Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Taxes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Savannah–Chatham County holds public hearing on statewide floating homestead exemption, vote set for Feb. 19
Summary
County staff outlined differences between Chatham County’s longtime Stevens Day homestead exemption and Georgia House Bill 581, and residents urged commissioners to opt out ahead of a scheduled Feb. 19 vote.
Get email alerts on the Property Taxes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Savannah–Chatham County held a public hearing Feb. 8 on Georgia House Bill 581, the statewide “floating” homestead exemption enacted April 18, 2024, with county staff explaining how the law differs from Chatham County’s long‑standing Stevens Day homestead exemption and residents urging local officials to opt out.
Lamedice Holmes, controller in the Division of Finance, said House Bill 581 establishes a statewide floating exemption that freezes a homeowner’s base year value and allows annual adjustments based on a consumer price index formula. Holmes said the law also includes an optional local sales‑tax referendum that jurisdictions may use to offset property tax revenue and that it does not eliminate existing homestead exemptions unless the state exemption would provide a greater benefit to the taxpayer.
Holmes said the county’s Stevens Day homestead exemption — enacted in 1998 and named after state legislators Ron Stevens and Burke Day — similarly freezes base‑year values for primary residences and permits modest annual increases tied to inflation for City of Savannah and Chatham County School Board taxes. She said House Bill 581 covers properties larger than five acres, is expected to use a CPIU‑style calculation for annual adjustments, and would use tax year 2024 to establish base values for existing homeowners.
Holmes told the hearing that the county’s analysis shows a typical existing homeowner “may not benefit” under the House Bill 581 calculation in the first year and could pay more over a 10‑year period under the statewide formula than under Stevens Day. Holmes also warned that opting in would require substantial staff time to implement the new calculations and that the county believes “this is why every municipality in Chatham County is choosing to opt out of House Bill 581.”
Multiple residents urged the county to opt out. Cheryl Gay said, “I support opting out,” and asked officials to lower the millage rate. Tommy Matthews said he favored opting out “until we find out more about it,” adding, “please keep Savannah, Savannah.” Vicky Bradley asked whether the state legislature was still considering amendments to the law and whether the county should wait for any changes before voting; Sean, a county staff member, replied, “we can only act based on what they've actually passed right now,” and noted the county must decide whether to opt in or opt out by the March 1 deadline unless the legislature moves that date.
Josephine Martin, a resident and first‑time attendee, said she understood that if the county does not opt out Stevens Day “would go away,” and asked whether school board taxation under Stevens Day would differ; staff clarified that Stevens Day adjustments apply to certain local levies, and that both frameworks allow modest annual inflationary increases. James Jones, another resident, said he supported keeping Stevens Day and opposed opting in.
The public hearing was labeled number three in the county’s required series of hearings on the subject. Holmes said a vote on the resolution to opt out is scheduled for Feb. 19; no formal vote or decision was made at the Feb. 8 hearing.
The discussion centered on differences in methodology (CPI measure and base year), scope (statewide coverage and the five‑acre threshold), implementation workload for county staff, and the statutory deadline for opting in or out. The county encouraged residents to contact their state legislators about outstanding questions or potential amendments to House Bill 581.
A Feb. 19 vote remains scheduled; county staff warned that any subsequent state amendments could affect local options but said the board must act on the law as enacted unless the legislature alters deadlines or provisions.

