Bryan County state legislators introducing bill to lock in homestead exemption
If passed and voted in, House Bill 362 would nullify the school board's plan to opt out, a decision many Bryan County residents have hit out against because it could potentially lead to higher taxes that go toward county schools.
'It is 581, but it's a local bill. So, if you opt out, the people will have another bite at the apple,' State Rep. Ron Stephens (GA-164). 'We've gotten a lot of calls from people who are looking for predictability on their property taxes, and this will give it to them.'
H.B. 581 was the original legislation that allowed for the homestead exemption, which is essentially a cap on property taxes.
Bryan County itself and several cities within the county have all decided to opt in.
However, the school board has made it clear they intend to opt out, citing budget concerns for a growing school district.
'All the revenue comes back, plus a cost of living. So, there's no loss of revenue at all,' Stephens said.
According to Rep. Stephens, 66% of taxes in Bryan County go towards the school system.
Stephens, Rep. Jesse Petrea (GA-166), Rep. Lehman Franklin (GA-160) and Sen. Ben Watson (GA-01) are working to push the legislation through the state house and senate within the coming days.
If the measure does pass, Bryan County residents will vote on it in November.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ohio's new flat tax puts schools, roads and other public goods at risk
The result was two decades in the making. Republicans in charge of the Statehouse ended the progressive, or graduated, income tax in Ohio. They did so in the most recent state budget bill, commencing in July. That outcome may please many Ohioans, especially those who have applauded the Republican project, begun in 2005. The aim has been to reduce state income tax rates, shrinking both the percentage collected from individuals and the number of brackets. Not surprisingly, taxpayers, especially big campaign donors, like paying less. Today, the state income tax features a single bracket, all those affected paying 2.75%. That is a long way from the nine brackets and top rate of 7.5% on income above $200,000 early in this century, or just before Republicans went to work. The argument has been that such a reduction would prove an economic boon to the state. As it is, the data indicate nothing of the kind. The state still lags the country as a whole, its median income 41st among the states. Such trends inspire some Republicans to insist they haven't done enough. Many, including Vivek Ramaswamy, the party's leading candidate for governor, talk about eliminating the income tax. Wouldn't that be swell? Worth recalling is why Ohio adopted an income tax. The state found itself increasingly without the resources to invest adequately in public goods, from education to roads and health care. So, in 1971, the state legislature, pushed by Gov. John Gilligan, the Democratic governor, enacted the tax. When opponents challenged the measure, Ohio voters decisively rejected their view. No doubt, Republicans often grumbled about the tax. At the same time, a bipartisan consensus formed. When recessions struck, or events otherwise triggered budget shortfalls, both parties looked to the income tax for help. Notably, the likes of George Voinovich and Bob Taft recognized the value in increased tax rates for those at the highest income rungs. Why? Mike DeWine recently provided an answer. The governor took office six years ago expressing skepticism about the need for further income tax cuts. (His fellow Republicans went ahead, anyway.) He cited the state's 'unfinished business.' Most recently, as he vetoed ill-conceived moves by lawmakers to address the local property tax burden, he reminded: 'We need to fund our schools, we need to fund our mental health in the state.' The income tax is a practical tool for addressing such priorities. It opens the way to progressivity, reflecting the ability to pay. Thus, it adds a worthy element of equity, in contrast to the regressive sales tax and property tax. This is what Republicans have abandoned with their flat tax. More: Trump's reversal on climate change is among his most reckless actions | Opinion Headed into this budget cycle, Republicans had whittled the number of tax brackets down to two, 2.75% on income between $26,050 and $100,000 and 3.5% on income above $100,000. By wiping out the higher rate, they have delivered a $1 billion tax cut to those Ohioans with higher incomes. Two think tanks, Policy Matters Ohio and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, have calculated further that the top 1% of earners, with an average annual income of $1.7 million, will receive 40% of the tax cut. The bulk of the remainder flows to the next 15%. Since Republicans began whacking the graduated income tax, the top 1% have enjoyed an average annual tax cut of $52,459. By contrast, those in the bottom 20% pay $80 more in all taxes. The bottom 20% pay 12.7% of their income in state and local taxes while the top 1% pay just 6.3%. That