SB 98 revises Georgia’s guardianship and conservatorship laws to recognize and distinguish “county conservator” from “county guardian” throughout Title 29 and related provisions in Title 53. The bill updates definitions, preference and appointment rules, temporary substitute appointment provisions, settlement and termination procedures, and bond requirements so that county administrators are treated as ex officio county guardians and ex officio county conservators when appointed by the court. It also makes conforming changes to terminology across multiple code sections to reflect the new or clarified role of county conservators.
A key feature of the bill is a transition rule effective July 1, 2025: in conservatorship matters where a person is serving as county guardian, that designation becomes county conservator by operation of law unless the court orders otherwise. The bill also states that, in those cases, no additional bond is required unless the court finds good cause. Other provisions require county guardians, county conservators, and public guardians to cooperate when serving the same ward, and it authorizes county administrators and ex officio county guardians/conservators to receive an annual fee if approved by the county governing authority and probate court.
Impact
SB 98 amends multiple sections of Georgia law governing minors and incapacitated adults by standardizing the county-level fiduciary role as “county conservator” in conservatorship matters while preserving “county guardian” for guardianship matters. It changes appointment preferences, temporary substitute appointments, intestate estate administration after a ward’s death, bond and security rules, and letters of appointment, and it updates county administrator statutes to align with the revised terminology and duties. The bill also creates a statutory conversion of existing county guardian conservatorship roles to county conservator status on July 1, 2025, reducing the need for new appointments or additional bonding in those cases unless a court orders otherwise.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the Senate 50-0 and the House 162-0, indicating unanimous support in both chambers. The absence of committee transcript debate suggests the measure was viewed as a technical, conforming, and administrative update rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are administrative rather than ideological: the bill changes long-standing terminology, shifts existing county guardian conservatorships into county conservatorships by operation of law, and modifies bond requirements for those transitioning roles. Any concern would likely come from probate courts, county officials, or fiduciaries focused on implementation details, especially the July 1, 2025 conversion, the scope of court discretion to require additional bond, and how the new terminology interacts with existing county administrator practices. However, the unanimous votes suggest these issues were not significant sources of opposition in the legislative process.
A bill for an act relating to education, including by modifying provisions related to trainings and curricula provided by school districts and prohibited sexual orientation and gender identity instruction, and implementing prohibitions related to the diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts of institutions of higher learning governed by the state board of regents, community colleges, and public schools.