As a member of the Facilities Advisory Committee, appointed by the Board of Education, I watched, with great interest, a July 27 presentation given by Mr. Claude Paquin of Fayetteville.

As I listened to Mr. Paquin, I was impressed by his proficiency with numbers and his comfort in using them in massive detail. However, I was discomfited by his use of sarcasm and ridicule in making reference to anyone or any viewpoint that differed from his own. Unfortunately, for me, the latter detracted from the former.
In both Mr. Paquin’s presentation, and in many of his published letters of opinion, he cannot seem to refrain from attacks on the character or intelligence of those with different opinions than his own. It became very obvious that this is, indeed, very personal for Mr. Paquin.

As someone to whom the SPLOST holds great appeal, I object to being labeled a “tax advocate” by Mr. Paquin. I do not relish paying more money in any form of tax, nor does anyone I know. However, since when is a property tax not a tax?

Mr. Paquin advocates a general obligation bond which translates to a property tax for the great majority of us - yet he does not see himself as a “tax advocate.” Mr. Paquin makes innuendo about “hoodwinking the public” and evil intentions behind those favoring a sales tax.

Any support I would give to a SPLOST does not come about because I would personally profit from it in any way. The school system itself stands to gain no more from a sales tax than from a bond (with the exception of long-term debt obligation).

Mr. Paquin, however, stands to gain a great deal from passage of a bond referendum — he would not have to pay the property tax to support repayment of the bond.

Do I believe this makes him evil? Absolutely not — he is simply advocating for what is most beneficial to himself. There is nothing wrong with that, and Mr. Paquin had made no secret of the benefit of a bond to himself and those over 65. But, he cannot make that decision for all of us. We have to do that ourselves based on how each tax would affect our own lifestyle.

From my own personal standpoint, as someone who will have to pay either way, both financing methods have advantages and both have disadvantages — there is no perfect way to pay taxes. For me it comes down to a few basic computations — a great deal of sophistication is not necessary.

I looked at my property tax bill from the past year and determined that, on a home valued by the county at $225,000, I paid $331 for the two bonds already included on my bill. An additional bond of $60 million (providing, roughly, for $25 million for a high school, $15 million for a middle school and $8.5 million each for two elementary schools) would add about $173 to that portion of my property tax bill and up that amount to $504.

I also know that the county anticipates adding about 1.5 mills to my property taxes to help fund the new jail complex, further raising my bill by at least $130 — something I cannot ignore.

I think we can all agree that these numbers will not remain the same. My property value is going to change and the millage is going to change, but since that information is not available now, a comparison using last year’s numbers is the best that can be done. Differences will be minimal and most likely offset because my value will increase but the millage will probably be rolled back.

The choice is a simple one. Do I want to pay small amounts ($1 for every $100 spent over a period of five years or write a big check once a year for, probably for me, a minimum of 20 years. That check will only continue to get bigger if future bonds are layered on top of the existing ones.

Furthermore, I am not moved by the fact that one year later I may be able to deduct some percentage, and what percentage varies greatly from family to family, of my property tax from my income tax. I am looking at the net effect to my checkbook in one calendar year.

In September 1998, the state completed a three-year phaseout of the state sales tax on most grocery items. You couldn’t tell it by me. I didn’t notice the disappearance of 4 percent in sales tax from my grocery bill and I guarantee that I won’t notice the reappearance of 1 percent in sales tax.

Mr. Paquin estimates that we will spend $845.39 per person over five years in the form of a 1-percent sales tax. That means a family of four would pay $3381.56 in five years. That equates to $676.31 per year for a family of four. So, the average family of four in this county must make $67,631 in taxable purchases each year to pay this $676.31 in the form of a one-percent sales tax. I cannot quite get there for the average family in this county.

I was born and raised in Georgia and I have a number of relatives and friends all over the state. I have talked to people in Cobb, Paulding, Douglas, Gwinnett and Cherokee counties. Without exception, all of these people spoke to me of their reluctance to invite the 1-percent sales tax into their community. Also, without exception, they told me after experiencing it that they’d vote for it again over a property tax. There is no issue with these folks between the two — without exception they say it is the most painless way to pay a tax.

This doesn’t make them stupid — they made a choice and they have not regretted their choice. I have to give some credence to those with experience. I don’t doubt most people living in this county have acquaintances they can speak with in other counties that have a SPLOST.

I have also spoken to some senior citizens in this county who have told me they think a sales tax is the fairest tax there is — if you don’t want to pay it, don’t buy it. I suspect that in most households, as in mine, there is a great deal of difference between those things I absolutely must purchase and pay for (i.e., my utility bill, food, etc.) and those things I purchase because I want to (i.e., a TV, dinner out, a sofa, etc.). With a sales tax, I personally have the ability to manipulate how much of it I will pay — not so with a property tax.

Then there’s the community side of the coin. Our whole culture is based on the notion that we are a society. A society must support itself — the youngest and the oldest members. Does this mean that seniors have no obligation whatsoever to support the educational system simply because they no longer use it?

I may be wrong, but I don’t think the majority of seniors feel that way. A number of seniors in the county have spoken to me of their vested interest in a system that educates their children’s children.

I do not use Medicare or Senior Services, but my tax dollars support them. To say seniors should not support the school system (in any tax form whatsoever) is to also say that I shouldn’t be obligated to pay for the services that benefit seniors or farmers or the poor or any other group to which I do not belong. How long would any society prosper with this way of thinking?

What about the political side of the coin? Mr. Paquin advocates that building a large, local, long-term debt is okay because some people in the population won’t have to pay it at all and most of us wouldn’t have to pay all of it because we would move or reach the age of 65. Build the large debt and let someone else pay it.
We criticize our national leaders for building a huge national debt on the same premise yet it is okay to advocate doing it at the local level?

The whole idea of taxing property owners at all is a liberal, left-wing idealogy, (tax only landowners and spread the wealth among a multitude of others), yet the majority of citizens in this county characterize themselves as conservative and leaning more toward the right. Of course, we don’t question property tax because we all must pay it, but none of us are particularly happy about it.

I am disappointed that Mr. Paquin feels it is necessary to turn this issue into an us vs. them battle. There is no right or wrong here — no good or evil. There are simply two different ways to finance the same result and all voting citizens must make a choice as to which works best for their lifestyle.

I encourage all citizens to call or e-mail their School Board representative or the Superintendent and let them know which way they prefer. The school system isn’t interested in putting a tax question on the ballot that will not pass — the facilities are needed too badly.

The Facilities Advisory Committee has not yet made a formal recommendation to the Board of Education (and the Board is certainly not bound to accept it when we do). But once viewpoints are expressed and decisions are made, the voters must go to the polls and back up their choice; the decision is too important and it affects far too many of us for 11 percent or even 22 percent of us to make.

Keep in mind, the state has rules on the voting process and views must be expressed quickly — any issue on the November ballot will most likely be voted on by the board by Aug. 21. If your going to do it, do it now.

I feel compelled to say that this county cannot turn its back on the school system’s need for facilities. I, unlike Mr. Paquin and others, see this as the overriding issue. Whatever the decision, if a decision is to be made now, SPLOST or bond, I will support it. I will not hold our school “hostage” to get what I want. My way or no way is not for me. This particular need is more important than how it is achieved.
I have no doubt that Mr. Paquin will feel compelled to respond to my opinion. I would challenge him to be objective and stick to the issues and not be sarcastic. I wonder if he will be able to do so.

I spent over a decade working with the finest lawyers in this state and I know that they are trained to try and elicit emotional responses — the ones who do it the best are the most successful. When you are able to get someone to think and respond emotionally, you refocus some of their energy away from their ability to reason logically.

I do not want this paper’s readership to fear that they will see dissertations on this subject, at least not from me, on a weekly basis. I feel that this is an “all or nothing” and “now or never” endeavor to express my opinion. I thank the paper for allowing me to do so.

Connie Leary
Peachtree City

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page