inequity will deepen with the flat income tax. Something else merits attention: The Republican income tax cutting means that for every tax dollar Ohio collected in 2004, it takes in 85 cents today. That helps explain a conspicuous hole in the new state budget. It falls $2.86 billion short of the resources required under the Fair School Funding Plan. Nearly three-quarters of school districts receive less than what the funding plan says they need to provide an adequate education. Recall the applause that greeted the unveiling of the plan, a bipartisan effort to tackle, finally, a problem that dates to 1997, when the Ohio Supreme Court declared the school funding formula unconstitutional. The plan even represents a path to addressing rising anger about local property taxes. The state must step up to ensure the funding necessary to support public goods and services. Primary and secondary education are hardly alone in facing neglect. Higher rates for the wealthiest could be achieved while preserving part of their tax cut. The governor and lawmakers might tap the more than $11 billion in tax credits, exemptions, deductions and other breaks. What won't get the job done is abandoning the progressive income tax for a flat rate. Douglas is a retired Beacon Journal editorial page editor. He can be reached at mddouglasmm@ This article originally appeared on Akron Beacon Journal: Ohio flat tax puts schools, roads, other public goods at risk| Opinion
Boston Globe
a day ago
- Boston Globe
In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity and progressives are on board
Then multiple Democratic governors promised new districts in their own states to neutralize potential Republican gains in Washington. Their counter has been buoyed by national fundraising, media blitzes and public demonstrations, including rallies scheduled around the country Saturday. 'For everyone that's been asking, 'Where are the Democrats?' -- well, here they are,' said U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, one of several Democrats who could be ousted under her state's new maps. 'For everyone who's been asking, 'Where is the fight?' – well, here it is.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up There is no guarantee Democrats can prevent the Republican-powered redistricting, just as Democrats on Capitol Hill have not been able to stop Trump's moves. But it's a notable turn for a party that, by its own leaders' admissions, has honored conventional rules and bypassed bare-knuckled tactics. Advertisement So far, progressive and establishment Democrats are aligned, uniting what has often been a fragmented opposition since Republicans led by Trump took control of the federal government with their election sweep in November. Leaders on the left say the approach gives them a more effective way to confront him. They can challenge his redistricting ploy with tangible moves as they also push back against the Republicans' tax and spending law and press the case that he is shredding American democracy. Advertisement 'We've been imploring Democrats where they have power on the state and local level to flex that power,' said Maurice Mitchell, who leads the Working Families Party at the left flank of mainstream U.S. politics. 'There's been this overwrought talk about fighters and largely performative actions to suggest that they're in the fight.' This time, he said, Democrats are 'taking real risks in protecting all of our rights' against 'an authoritarian president who only understands the fight.' Texas made sense for Republicans as the place to start a redistricting scuffle. They dominate the Statehouse, and Gov. Greg Abbott is a Trump loyalist. But when the president's allies announced a new political map intended to send five more Republicans to the U.S. House, state Democratic representatives fled Texas, denying the GOP the numbers to conduct business in the Legislature and approve the reworked districts. Those legislators surfaced in Illinois, New York, California and elsewhere, joined by governors, senators, state party chairs, other states' legislators and activists. All promised action. The response was Trumpian. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Kathy Hochul of New York welcomed Texas Democrats and pledged retaliatory redistricting. Pritzker mocked Abbott as a lackey who says 'yes, sir' to Trump orders. Hochul dismissed Texas Republicans as 'lawbreaking cowboys.' Newsom's press office directed all-caps social media posts at Trump, mimicking his signature sign off: 'THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.' U.S. Rep. Al Green, another Texas Democrat who could lose his seat, called Trump 'egomaniacal.' Yet many Democrats also claimed moral high ground, comparing their cause to the Civil Rights Movement. Advertisement State Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., invoked another Texas Democrat, President Lyndon Johnson, who was 'willing to stand up and fight' for civil rights laws in the 1960s. Then, with Texas bravado, Romero reached further into history: 'We're asking for help, maybe just as they did back in the days of the Alamo.' A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that about 15% of Democrats' own voters described the party using words like 'weak' or 'apathetic.' An additional 10% called it 'ineffective' or 'disorganized.' Beto O'Rourke, a former Texas congressman who is raising money to support Texas Democrats, has encouraged Democratic-run statehouses to redraw districts now rather than wait for GOP states to act. On Friday, California Democrats released a plan that would give the party an additional five U.S. House seats. It would require voter approval in a November election. 