- State Rep. Beskin on homestead bill: I want what Decatur wants [Decaturish]
- General Assembly eyeing study of Georgia liquor laws [ABC]
- How the Beltline’s Westside Trail Looks Right Now [Curbed]
- Emory University Takes On ‘The Happiness Challenge’ [WABE]
- Broad Street, get ready for food trucks [Atlanta Magazine]
Photo courtesy of Wow Food Truck website
Well, I want what my brother wants. A new Dodge Challenger Hellcat. Doesn’t mean I’m going to get it.
What an odd reason for blocking the bill. I think there are enough issues with the bill itself that using this argument is silly.
I wouldn’t block my brother’s attempt to buy that new Hellcat just because I want one.
Below is the list of Georgia House Representatives who voted yes to remove the senior homestead bill (SB 343) from the house’s local consent agenda. The vote looks to have been almost straight down party lines. Only 5 Republicans voted no. I have compiled this list to make it easier for community members to call, fax, and email the legislators who stand in opposition to Decatur’s senior homestead exemption bill.
The following Georgia politicians have shown they are against smaller government and against tax relief for senior citizens:
Alex Atwood, R – St. Simons Island (District 179)
[email protected]
404.656.0152 – Office
912.264.4211 – Office
Mandi L. Ballinger, R – Canton (District 23)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
Timothy Barr, R – Lawrenceville (District 103)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Paul Battles, R – Cartersville (District 15)
[email protected]
404.657.8441 – Office
Dave Belton, R – Buckhead (District 112)
[email protected]
404.656.0152 – Office
Tommy Benton, R – Jefferson (District 31)
[email protected]
404.463.3793 – Office
Beth Beskin, R – Atlanta (District 54)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
404.814.0000 – Office
Shaw Blackmon, R – Bonaire (District 146)
[email protected]
404.656.0177 – Office
Bruce Broadrick, R – Dalton (District 4)
[email protected]
404.656.0298 – Office
Buzz Brockway, R – Lawrenceville (District 102)
[email protected]
404.656.0188 – Office
678.895.9064 – Office
Jon G. Burns, R – Newington (District 159)
[email protected]
404.656.5052 – Office
Michael Caldwell, R – Woodstock (District 20)
[email protected]
404.656.0152 – Office
Johnnie Caldwell, Jr., R – Thomaston (District 131)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Wes Cantrell, R – Woodstock (District 22)
[email protected]
404.656.0202 – Office
John Carson, R – Marietta (District 46)
[email protected]
404.656.0287 – Office
3605 Sandy Plains Road, Suite 240-123
404.520.8826 – Office
Amy Carter, R – Valdosta (District 175)
[email protected]
404.463.2248 – Office
229.245.1092 – Office
229.245.8890 – Fax
Joyce Chandler, R – Grayson (District 105)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
Mike Cheokas, R – Americus (District 138)
[email protected]
404.656.7857 – Office
229.924.7823 – Office
229.924.7893 – Fax
Valerie Clark, R – Lawrenceville (District 101)
[email protected]
404.656.0202 – Office
770.314.0456 – Office
Heath Clark, R – Warner Robins (District 147)
[email protected]
404.656.0109 – Office
David Clark, R – Buford (District 98)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Brooks Coleman, R – Duluth (District 97)
[email protected]
404.656.9210 – Office
404.656.5070 – Fax
Christian Coomer, R – Cartersville (District 14)
[email protected]
404.656.7153 – Office
770.383.9171 – Office
770.383.9170 – Fax
John Corbett, R – Lake Park (District 174)
[email protected]
404.656.0287 – Office
John Deffenbaugh, R – Lookout Mountain (District 1)
[email protected]
404.656.0202 – Office
Katie M. Dempsey, R – Rome (District 13)
[email protected]
404.463.2247 – Office
Robert Dickey, R – Musella (District 140)
[email protected]
404.651.7737 – Office
478.836.4362 – Office
Mike Dudgeon, R – Johns Creek (District 25)
[email protected]
404.656.0298 – Office
Emory Dunahoo, R – Gainesville (District 30)
[email protected]
404.656.0152 – Office
Geoff Duncan, R – Cumming (District 26)
[email protected]
404.656.0188 – Office
Chuck Efstration, R – Dacula (District 104)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
Terry England, R – Auburn (District 116)
[email protected]
404.463.2247 – Office
Bubber Epps, R – Dry Branch (District 144)
[email protected]
404.656.3947 – Office
478.743.9901 – Office
478.755.9046 – Fax
Dan Gasaway, R – Homer (District 28)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Sheri Gilligan, R – Cumming (District 24)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Micah Gravley, R – Douglasville (District 67)
