A Milton officer resigned under investigation in July

What, if anything, do you intend to do regarding property taxes for Fulton County homeowners?

I'll tell you exactly what I said in the Appen News HD47 debate:
We absolutely need property-tax reform. People are watching their home values rise on paper while wondering whether they'll eventually be taxed out of a home they already own.

I support protecting existing assessment caps and homestead exemptions, those are already law. But those protections alone don't address the underlying reasons property taxes rise.

When the state shifts costs onto local governments, local taxpayers may end up paying the difference. When commercial properties are undervalued, homeowners can shoulder a disproportionate share of the tax burden. And when assessments lack transparency, property owners have difficulty understanding or challenging their bills.

My priorities are ensuring the state adequately funds its obligations, particularly public education, strengthening the accuracy and accountability of commercial property assessments, and making the assessment and appeals processes more transparent.

Homeowners should be able to understand exactly why their property-tax bills change, how their properties were valued, and what options they have to challenge an incorrect assessment. Property-tax reform must address both the protections homeowners receive and the underlying costs being passed along to them.

At the center of my cost of living plan is meaningful property tax relief for Fulton County homeowners.

First, I will fight to protect the statewide assessment cap so rising home values do not automatically translate into sharply higher tax bills.

Second, I support expanding our homestead exemptions. I’ll work to increase the general homestead exemption for all Fulton homeowners, which reduces a home’s taxable value. Voters also took an important step last year to provide tax relief for seniors. I will push to allow measures on your ballot that provide a 100% Fulton County Schools property tax exemption for homeowners age 65 and older and an increase in Fulton County’s senior homestead exemption from $50,000 to $100,000. We can fund both through growth in the tax digest and responsible spending restraint, not higher rates on other homeowners.

Third, I support broader property tax reform across the state, but it must be phased in, state funded, and designed to protect essential local services. We cannot eliminate a major source of local revenue without explaining how schools, police, and fire will continue to be funded.

Homeowners deserve lasting relief, greater predictability, and a plan that actually adds up.

Milton has a deer problem that I never see mentioned in print or in the city’s minutes. Dogs have died, animals have been mauled and people have been threatened. What would you do about it?

As our community has grown, deer have increasingly been pushed into neighborhoods, roads, and smaller pockets of remaining open space. At the same time, opportunities to manage the deer population through traditional methods have become more limited. When wildlife is creating a public safety concern for residents, pets, and drivers, we cannot simply ignore it.

I will bring together the City of Milton, public safety officials, Georgia Department of Natural Resources wildlife officials, and affected residents to document incidents and determine where wildlife encounters pose the greatest risk. Residents should have a clear way to report encounters so officials can track patterns and understand where action is needed. Any response should be based on actual incident data and focused on public safety while being responsible about wildlife management.

First I would meet with you to understand your concerns. That's how I've run this campaign and it's how I intend to serve.

From there, my job would be to bring the right people to the table and make sure we have the information necessary to make informed decisions. We'd need to determine whether the City has ever participated in a deer population assessment with the Georgia Dept. of Natural Resources. We'd also need data on property damage, collisions and incidents involving residents and pets. We need to understand the scope of the problem so we're not wasting time and resources trying to solve the wrong one.

I trust the experts to identify effective, humane solutions. Once we get the ball rolling, my responsibility would be to ensure their recommendations are taken seriously and followed through on.

A lot can get lost in the bureaucratic shuffle. While I'm not an expert on wildlife management, I am good at staying on top of issues and making sure things don't fall through the cracks.

I can't promise that every problem has an easy solution, but I'll be a vocal advocate and help see the process through.

Vouchers are a big topic of conversation in Georgia right now. The basic idea is that state education dollars follow a child out of the public-school system and can be used for private education.

But public schools do not disappear when a student leaves, and neither do their fixed costs. Fulton County still has to pay for buildings, buses, teachers, special education, and other essential services. At the same time, the quality of our public schools is directly tied to the value of our homes, and for most families, their home is their largest investment.

How do you lower property taxes while protecting the funding and quality of our public schools? And if more state education dollars are redirected through vouchers, how do we prevent that from either shifting more of the burden onto local taxpayers, reducing services in our public schools, or weakening one of the biggest drivers of home values in this community?

Lowering property taxes and expanding school vouchers are two of Jack's main talking points, but you can't have it both ways. His promises sound good on campaign flyers, but the consequences are disastrous.

The voucher program uses taxpayer dollars to subsidize private education. We're being asked to take on that expense while our public schools are still underfunded.