'Maximize Democratic Party advantage,' O'Rourke said at a recent rally. 'You may say to yourself, 'Well, those aren't the rules.' There are no refs in this game. F--- the rules. ... Whatever it takes.' Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin acknowledged the shift. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to a knife fight,' he said. Andrew O'Neill, an executive at the progressive group Indivisible, contrasted that response with the record-long speeches by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J. and the Democratic leader of the U.S. House, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, in eviscerating Trump and his package of tax breaks and spending cuts. The left 'had its hair on fire' cheering those moments, O'Neill recalled, but were 'left even more frustrated in the aftermath.' Advertisement Trump still secured tax cuts for the wealthy, accelerated deportations and cut safety net programs, just as some of his controversial nominees were confirmed over vocal Democratic opposition. 'Now,' O'Neill said, 'there is some marriage of the rhetoric we've been seeing since Trump's inauguration with some actual action.' O'Neill looked back wistfully to the decision by Senate Democrats not to eliminate the filibuster 'when our side had the trifecta,' so a simple majority could pass major legislation. Democratic President Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, he said, was too timid in prosecuting Trump and top associates over the Capitol riot. In 2016, Democratic President Barack Obama opted against hardball as the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, refused to consider Obama's nomination of Garland to the Supreme Court. 'These unspoken rules of propriety, especially on the Democratic side, have created the conditions' that enabled Trump, Mitchell said. Even on redistricting, Democrats would have to ignore their previous good-government efforts and bypass independent commissions that draw boundaries in several states, including California. Party leaders and activists rationalize that the broader fights tie together piecemeal skirmishes that may not, by themselves, sway voters. Arguing that Trump diminishes democracy stirs people who already support Democrats, O'Neill said. By contrast, he said, the GOP 'power grab,' can be connected to unpopular policies that affect voters' lives. Green noted that Trump's big package bill cleared the Senate 'by one vote' and the House by a few, demonstrating why redistricting matters. U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said Democrats must make unseemly, short-term power plays so they can later pass legislation that 'bans gerrymandering nationwide ... bans super PACs (political action committees) and gets rid of that kind of big money and special interest that helped get us to this place.' U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, added that a Democratic majority would wield subpoena power over Trump's administration. Advertisement In the meantime, said U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson, D-Texas, voters are grasping a stark reality. 'They say, 'Well, I don't know. Politics doesn't affect me,'' she said of constituents she meets. 'I say, 'Honey, it does' If you don't do politics, politics will do you.''
Fox News
3 days ago
- Fox News
SC Republican mounts bid for House seat currently occupied by gubernatorial hopeful Nancy Mace
South Carolina Republican state Rep. Mark Smith launched a bid for U.S. Congress. He is running for the seat in the Palmetto State's 1st Congressional District, which is currently occupied by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, who is running for governor. Mace launched a gubernatorial bid earlier this month, leaving her House seat up for grabs in the 2026 election. "In the State House, I fought for the largest tax cut in South Carolina history, backed the blue, cracked down on illegal immigration, and defended our values without apology," Smith declared in a Thursday post on X. Smith has served in the state House of Representatives since late 2020. "In South Carolina's 1st District, we need a proven conservative leader who will fight for President Trump's America First agenda and deliver results — not drama," he said in the X post. "The Lowcountry needs a fighter who will stand with President Trump and puts South Carolina first. That's exactly what I'll do in Washington," he asserted.
