A Georgia Senate committee is currently examining how to regulate state agencies’ use of artificial intelligence (AI), and is also exploring whether similar regulations should apply to local governments. The Senate Committee on Science and Technology is considering House Bill 147, which has already passed the state House unanimously. This bill would require state agencies to disclose their AI usage to the Georgia Technology Authority (GTA), and it also defines AI within the context of the law.
State Representative Brad Thomas (R-Holly Springs), the bill’s author, emphasized the growing importance of AI in society during the committee hearing, stating, “Artificial intelligence is something that’s not going to go away. It’s going to be interwoven in our society.” He added, “The problem is we know we have systems that have bias in them, and so we have a responsibility to put guardrails up,” explaining the need for HB 147.
Currently, HB 147 focuses solely on state agencies, but it would codify existing reporting requirements already in place through the Georgia Technology Authority. Cameron Fash, the government relations director for the state’s tech regulator, confirmed that the GTA currently requires executive branch agencies to obtain approval before using AI systems or tools; however, these rules are not yet part of Georgia state law.
Key Provisions of HB 147
Under HB 147, state agencies would be required to report the following to the Georgia Technology Authority:
- The name and vendor of any AI system.
- A description of the system’s capabilities.
- Whether the AI system is being used to independently determine a conclusion or judgment.
- Whether the state agency has conducted an impact assessment on the AI system.
The bill also directs the Georgia Technology Authority to compile these reports into a comprehensive report for the governor, lieutenant governor, and the state legislature. Additionally, it would establish policies and procedures for state agencies to follow when procuring and using AI systems.
Expanding Regulations to Local Governments?
The committee also discussed the possibility of extending AI regulations to local governments, such as counties, cities, and school systems, mirroring provisions from a related Senate bill that had a broader scope. Senate Bill 37, the “AI Accountability Act,” proposed creating a statewide AI board to provide guidance for both state and local agencies, but it failed to pass out of committee before Crossover Day. If the bill had passed it also would have mandated local governments to publicly report their AI usage.
State Senator Ed Seltzer (R-Acworth), who chairs the science and technology committee, suggested it would be prudent to address the use of AI by local governments. He posed the question of whether the legislature’s role should be limited to requiring disclosure of AI usage, or whether it should extend to mandating how AI is used. Seltzer provided an example of a Georgia city, where public parking garages used AI technology to automatically alert police to the sound of gunshots or broken glass. This technology included facial recognition, but the city chose not to use it due to privacy concerns.
The Georgia Technology Authority was initially established in 2000 to gather information on state agencies’ IT expenditures. Over time, its responsibilities expanded to encompass cybersecurity, IT spending, and internet access across the state. In 2023, the GTA established an AI Office, which formed an AI Advisory Council. This council has issued AI guidance and ethics principles for state organizations.
AI Usage in Local Governments
Local governments are just beginning to implement AI and are currently discussing how to regulate it. For instance, the city of Atlanta utilizes AI for social media posts and an AI chatbot for its 311 service. After last summer’s water main breaks, Mayor Andre Dickens announced plans to integrate AI into water-main monitoring. Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport is also developing an AI strategy.
The Atlanta City Council established an AI commission in December to develop possible regulatory legislation by next year. Councilmember Amir Farokhi chairs the commission. He stated in a text message that the commission “is intended to look at how the city could better utilize AI, what the guardrails should be, and other considerations for municipal AI integration.”
In other Georgia cities and counties, AI use is still fairly limited. Rusi Patel, general counsel for the Georgia Municipal Association, noted that city governments are just starting to discuss how to appropriately use AI. According to Kaylon Day, an ACCG governmental affairs associate, the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia (ACCG) reports similar developments at the county level. She stated, “It hasn’t emerged as a huge issue for our counties, at least as far as them contacting us. Our research on the extent counties are using AI is limited at this time.”
However, Macon-Bibb County is using AI to help prioritize pavement repairs across 1,200 miles of county-owned roads, according to The Macon Telegraph. This means AI, instead of human decision-makers, is helping determine how millions of tax dollars are spent.
Next Steps
The senate committee did not take any action on the bill during its Wednesday meeting. Senators Albers and Thomas are working to revise the bill and plan to reintroduce a substitute version for further committee consideration. The last day of the legislative session is April 4.
