A new form of government aimed at giving more local control to such communities as Vinings and Dunwoody has emerged at the state Capitol, after days of being bogged down by lawmakers unable to decide how much authority townships should have.

After days of debate, the House Governmental Affairs Committee finally passed HB 925 and agreed that a township should be limited to controlling development and enforcing codes.

Earlier versions of the bill would have allowed a township to stage arts events, engage in public beautification projects, improve parks and possibly even operate libraries. Even so, advocates emphasized that the concept fell far short of cities, which usually oversee police, fire and ambulance protection, public works and other services.

"I am very pleased with the final version of the bill," sponsoring Rep. Mark Jacobs (R-Atlanta) said. "From where the idea started, it has come full circle."

The first township bill would have given the new government the ability to control only zoning and land use. Jacobs added to his bill development inspections and code enforcement. Other services were added to the legislation as lawmakers debated what types of things a township might want to do.

A township would be authorized by legislation and then would have to be approved by the local community. Once approved, the town board could charge for its zoning and inspection work plus a half-mill property tax.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-Tifton), chairman of the committee, suggested the expansion of township powers. Scott contended that a town council, once created, might want to take on small projects the larger county government might never get to.

"Basically, the way it's drafted, it's an elected zoning board," Scott said about the current version of the bill. "Some communities are going to want to do more."

That possibility, however, sent the debate into new directions, as lawmakers and advocates for counties and cities sparred about what political and service complications each add-on might mean.

The measure approved in committee allows a township the greatest autonomy of any version to date. Earlier attempts would have limited the township to zoning changes less intense than the county's land-use plan. They also would have made a county commissioner an ex officio member of the town council and even required some actions to be routed through the county.

None of those provisions made the final version.

As a result, the powerful lobby for county governments, the Association County Commissioners of Georgia, now opposes HB 925 and Senate Resolution 130, the companion legislation calling for a statewide constitutional amendment to authorize townships.

"We were struggling to be neutral, but we are going to have to be opposed," said Jim Grubiak, longtime ACCG lobbyist. "It made sense to try to build on the relationship rather than assume it needs to be divided."

Townships are conceived as a middle step for communities seeking more local control, because development often is the flash point between counties and disgruntled areas.

Four Fulton County communities have incorporated in the past three years. Residents of all four complained that they felt as if a distant County Commission did not follow local desires in approving so much development and also failed to provide adequate services for the taxes collected.

Such communities as Dunwoody, Tucker, Vinings, areas of south Fulton County and St. Simons on the coast have made similar complaints but have not incorporated.

Dunwoody's efforts are pending in the General Assembly. South Fulton rejected a city in a vote last year. The others continue to study their options.

Jacobs said he is confident he can steer the measure onto the House floor in the next few legislative days. If so, the township concept probably will generate as much debate there as it did in committee.