This article first appeared in Political Peach News

My family’s budget is a plan to match our expenses with our income. The money going out can be divided into two buckets: what we must spend on essential necessities like food, shelter, and clothing, and discretionary spending, be it a vacation or a bigger television. Our discretionary spending is a statement of our values, what we deem important in life. Our state’s budget is similar: we have certain necessities we must spend money on, such as federally mandated expenses and others required by our state constitution and laws. Our state’s discretionary spending, like my family’s budget, is a statement of what we collectively decide is important. It should be a reflection of our values as a society.

To build a state budget, the governor and state legislature work together each year to produce a budget for the fiscal year, which runs from July to June of the next year. Currently, the state government is operating under Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 budget. And the legislature is developing the state’s FY2024 budget that will become effective for 12 months beginning July 1, 2023.

Georgia’s governor has the sole authority to set revenue projections for the upcoming year. The legislature then decides how that money will be allocated among governmental agencies. The governor has a line-item veto over the budget expenditures, but the state, unlike the federal government, must operate under a balanced budget. 

The majority of the revenue for the state comes from our personal income tax payments. In FY23, this source provided around half of our state revenue. The other half comes from corporate tax, sales tax, and other smaller sources. 

Gov. Brian P. Kemp, with the advice of the state’s fiscal economist Jeffery Dorfman, is projecting total revenue of $32.5 billion for FY24. He also anticipates a sharp drop in overall tax collections for the rest of 2023 that will continue in 2024. Personal income tax revenue will increase slightly, but revenue from capital gains taxes will decrease significantly because of slim profits in the stock market. 

A report by the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute (GBPI) shows that state spending remains at pre-2008 recession levels. Despite a population increase of around 1.3 million, state spending per person has dropped below pre-recession levels.  Danny Kanso, Director of Legislative Strategy and Senior Fiscal Analyst at GPBI, notes that flat revenue projections can be used to limit state spending. “It may be a policy choice rather than a best-effort judgment.”

Provocative GOP strategist Grover Norquist, an advocate of low taxes, has often been quoted saying that his goal is to shrink government so small that it could drown in a bathtub. Governor Kemp may not want to take spending cuts to the level Norquist recommends, but he certainly touts lower taxes and only bare-bone spending on government functions. 

“The revenue estimate for the current FY2023,” Kanso says, “is far, far below what we collected in FY 2020. But, this is a tool…that’s being used by the governor to limit state spending and to keep spending on a very conservative trajectory, particularly if we look back over the last five years.” Kanso adds that the governor’s proposed $32.5 billion budget for FY 2024 “offers a muted response to deep deficits in the capacity of state government to meet Georgians’ needs.”

In spite of flat revenue projections permitting only small spending increases, the governor has found money to give a one-time $1 billion property tax rebate this year, which will primarily benefit the middle and higher-income Georgians who pay property taxes, and a one-time $1 billion personal income tax rebate. The governor has often said that he wants to put money back in the pockets of “hard-working Georgians.” But the governor has certainly not been miserly when handing out various tax credits, incentives, and outright spending to lure big corporations, mostly from out of state. 

Despite the progressive nature of the personal income  tax (i.e., taxing higher income filers more than lower income), reducing or eliminating this tax has long been a dream and campaign talking point for Georgia Republicans. Last year the legislature passed flat tax legislation that would gradually reduce the tax rate if certain revenue benchmarks are met. According to GPBI, the legislation alters the state’s current range of graduated income tax brackets (from 1 percent to 5.75 percent) to a flat tax of 5.49 percent in 2024 for all individual taxpayers. The legislation further lowers that rate to 4.99 percent by 2030 while simultaneously increasing the state’s personal exemption from $18,500 in 2024 to $24,000 in 2030.The increased exemption would somewhat offset the tax burden on lower-income filers. But the current low projections for future state revenue could threaten delays in the measure’s seven-year implementation schedule because the legislation has built-in revenue increase benchmarks to allow this reduction. 

Georgia is already a low-tax state, ranked as the 8th lowest state by the Tax Foundation. We have low per capita spending in areas such as schools, health care, and other significant quality-of-life government services. The total of $2 billion that the governor is proposing to give away in tax credits and refunds could be better spent filling gaps in funding such discretionary services.

In addition to lower spending for state services, flat revenue projections have resulted in a dire situation for state employees. Kanso says that more than a decade of flat budgets has caused hiring freezes, eliminations of vacant positions, and low wages.“This makes it very difficult to keep the kind of institutional knowledge and just operational know-how that you need to operate a state agency serving millions of people.” 

Across the board, in 2022, the turnover rate was over 25% of Georgia state employees, and the number of applicants was at an all-time low. This staffing problem has become apparent to average Georgians. One of many recent examples occurred when the Department of Labor had much difficulty administering covid relief funds, and another is the high caseloads for counselors in the Department of Children and Families. Over the past 15 years, the state has reduced its full-time workforce by nearly 30%, from 83,000 to less than 60,000 employees. Understaffing is hampering the effective and efficient delivery of services.  

The controversial titanium dioxide mine proposed on land adjacent to the Okefenokee Swamp provides one opportunity for Georgians to affect the mine’s future and another to protect the future environmental health of the Swamp. First is an opportunity to speak out against issuing a mining permit, and the second is to voice support for House Bill 71, which would protect the swamp from any additional mining.

