Since the burden is on the intervenor to come forward with evidence to support any affirmative defenses interposed by him against the petition by the state setting forth the validity of the bond issue ( Harrell v. Town of Whigham, 141 Ga. 322 ( 80 S.E. 1010) (1913)), and the intervenor produced none, the trial court did not err in finding the program "sound, reasonable, feasible and practical." See Mays v. State, 110 Ga. App. 881 ( 140 S.E.2d 223) (1965). Furthermore, this is a legislative matter subject to the most limited review by the courts.

To resolve this, the Hall County Board of Education had to construct a sewer line from the school to the nearest and most favorable point of entry into the City of Gainesville sewer system. Since the existing system operated by the City of Gainesville did not extend beyond the city limits, the County Board of Education condemned as easement through condemnee's land which lay partially within and partially without the city limits in order to reach and connect with the existing city sewer line. Under this state of facts the Hall County Board of Education has the power to condemn a sewer easement outside its territorial boundaries. See also Mays v. State of Ga., 110 Ga. App. 881, 886 ( 140 S.E.2d 223). 3. Did the trial judge have the power to amend the judgment to incorporate the plat and thereby conform the description of the condemned lands to the evidence?