The math won’t work. Trading property for sales taxes hurts Ga. communities.

A recent guest opinion column in the AJC (“Saving the U.S. means restoring the American dream. That starts in Georgia,” by state Sen. Greg Dolezal) argued that Georgia should dramatically shift away from property taxes in favor of sales tax and other reforms in the name of protecting homeownership.

I understand why many Georgians are frustrated by rising property tax bills, especially seniors and families living on fixed incomes.

Affordability is a real challenge, and property tax relief is a conversation worth having.

But there is an important distinction between wanting property tax relief and eliminating the financial foundation that allows local communities to function.

When people talk about the American Dream, they usually talk about homeownership. And they should. Owning a home creates stability, builds wealth and strengthens communities. But maintaining strong communities also requires stable local government and reliable funding for the services residents count on every day.

People expect responsive police and fire services, well-maintained parks, functioning infrastructure, safe streets and continued investment in quality of life. None of those things happen by accident. They require stable and predictable funding.

Strong public investment in schools, infrastructure matters

Chamblee City Councilman Jimmy Furst. (Courtesy of Kynder Ganoe)

That predictability is why property tax has remained a core part of local government finance for generations. It is not perfect, but it is reliable.

Cities and counties can budget responsibly because they generally know what revenue will look like year to year.

Sales tax, by contrast, rises and falls with the economy. When consumer spending slows, revenue drops quickly.

Ironically, those economic downturns are often the exact moments communities need government services the most.

The argument that property taxes are inherently unjust also overlooks an important reality: Local governments do not create property values in a vacuum.

That predictability is why property tax has remained a core part of local government finance for generations. It is not perfect, but it is reliable.

Cities and counties can budget responsibly because they generally know what revenue will look like year to year.

Sales tax, by contrast, rises and falls with the economy. When consumer spending slows, revenue drops quickly.

Ironically, those economic downturns are often the exact moments communities need government services the most.

The argument that property taxes are inherently unjust also overlooks an important reality: Local governments do not create property values in a vacuum.

Public investment matters. Strong schools, safe neighborhoods, infrastructure improvements, parks and economic development all contribute to rising values.

In many ways, property taxes help fund the very amenities and services that make communities desirable places to live.

Georgia has already shown there are ways to provide meaningful relief without dismantling the entire system. Senior homestead exemptions have helped many older residents remain in their homes while still allowing local governments to maintain essential services.

Those targeted approaches recognize a real challenge without creating unintended consequences for every community across the state.

Create accountability, but keep local control

Could Georgia continue looking at targeted tax relief, homestead protections or ways to improve affordability? Absolutely. Those are reasonable conversations worth having.

But replacing stable local revenue with a heavier dependence on sales tax creates real risks, particularly for communities that do not have large retail corridors or tourism economies. A one-size-fits-all statewide solution ignores the reality that Georgia’s communities are incredibly different from one another.

The broader concern is not simply taxes. It is local control.

The people closest to a community are usually best positioned to decide how that community should fund services and invest in its future.

State leaders should absolutely provide guardrails and accountability, but permanently limiting the flexibility of local governments weakens the ability of cities and counties to respond to growth, emergencies, infrastructure needs and changing community priorities.

I believe in fiscal responsibility. I also believe in honest conversations about the actual cost of maintaining thriving communities.