The Okefenokee Swamp encompasses around 438,000 acres in the extreme southeastern corner of Georgia. It is a beautiful and iconic black water swamp, home to tall, old-growth cypress, prairie grassland, and marsh. It hosts a vast variety of plant and animal species, figures prominently in the history and hearts of native tribes, and is enjoyed by around 700,000 visitors each year. The swamp was formed eons ago when the Atlantic Ocean, which covered much of the area of the present-day swamp, began to recede, leaving a bowl depression of water held in place on the east side by a sand dune, much like a dam. Today that dam is known as the Trail Ridge and extends south into Florida and north along the eastern border of the swamp. This sandy ridge contains a range of minerals, including titanium dioxide, that, when mined and processed, can be used to whiten products like paint and toothpaste. Mining companies have been attracted to the Trail Ridge since the early 1990s when DuPont Chemical Company applied for permits to extract titanium dioxide from large tracts along the sandy ridge. Strong opposition from the public and political leaders, including then Governor Roy Barnes and U.S. Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, stopped DuPont’s efforts. 

This latest threat to the Swamp comes from an Alabama-based company, Twin Pines Minerals LLC. It wants to establish a “demonstration” mine on 773 acres adjacent to the southeast corner of the boundary of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, almost on the border with Florida. The approval process for the mining permit has had a rocky journey and is now being reviewed by the Environmental Protection Division (EPD), a division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

As part of the EPD review, the division is soliciting public comment to be submitted via email to twinpines.comment@dnr.ga.gov before March 20. The mining application and more detailed information can be found at the EPD’s Twin Pines information site.  

Last week, the EPD hosted two virtual town halls where commenters weighed in on the Twin Pines Minerals’ application. An article in the AJC reported that at last Thursday’s event, only one person, among hundreds of speakers in opposition, spoke in favor of the permit application of Twin Pines. Hopefully, the EPD will heed the concerns of many different voices and deny this permit. If the mine receives the permit and becomes operational, there are concerns that additional mining applications will be proposed. The Twin Pines’ application before the EPD describes the mine as a “demonstration” mine. The company claims it can successfully mine near the Okefenokee without damaging the swamp. This applicant, and possibly other companies, intend to try to develop additional mines along the Trail Ridge, extracting huge profits from the sandy soil without regard to the environmental cost. 

Because of this concern about future mining, some Georgia legislators have introduced a bill to prevent additional mining along the Trail Ridge adjacent to the Okefenokee. HB 71 will not affect the current Twin Pines application. It was introduced by Rep. Darlene Taylor (R-Thomasville) and has been assigned to the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee but has not yet had a hearing.  

It seems that Twin Pines does not want this bill to pass. Last month, the company had nine registered lobbyists at the state capitol. This is an unusually large number of lobbyists for a small Alabama company with concerns apparently about only a single bill. But Twin Pines has already invested large sums in the permitting process and site preparation, and they envision huge profits if they get this current permit with the potential of additional mining operations. So, they understandably have a lot riding on not only the permit but also this bill.  “Titanium is a very common mineral found in sand formations worldwide,” says Gordon Rogers, the Flint Riverkeeper, speaking on behalf of the Georgia Water Coalition Leadership Team. “They [Twin Pines Minerals] want this permit so they can make money, but it’s the wrong place to make money. There are other titanium operations in Southeast Georgia and Northeast Florida that are ongoing and that are profitable. But Trail Ridge is just the wrong place to do this mining.” 

Environmental organizations are asking Georgians to not only register comments with EPD against the issuance of the mining permit but also to call their own legislators and members serving on the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee to urge a hearing and passage of HB 71. 

In making comments to both the EPD and legislators to oppose the mining permit and to urge passage of HB 71, some key points to make are: 

• Mining so close to the border of the swamp could cause irreparable, long-term damage to the water level in the swamp and could erode the ridge that serves as a dam for the swamp along the eastern border of the swamp.
• Titanium dioxide is readily available in other areas and must not be mined near the swamp. 
• Twin Pines Minerals LLC has been a bad actor in previous businesses and in the approval process for this mine permit. 
• Many environmental organizations, scientists, and many Georgians oppose this mining permit and support laws to protect the Okefenokee. 
• A lawsuit filed in federal district court last November by the Southern Environmental Law Center challenges how the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers relinquished regulatory jurisdiction over the Twin Pines Minerals application. The permit should not be issued until the legal issues raised in this lawsuit are adjudicated.  

Additional background on the mining permit and reasons to pass HB 71 can be found in recent articles in The Current, or this from the AJC, and in this information from the Okefenokee Protection Alliance resource page. This link also has a great map showing the location of the proposed mine. 

“I can make it real simple,” says Rogers. “The Twin Pines permit needs to be denied based on the quality of the application. It needs to be denied on its merit or lack of merit. Analysis by independent hydrologists has shown that mining on the Trail Ridge puts at risk the water levels in the Okefenokee, plain and simple. It’s just too risky, and it needs to be denied.”

Regarding HB 71, Rogers points out that the bill is about future mining permits, not this one. And it’s important to protect the entire Trail Ridge formation forever. So, it is critical that Georgians support the passage of HB 71. 

Krista Brewer

Krista Brewer is a native Atlantan who has a professional background in writing, reporting and editing. For several decades she has closely followed Georgia politics, focusing on topics such as healthcare, voting and immigrant rights, and budget and environmental issues. She is active on Twitter and invites readers to follow her @KristaRBrewer.