Public schools have an obligation to educate every child, regardless of circumstances. Private schools don't operate under those same obligations. They aren't required to follow any curriculum standards or employ state-certified teachers. And the$6,500 wouldn't even cover half of the tuition of any private school here in north fulton.

And Fulton County already offers school choice through the COSA program. Students can go to any Fulton school, as long as there's room. So lets not pretend this debate is really about giving families a way out of underperforming schools. They already have options within the public school system.

We have an ethical obligation to adequately fund public education for every child before committing more taxpayer dollars to private alternatives.

Lowering property taxes should mean finding ways to reduce the burden on homeowners, not shifting costs or weakening the schools communities depend on.

Great public schools and predictable homeownership are not competing priorities.

Much of the pressure on property tax bills in recent years has come from rapidly rising assessments. A family can owe more simply because their home is worth more on paper, even when their income has not increased. That’s why I will focus on protecting homeowners from tax increases driven by rising assessments.

We should protect the assessment cap voters approved so a surging housing market does not automatically mean higher tax bills. I support rolling back tax rates when values rise, allowing schools to fund the budgets they adopt without homeowners paying more simply because assessments increased.

We should use growth to fund additional relief. New homes, businesses, and economic growth expand the tax digest and can help fund stronger senior exemptions, including a full school tax exemption at age 65. Broader reforms should be phased in, state funded, and backed by clear public math.

At the same time, the state must fully fund the school formula and ensure teacher pay keeps pace with the cost of living. Protecting public schools and making homeownership more affordable can go hand in hand. We can and should focus on both.

Georgia holds a multibillion-dollar budget surplus. How do you plan to handle it: return more of it to taxpayers through rebates and rate cuts, keep it in reserve, or spend it on new state programs? If new programs, which ones?

The state legislature should continue returning surplus funds to taxpayers through rebates and responsible rate cuts, based on a simple principle: you know better than the government how to spend your money.

If we want the government run more like a business, we should manage it that way by maintaining a responsible cushion for economic downturns, so we can avoid raising taxes or cutting funding for schools and public safety when revenues decline. Strong reserves also help protect Georgia’s credit rating and keep borrowing costs lower for taxpayers.

We should be cautious when politicians talk about using our existing reserves to “invest” in new government programs. One-time money should not be used to create permanent spending obligations. When the reserves are gone, the programs remain, and taxpayers are left with the bill and a tax increase.

The best investment of your tax dollars is to leave them with you and never take more than government needs in the first place. New priorities should compete for funding through the regular budget process, while surplus dollars beyond responsible reserves should be returned to the people who earned them.

Georgia is no longer sitting on a $14 billion surplus. Most of what is left is in the rainy- day fund. Only about $1 to 2 billion can be spent freely. I've spent months studying these numbers, because I'm not waiting to be elected to start doing this job.

My first priority for what remains would be restoring the $344 million Governor Kemp withheld after a bipartisan legislature approved it. That money was meant for public schools, school safety, healthcare, disability services, domestic violence shelters, sexual assault centers, state retirees, and summer meals for kids.

These weren't frivolous expenses. They were investments in people's lives that our representatives had already agreed were necessary. Governor Kemp says we may need our reserves to balance this year's budget. That's exactly why these choices matter. When money is tight, children's safety and summer meals shouldn't be the first things cut. Withholding that funding was a choice, and it was the wrong one.

I'm not opposed to returning money to taxpayers. But my job is to make sure you get the best value for every dollar. That means lowering long-term household costs, protecting our rainy-day reserves, and making responsible decisions about our future.

Milton has worked to keep its rural character: horse farms, large lots and open space. Some decisions that shape it are made by the state, from widening state highways to state rules on local zoning. What would you do to help Milton keep its rural character and greenspace?

I'm passionate about this because I know what it's like to live somewhere that expanded too quickly, without adequate infrastructure or meaningful input from residents. When we moved back, my five year old son said, "The trees here make me feel safe." That peace and serenity is what I want to protect.

At the state level, I'll prioritize local control over development and ensure GDOT projects address actual transportation needs, with infrastructure keeping pace with growth. But local control must also come with accountability. Giving communities authority shouldn't mean giving local officials a free pass when residents' property rights are violated.

I experienced this firsthand here in Milton. My neighbor was allowed to remove more than 200 mature trees from my property, and the city permitted alterations to a pond on my land, all without my consent. Our home's value has dropped 20%, our privacy is gone, and we're a year into litigation we never wanted. Our HOA also allowed this to happen.

City permitting processes and HOAs are supposed to protect homeowners and their property rights. Instead, we've been left fighting this battle alone.

