1 · His tax rate, stated different ways almost every time
His model has exactly one number for the school tax rate under his recommended path: 18.57 mills. (Option A, the fastest path, is 18.80.) In the twelve instances collected below, only two name which version of the plan he means, and those two are roughly right. The rest are vague, and they scatter from “18-19” up to a flat 20.
| When | What he said | Names a version? |
|---|
| July 13, 2026 | “around 19 mills providing one mil for emergency situations” | No |
| July 13, 2026 | “Full homestead exempt model at 20 mills (kept at 20 mils)” | No |
| July 16, 2026 | “model it towards a 19 to 20 mil range” | No |
| July 16, 2026 | “You could be at 19 mil rate consistently” | No |
| July 16, 2026 | “I recommend that 19 mil rate” | No |
| July 21, 2026 | “approximately the 19–20 mill range” | No |
| July 21, 2026 | “would pay 19-20 mils” | No |
| July 22, 2026 | “20 mils for school on non-homestead property” | No |
| July 22, 2026 | “School takes 20 or 19” | No |
| July 22, 2026 | “other ways we can frame it to get to 18-19 mils” | No |
| Aug 5, 2026 | “from 15.75 mils to 18.8” | Yes, correct |
| Aug 5, 2026 | “that millage rate goes from 16 to 18.5” | Yes, close |
Every figure he has given that isn't read straight off the file disagrees with the file.
Source: his model; his public posts, his own correspondence, and meeting recordings.
2 · "Ending any possibility" vs. the 17% his own model keeps taxable
“No, this option comes with a full homestead exemption ending any possibility on taxing the home.”Facebook comment reply, August 10, 2026
his own model
20% of homestead value is held back by the five-year rule. Net of the senior add-back, 17% of all homestead value stays taxable every year: the newest homeowners pay the full bill until they clear five years, and new buyers keep taking their place.
"Any possibility" and "a group of homeowners paying their full bill every year" cannot both be true.
3 · "Strong legal guardrails" vs. the guardrail is the tax
“…with strong legal guardrails to protect taxpayers.”Public Facebook post, July 21, 2026
his own model
The five-year rule isn't a protection layered on top of the plan. It's the formula that keeps the plan under the legal 20-mill cap. Remove it and the rate needs 21.52 mills in 2028, over the limit.
He's calling the mechanism that taxes recent movers a "guardrail to protect taxpayers." It doesn't protect the people it applies to. It's what makes them pay.
4 · “Guarantees School Tax Digest” vs. a digest his own model shrinks
“Guarantees School Funding. Guarantees School Tax Digest. Guarantees General Fund Reserve Protection. