Paulding County Board of Education holds second public hearing on HB 581 opt‑out; no vote yet

Paulding County Board of Education members held the second of three public hearings required by Georgia law on whether the district should exercise its one‑time right to opt out of the statewide floating homestead exemption created by House Bill 581.

Superintendent Steve Barnett told attendees that HB 581 and the related constitutional amendment (identified in the hearing materials as HR 1022) cap how much homestead assessments can rise and give local governments a single opportunity to opt out. "This is a one‑time decision that will permanently impact the school district," Barnett said, adding the board would "listen to the community to get their feedback" and would not act sooner than Feb. 11.

The hearing drew a mix of questions and comments from residents and a presentation from county officials. Barnett emphasized locally relevant data in the board’s presentation: Paulding County has roughly 32,000 students and about 4,000 staff; the district’s digest is disproportionately residential (cited at about 86 percent residential versus a neighboring average of roughly 65 percent); local revenue comprises about 38 percent of the district’s funding; and recent local spending includes roughly $12 million on school safety and security over three years.

Why it matters: supporters and critics said the exemption affects more than homeowner bills. Barnett warned that the statewide exemption could erode local capacity to fund operations and capital needs by limiting how property values may grow for tax assessment purposes and by shifting more funding decisions to the state. He also flagged a possible indirect effect from local option sales taxes (FLOST) in neighboring counties: "a FLOST, if approved by the voters, could still have a negative impact on the school district's E‑SPLOST collections," Barnett said, explaining that shopping behavior across county lines could reduce sales tax revenue used for capital projects.

Public commenters raised questions about who would be affected and urged clarity. Brandon Miller, identifying himself as a longtime county resident, framed his comment around the November statewide vote that approved the constitutional amendment: "This county, by majority vote of 63% elected to pass HB 581," Miller said, urging the board to honor voters' intent. Resident Chris Batsworth said many in the county feel taxes are out of control and urged the board to watch expenses: "Just over the last five years ... the school budget's up $137,000,000 and we're only educating 1,700 more students per year," Batsworth said.

Other callers voiced confusion about exemptions and timing. Roy Lee Strickland asked how seniors would be affected; the board clarified that senior tax exemptions (for qualifying ages) and current local homestead exemptions would remain unchanged if the district chose to opt out. A board representative and the county chief appraiser explained that homestead protections are tied to the household and property status and can reset when a home is sold.

Board staff and speakers repeatedly pointed attendees to online resources compiled for the hearings, including a presentation from Jan. 14 and a frequently updated FAQ: Barnett said the district would add questions raised at the hearing to that FAQ. The board attorney also reviewed hearing procedures, including a five‑minute time limit for public speakers and the requirement that the board take comments under consideration but not respond during the public comment period.

No formal decision was taken at the hearing. At the close of the public comment period the board moved to adjourn; the motion to adjourn was made by "Mr. Fuller" and seconded by "Mr. Clayton," and the meeting was declared adjourned after a voice vote.

The board reminded residents that this was the second of three required hearings; the final scheduled hearing listed during this session is Feb. 4 at 6 p.m., and written comments may be submitted to the superintendent's office.

Ending: The district provided printed and online resources for residents and said it will keep updating its FAQ with questions raised during the hearings. The board did not take a vote on whether to opt out during this meeting and said any formal action would follow the remaining public hearing(s) and its internal decision timeline.