I want stronger property rights, stricter permitting safeguards, and meaningful consequences when those protections fail.

I strongly believe decisions about Milton’s future should be made close to home, with the state serving as a partner in preserving our community. Milton’s rural character and quality of life are part of what makes it special, and growth should occur where local leaders and residents determine it is appropriate.

Zoning is one of Milton’s most important tools. I oppose state efforts to override local zoning with one-size-fits-all density mandates. Milton has deliberately chosen a lower density approach, and those land use decisions should remain with the community.

Transportation policy should respect that same principle. My opponent has said she supports expanding MARTA into our community. I do not believe the infrastructure and development required for that expansion are compatible with the lower density character Milton residents have worked for years to preserve. Transportation solutions should fit Milton, not require changing Milton to fit them.

Instead, I would work to give Milton a stronger voice in planning state roads. Building on the greater planning authority Milton received over State Route 9 in 2025, I’ll pursue similar partnerships on State Route 372 and other corridors to improve traffic and safety while respecting our community’s character.

Milton’s police use license plate cameras from Flock Safety, and state law sets the rules for how long that data may be kept and who may use it. Should the legislature change those rules? If so, how?

The legislature must set stronger safeguards for all surveillance technology used by the government, including Flock cameras. The Fourth Amendment protects Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures. That is a fundamental right, and preserving it is essential to maintaining public trust.

As a practical matter, when we build safeguards into law, we should plan for the worst case scenario, not simply assume a system will always be used properly. I do not believe current Georgia law goes far enough. Agencies can retain this data for up to 30 months, far longer than necessary in most criminal investigations, and this year officers across the state have been charged with accessing it for unlawful reasons. Both issues are fixable.

At a minimum, I support reducing data retention to 30 days unless it is tied to an active investigation, requiring a case number and documented reason for every search, conducting regular audits, limiting outside sharing to legitimate criminal investigations, giving local departments control over who can search their data, and requiring annual public reporting on how the system is used.

Yes. This mass surveillance technology spread across Georgia faster than regulation could keep up with.

Today, state law allows plate data to be kept for 30 months, requires no audits, and doesn't require a warrant to search it. Each agency sets its own rules. Here in Milton, police quietly extended retention from 30 days to a full year without a public announcement.

And the system is being abused. This year, dozens of Georgia officers have been fired or charged for misusing these cameras, including to track former partners. Most were caught only after audits began.

I would change the law in five ways: cut retention to 30 days unless data is tied to an active investigation, require a warrant to search someone's past location history except in emergencies, require a case number for every search, mandate independent audits with public reporting, and limit sharing with out-of-state agencies.

Flock has promised some of this, but company policies aren't laws.

I support giving police the tools to solve crimes. I don't support a surveillance system that tracks law-abiding residents without real oversight.

Data centers are driving much of the expected growth in Georgia’s demand for electricity. What, if anything, should the state do about them, including their effects on residents’ power bills and water supplies?

First, we need an extended moratorium on new data center construction. Once we develop that land, we can't get it back. We need to understand the environmental impact and the real, long-term jobs these projects create.

The state's own audit found a data center can employ about 1,500 construction workers at its peak, but only around 50 permanent staff once it's running.

Second, our power bill protections are merely Public Service Commission rules, not law. Rules can change, and a future commission could undo them. We need to put these protections into law immediately.

Third, the tax breaks must end. Georgia waived more than $430 million in sales taxes for data centers last year. That alone could have covered the $344 million in funding Governor Kemp cut that I mentioned earlier. The state's own study found most of these projects would have come here anyway, without the tax breaks.

Finally, water. Residents deserve to know how much water and power a facility will use before it's approved, with no secret agreements.

I'm not against growth. But my job is to make sure Georgians get the best value for their money, and that includes their power bills and their water.

Residents and local leaders should have the authority to decide whether massive data centers fit their infrastructure, resources, and long-term plans. Before projects are approved, communities deserve transparency about their expected water and power demands.

Data centers should pay their own way for the power, water, and infrastructure they require. Georgia families and existing businesses should never be forced to subsidize the enormous demands created by these projects.

I support ending the special sales tax exemption for new data centers. A state fiscal analysis estimated that exemption cost Georgia roughly $474 million in foregone state revenue in 2025 alone. Eliminating unnecessary incentives like this can help us to continue reducing the tax burden on Georgia families.

Finally, we need lasting protections for residential power bills. The Public Service Commission has adopted rules designed to prevent data center costs from being shifted onto existing customers, including requiring large new users to bear infrastructure costs. I support putting those protections into state law so they do not depend solely on regulatory policy.