[email protected]
404.656.0152 – Office
Buddy Harden, R – Cordele (District 148)
[email protected]
404.656.0188 – Office
Brett Harrell, R – Snellville (District 106)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
404.966.5804 – Office
Matt Hatchett, R – Dublin (District 150)
[email protected]
404.656.5025 – Office
404.657.8278 – Fax
Lee Hawkins, R – Gainesville (District 27)
[email protected]
404.656.0213 – Office
Dustin Hightower, R – Carrollton (District 68)
[email protected]
404.657.1803 – Office
404.285.1445 – Office
Bill Hitchens, R – Rincon (District 161)
[email protected]
404.657.1803 – Office
Susan Holmes, R – Monticello (District 129)
[email protected]
404.656.0178 – Office
Penny Houston, R – Nashville (District 170)
[email protected]
404.463.2247 – Office
Rick Jasperse, R – Jasper (District 11)
[email protected]
404.656.7857 – Office
Jeff Jones, R – Brunswick (District 167)
[email protected]
404.656.0126 – Office
Jan Jones, R – Milton (District 47)
[email protected]
404.656.5072 – Office
404.657.0498 – Fax
12850 Highway 9Suite 600-356
Trey Kelley, R – Cedartown (District 16)
[email protected]
404.657.1803 – Office
Tom Kirby, R – Loganville (District 114)
[email protected]
404.656.0177 – Office
404.651.8086 – Fax
David Knight, R – Griffin (District 130)
[email protected]
404.656.5099 – Office
678.464.4926 – Office
Jodi Lott, R – Evans (District 122)
[email protected]
404.656.0177 – Office
Eddie Lumsden, R – Armuchee (District 12)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Chuck Martin, R – Alpharetta (District 49)
[email protected]
404.656.5064 – Office
11770 Haynes Bridge RoadSuite 205-544
Howard Maxwell, R – Dallas (District 17)
[email protected]
404.656.5143 – Office
770.386.5420 – Office
Tom McCall, R – Elberton (District 33)
[email protected]
404.656.5099 – Office
404.656.6897 – Fax
706.283.6656 – Fax
Greg Morris, R – Vidalia (District 156)
[email protected]
404.656.5115 – Office
404.463.4122 – Fax
912.293.0725 – Office
Chad Nimmer, R – Blackshear (District 178)
[email protected]
404.651.7737 – Office
404.651.5795 – Fax
912.807.6190 – Office
Randy Nix, R – LaGrange (District 69)
[email protected]
404.656.5087 – Office
404.463.2976 – Fax
B.J. Pak, R – Lilburn (District 108)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
Butch Parrish, R – Swainsboro (District 158)
[email protected]
404.463.2247 – Office
478.237.3838 – Office
Don Parsons, R – Marietta (District 44)
[email protected]
404.656.9198 – Office
770.977.4426 – Office
Allen Peake, R – Macon (District 141)
[email protected]
404.656.5132 – Office
478.474.5633 – Office
Jesse Petrea, R – Savannah (District 166)
[email protected]
404.656.0109 – Office
912.354.3680 – Office
Clay Pirkle, R – Ashburn (District 155)
[email protected]
404.656.0188 – Office
Jay Powell, R – Camilla (District 171)
[email protected]
404.656.5103 – Office
229.336.3962 – Office
Alan Powell, R – Hartwell (District 32)
[email protected]
404.463.3793 – Office
706.206.6500 – Office
Betty Price, R – Roswell (District 48)
[email protected]
404.656.0202 – Office
Jimmy Pruett, R – Eastman (District 149)
[email protected]
404.656.7855 – Office
478.374.4316 – Office
478.374.5114 – Fax
Regina Quick, R – Athens (District 117)
[email protected]
404.656.0220 – Office
Brad Raffensperger, R – Johns Creek (District 50)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Paulette Rakestraw, R – Hiram (District 19)
[email protected]
404.656.0177 – Office
770.439.9056 – Office
Matt Ramsey, R – Peachtree City (District 72)
[email protected]
404.656.5024 – Office
Bert Reeves, R – Marietta (District 34)
[email protected]
404.656.0287 – Office
770.427.1605 – Office
Trey Rhodes, R – Greensboro (District 120)
[email protected]
404.656.0325 – Office
Tom Rice, R – Norcross (District 95)
[email protected]
404.656.5912 – Office
Terry Rogers, R – Clarkesville (District 10)
[email protected]
404.651.7737 – Office
706.754.0706 – Office
Ed Rynders, R – Albany (District 152)
[email protected]
404.656.6801 – Office
404.463.2249 – Fax
Jason Shaw, R – Lakeland (District 176)
[email protected]
404.656.0213 – Office
229.482.3505 – Office
229.482.8043 – Fax
Barbara Sims, R – Augusta (District 123)
[email protected]
404.656.7855 – Office
Richard H. Smith, R – Columbus (District 134)
[email protected]
404.656.6831 – Office
404.463.1673 – Fax
Lynn Smith, R – Newnan (District 70)
[email protected]
404.656.7149 – Office
Jason Spencer, R – Woodbine (District 180)
[email protected]
404.656.0177 – Office
404.463.2976 – Fax
Valencia Stovall, D – Lake City (District 74)
[email protected]
404.656.0314 – Office
