Valuing Taxpayers, Your Neighbors, and City Services

During last fall’s Peachtree City election cycle, I wrote a letter to the editor about how to meaningfully cut property taxes for homestead taxpayers. Mr. Neil Sullivan wrote a sort of response, and while I appreciate the engagement, his comments leaned on a few familiar tropes that deserve a closer look.

Mr. Sullivan pointed out that property taxes are paid on the value of a home decided by a government employee, which makes it seem like the value is simply a made-up number by a single individual.

The tax assessor’s office must use a disciplined method including property data, market data, and comparable sales to determine a fair market value. If they did anything less, I suspect the elected tax assessor would be voted out of office, and, if values were completely arbitrary, subject to multiple appeals, and, possibly, litigation.

The average 2026 homestead property tax bill in Peachtree City is projected to be $1,218. My hypothetical 50% reduction – $609 per year – was intentionally extreme. It illustrated that you cannot cut taxes by that magnitude without dismantling the core functions of city government.

In my example, everything except Public Safety and a part of Public Works disappeared. That means no City Manager for administrative oversight of fire or police, typical in a democracy, or City Clerk to keep official records, no Finance Department to ensure payroll is met, no IT to keep systems running, and, ultimately, no professional city management for elected officials to work through to meet constituents’ expectations. These are not luxuries; they are the minimum infrastructure required for a functioning municipality. Mr. Sullivan did not address any of these implications.

We saw a real-world version of this last fall when the 2026 budget nearly failed at the 11th hour because some council members wanted to cut the fire training tower and employee merit increases. The fire tower is now back in the budget, funded, appropriately enough, through reserves.

Mr. Sullivan also wrote that I “reassured us that any tax benefit from tax reductions proposed by some candidates would be small” as if the numerical figure were up for debate. It wasn’t. A $504,105 reduction spread across all homestead taxpayers results in an average reduction of $25. It is a fact, not an opinion.

Now I don’t begrudge anyone $25. If I saw a $5 bill and $20 bill on the sidewalk, I’d stop and pick them up, but to hold up approving a government budget for $25- an amount that becomes negligible over a year of income and expenses- or 2% of a property tax bill is not something most people would describe as large.

I chose $609 because it is a meaningful amount of money. When people have more room in their budget, they often eat out more. That’s how household economics work. Someone gets a night off from cooking, and nobody has to wash dishes. I chose McDonald’s, specifically, because it’s ubiquitous and most people know what things there cost.

It seems Mr. Sullivan interpreted this as me judging how people spend their money. That trope is tired, and frankly, it’s a veiled ad hominem. If you have extra money, I don’t care whether you spend it on McDonald’s, Starbucks, cocktails, a BMW, or set it on fire in the backyard. The point was never about lifestyle choices. It was about the scale of the tax cut. 

When the conversation shifts to “Schultzie is judging people,” we stop talking about numbers, values, and taxation – and start talking about me. That’s not serious policy discussion.

Another trope that made an appearance was the familiar “nothing stops you from sending more money to Peachtree City.” Technically true. Practically absurd. Only a fool pays more taxes than necessary. Peachtree City does not provide extra services if I voluntarily overpay. Why would anyone do that?

Mr. Sullivan then adds, “Even if me or my neighbor ‘can afford it,’ shouldn’t that be that person’s choice.” If he’s suggesting a “pay what you feel like paying” model for municipal government, that’s unworkable. When you buy a home, you’re also buying the responsibility for the property taxes that come with it.

Mr. Sullivan also attributed to me the view that “taxes to provide government services are reasonable.” For Peachtree City, that’s largely correct – our city government is lean and provides essential services efficiently. But at the state, federal, and even Fayette County BOE levels, I have very different views. Waste, fraud, and abuse at the federal level are staggering. My letter never suggested otherwise.

Mr. Sullivan asked the question, “After all, does the government exist to serve the taxpayer, or does the taxpayer exist to serve the government?” This framing is odd. Peachtree City government – including every elected official – is made up of taxpayers. Our government is not some alien entity that descended to extract money from us. It is us. 

Council members are residents and homeowners in Peachtree City. Their job is to ensure government serves taxpayers. This is why we elect them- to serve our needs. Disagreeing with their decisions does not mean taxpayers now serve the government.We all have agency, but as I’ve discovered, it is easier to armchair quarterback in The Citizen than show up at city council meetings, contact elected representatives, support a political campaign, or even vote.