Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County lobbyists brief commissioners on a bundle of bills including election‑judge rules, public‑notice changes and town‑abandonment provisions
Summary
Lobbyists updated the Board on several bills: HB 1080 (election judges composition likely to fail after a Democrat withdrew support); HB 26‑1095 (allowing online legal notices — moving to the governor); a massage‑facility regulatory bill (passed); HB 1326 (PUC provision affecting rural co‑op appeals, which the lobbyists oppose); SB 62 (rodenticide limits); Plains to Pines Scenic Corridor (signed); and SB 26‑157 (shortening town‑abandonment timelines for failed municipal water systems).
At a special meeting, Elbert County lobbyists Steve Belsky and Tim Coleman gave a rapid briefing on several bills of local interest and fielded questions from commissioners.
Election judges and notices: the lobbyists said HB 1080, originally co‑sponsored by an Elbert County‑associated sponsor and Representative Amy Paskal, sought to require election judge panels to include officials from each major party; after Representative Paskal withdrew her name the lobbyists said the bill was likely to die. They also described HB 26‑1095, which would let local governments post legal notices on a newspaper’s website (not behind paywalls) and on the press association’s site; the county supported that bill and it was reported as headed to the governor.
Local regulation and public safety: the briefing noted a massage‑facility regulation bill (to expand local regulatory authority beyond human‑trafficking concerns) had passed and would go to the governor. The lobbyists also summarized SB 62, which would limit certain rodenticides and require applicator licensing for some uses; they said the measure had been narrowed and faced opposition in the House.
Utilities and land use: on HB 1326 the lobbyists said the bill includes a controversial provision that could allow rural electrical co‑ops to appeal local land‑use denials to the Public Utilities Commission; Elbert County allied with other local governments to oppose the provision and was meeting with DOLA and other stakeholders to try to remove it.
Town abandonment: the lobbyists explained SB 26‑157 (inspired by the town of Hartman), which shortens the abandonment timeline to allow the county to take over failing water infrastructure quickly and access up to $100,000 from a small‑communities water/wastewater grant fund to maintain systems while residents potentially reorganize; CCI, CML and DOLA supported the measure.
Next steps and local follow‑up: lobbyists said they would continue working with stakeholders and advise the Board if amendments or votes required county attention; commissioners did not take formal votes during the briefing.