Brian Strickland, R – McDonough (District 111)
[email protected]
404.656.0109 – Office
Jan Tankersley, R – Brooklet (District 160)
[email protected]
404.656.7855 – Office
Darlene K. Taylor, R – Thomasville (District 173)
[email protected]
404.656.0178 – Office
229.225.9943 – Office
229.225.9945 – Fax
Tom Taylor, R – Dunwoody (District 79)
[email protected]
404.656.3947 – Office
Sam Teasley, R – Marietta (District 37)
[email protected]
404.656.5146 – Office
Scot Turner, R – Holly Springs (District 21)
[email protected]
404.656.0152 – Office
Sam Watson, R – Moultrie (District 172)
[email protected]
404.656.0213 – Office
Andrew J. Welch, R – McDonough (District 110)
[email protected]
404.656.0213 – Office
770.957.3937 – Office
678.583.4888 – Fax
Bill Werkheiser, R – Glennville (District 157)
[email protected]
404.656.0126 – Office
912.654.3610 – Office
Joe Wilkinson, R – Atlanta (District 52)
[email protected]
404.463.8143 – Office
404.657.8278 – Fax
678.398.7383 – Office
Chuck Williams, R – Watkinsville (District 119)
[email protected]
404.656.0254 – Office
Bruce Williamson, R – Monroe (District 115)
[email protected]
404.656.5025 – Office
770.267.2566 – Office
Picking and choosing who gets tax breaks and who doesn’t is not “small government”.
Interfering with local legislation which would enable a local referendum which only affects local tax payers isn’t small government.
Obstructing bills which reduce government tax revenues is quite literally against smaller government.
I agree with you on the first part. The second part assumes they won’t increase taxes on the rest of us to make up the difference.
Incorrect assumption. This wont be a reduction in taxes coming in, merely a redistribution of the tax base based off of age. Decatur will still need the same amount of taxes to help fund our schools.
Picking and choosing who gets tax breaks and who pays how much tax is exactly the way our current tax codes work.
Usually the legislators do the picking and the choosing giving us taxpayers no choice but to comply.
At least with this bill, affected citizens were being offered chance to have a direct vote on the matter. To me that is a step towards small(er) government.
Fair point.
This is a way different situation than I understood from the mayor’s email earlier this week.
Not a case of one representative deciding to block but rather a full out effort by Republicans. Might be philosophical concerns about the issue or might be desire to obstruct efforts of some of the few Democrats in the State Senate. Either way, looks like this bill is dead for sure.
I’m not at all sure it would have passed in November but I think we Decatur voters should have been given the chance to decide.
Thanks DT. I wrote everyone on your list and so far, have received replies from Representatives Colbert and Pruett. Both expressed appreciation that someone from outside their district shared an opinion on SB343.
Your list with email addresses was very helpful.
I find it odd that I have seen no critical reaction from Decatur residents to this proposal. Yes, there are low- and moderate-income seniors in the city who are burdened by their property tax bill. Let’s design a program targeting them, or ideally, targeting all low- and moderate-income households who pay property taxes, including renters who pay property taxes via their rents.
There is little logic to indiscriminately give what are very large tax breaks to affluent households – yes there are affluent seniors in Decatur, many of them in fact. This merely shifts the tax burden to younger households, some of them with lower incomes and higher expense burdens (e.g., kids, mortgages, rent). And it is such a large break that it is likely to strain the schools, at least in the long run. And I refuse to believe that this will truly sunset in 5 years. Once it goes through, it will be renewed or extended permanently, as is the nature of tax breaks. And in the long run, the in-movers with kids will slow as demographics change, and Decatur will age, with little tax break available for public education.
To argue that seniors should not pay school taxes because they do not have kids in school turns public education into private education. It ignores the public-good nature of education, that it benefits everyone in the city to have good schools. And, even in the private good context, the benefits of good schools helps maintain our property values and increase them, which will accrue to us or our heirs. It turns senior residents into free-riders who benefit from the good school system without having to support it in any way.
