A committee amendment to raise DUI school program fees and add a $10 assessment fee passed after debate over in-person versus online delivery and access for rural participants.

A committee member presenting the proposal said the fee schedule had not been adjusted in about 12 years and some providers were closing. The presenter said the existing fee total was $385 and that the proposal would increase the total to $430—"which is only a I believe that would be a, $45 increase." The presenter added that an additional $10 assessment fee should be added for professional assessments, which would make the total increase $55.

Nut graf: The committee approved amendments to update the fees charged by licensed DUI schools, add a $10 assessment fee, and emphasize in-person, controlled settings for the program. Members debated access concerns for rural participants who may lack transportation and for people with medical or mobility issues who previously used online options.

Committee discussion included judges’ and providers’ concerns that online delivery during the COVID-19 period reduced program control and interaction among offenders. "By being in a controlled setting in the presence of other offenders, then they can interact," the presenter said. Representative Taylor said she worried that limiting online options could cut off access to the program for some first-time offenders and recommended preserving access pathways. Representative Alexander raised that keeping online options could increase participation and lessen travel burdens for rural Georgians.

The transcript records multiple votes on amendments. Committee members first agreed to add the $10 assessment fee by voice vote; the record shows two members opposed to that motion. The committee then voted on the amendment as amended and later divided the question on the final bill; the transcript records three opposed on the final division. The committee chair announced the bill passed as amended.

Ending: The committee approved the fee changes and added the $10 assessment fee; the committee also indicated a preference for in-person delivery while some members urged the committee to consider pilot studies or future review of online delivery to address access concerns.