential economic engine for southeastern Georgia and has spent $11 million pursuing it.
The project cleared a major hurdle late last year when the Federal Aviation Administration approved a launch site operator license authorizing up to 12 small-vehicle launches per year.
But the spaceport’s supporters have suffered two significant setbacks this year. In March, Camden County voters overwhelmingly rejected a referendum that would have allowed the county to buy a 4,000-acre site to house the facility.
Late last week, Union Carbide, which owns the site, announced it no longer intends to sell the property to the county.
Kevin Lang, who owns property on adjacent Little Cumberland Island, called the study a “red herring” by Spaceport Camden supporters to divert attention from the obstacles blocking the project.
“I question the timing,” he said. “It looks like this is an attempt to distract the public from the more relevant news.”
Lang also questioned the study itself. He said ARCTOS focused on an unrealistic launch trajectory.
“They launch the rocket almost straight up … to minimize the dwell time over Cumberland Island,” he said. “There’s never been a rocket launch from Cape Canaveral with that trajectory that we know of. …The normal pattern would be flatter.”
“Rockets do launch and explode,” added Dick Parker, another Little Cumberland Island property owner. “That’s why in the United States, we don’t launch rockets over houses.”
Despite the referendum, the county is continuing to pursue the land deal through an existing contract with Union Carbide. The case has landed in the state Supreme Court, which has set oral arguments for Aug. 23.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
ATLANTA – Opponents of a planned commercial spaceport in Camden County will get a chance after the holidays to make their case.
A judge in Glynn County granted a temporary restraining order Tuesday blocking Camden County from buying the 4,000-acre tract intended as the site of Spaceport Camden.
County officials said Superior Court Judge Stephen Scarlett’s ruling doesn’t change any plans for the spaceport.
“Camden County never intended to purchase the Spaceport Camden property before the holidays,” Spaceport Camden spokesman John Simpson said. “The decision by Judge Scarlett moves this issue past the holiday season, and we look forward to presenting our side to the court at that time.”
Scarlett has scheduled a hearing on Jan. 5 to take up a motion for a permanent restraining order blocking the project.
Camden officials have been working on the planned spaceport for more than five years. They gained a major victory on Monday when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued an order approving a launch site operator license for Spaceport Camden.
Supporters have touted the project as a major jobs generator. The spaceport has been endorsed by Gov. Brian Kemp and most of Georgia’s congressional delegation.
But opponents say firing small rockets from Spaceport Camden over populated areas of Little Cumberland Island would pose a major safety risk. They cite documents submitted by the county that project a likely 20% failure rate for the small rockets that would be launched from the spaceport.
Other interested parties that have expressed reservations over the project include the National Park Service – which operates the Cumberland Island National Seashore – officials at the U.S. Naval Submarine Base at Kings Bay and environmental organizations worried about the spaceport’s impact on a fragile coastal ecosystem.
The court case is being waged by opponents looking to force a voter referendum on the purchase of the launch site property.
Monday’s “record of decision” issued by the FAA isn’t the final say on Spaceport Camden. If the project survives the court challenge and moves forward, each launch would have to be approved separately.
Camden County is planning up to 12 launches per year from the spaceport.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