Why don’t we just abandon all taxes and go to user fees for everything? Heck, let’s just get rid of the public schools and city government all together and let folks fend for themselves in the private market.
What is going on here? Have we become Milton?
— A resident mourning the declining public spirit of this city.
To the best of my knowledge, no segment of the younger households you reference has organized and petitioned the city commission for relief, which is the path that resulted in the proposal currently under the Dome. I fail to see how citizen activism and government response represents a loss of public spirit. If anything, the grassroots efforts of (some of) our seniors shows an active and engaged citizenry. Bully for them!
Also, don’t forget that what’s happening now is just securing Decatur’s right to put the exemption to a vote. The whole of the community will still have ample time to consider the various pros and cons of the proposal and then be heard at the ballot box.
Finally, the $70 million school bond is exclusive from any exemption currently on the table. Seniors will continue to help pay for all the new construction to serve our students.
I am sorry, but I don’t view folks organizing to get their taxes lowered, while still benefitting from the strength of the schools, as public spirit. It is self-interested lobbying. And the bond mileage will be very small compared to the current large portion of the tax bill going to the schools.
By public spirit, I meant the willingness to invest in public goods that benefit the whole, and not ourselves individually. But I guess having to explain that is a poor sign itself.
Yes, Tea Partiers and other anti-government folks would have public spirit by your definition. Not by mine. I don’t think we will come to consensus on a definition of this term.
I am sorry, but I don’t view folks organizing to get their taxes lowered, while still benefiting from the strength of the schools, as public spirit. It is self-interested lobbying. And the bond mileage will be very small compared to the current large portion of the tax bill going to the schools.
By public spirit, I mean the willingness to invest in public goods that benefit the whole, and not ourselves individually. But I guess having to explain that is a poor sign itself.
Yes, Tea Partiers and other ant-government folks would have public spirit by your definition. Not by mine. I don’t think we will come to consensus on such a definition.
Perhaps I feel differently because I actually know or know of the seniors who drove this effort and was present the night they petitioned the commission. What you reduce to self-interest, I see as the people who, through the worst days of south Decatur, were the glue that kept the community from imploding. When the city lacked the resources to properly serve and protect Decatur south of the tracks, these are the people who organized and, working with essentially no resources, kept the neighborhood functioning. I think they know a thing or two about public spirit.
I’m fairly sure I have a decent idea of it as well. I’m not all that affluent by New Decatur standards but I recognize the contribution these folks have made towards the Decatur we enjoy today and I’m willing to give back in the form of helping fund some relief. Perhaps others share this appreciation. I guess we’ll know in November if this thing gets through the Legislature.
Now if you feel the problem is that the break would extend too broadly to those who don’t in any way need it, well beyond the group that petitioned for it, that’s fine and worthy of further debate. But to essentially malign, or at the very least dismiss, the petitioning group as self-interested lobbyists is, IMO, way off the mark from who these folks really are.
My last comment on this. I don’t know the people you are talking about and maybe they are not affluent and deserve some tax relief. I am sure many who would like to see it pass could use the help.
But this could be done easily and with much less harm to others, with a good, income-based proposal (that hopefully also benefited lower-income renters.)
But the folks you speak of, are not the only ones advocating for this change. I have seen flurries of emails from folks in my neighborhood and many of these folks are very far from hard up.
Finally, just because someone worked in the public interest in the past, doesn’t give them a free pass on this. It is bad, regressive policy.
The income based aspect of it has been the main opposition reasoning behind most of the concerned citizens in Decatur. While there are seniors that need relief, we also recognize affluent ones that certainly do not. That is why the measure would not have likely passed in November without that clause being changed.
Maybe this is a blessing in disguise? Maybe it will force them to reconsider the proposal next year, perhaps better written with some income/wealth caps on it?
And on the last note about renting, this bill in no way affects renters and it wont. The only person that would get the tax relief would be those that hold the property and literally pay the taxes. You would have to be lumped into the home-owners group to be affected by the school taxes.
Sorry, that’s not correct. Just because someone doesn’t physically pay a property tax bill does not mean that they are not paying for higher or lower taxes. It is called tax incidence and is well established in the public finance literature. Landlords largely pass on property taxes (and increases) to tenants. Tenants are paying a rent that is “gross” of property taxes.
The point about renters is exactly that they will NOT benefit from this proposal. They DO pay property taxes just not directly to the city/schools/county.
By giving senior homeowner tax breaks the property tax base will effectively shifted from seniors (many with significant means) to those without tax breaks (or the schools’ budgets will be cut severely). Many renters have lower incomes and wealth than many senior homeowners. Their landlords will see increased property taxes and will pass those on to their tenants.
Without means-testing there will be many inequities in this.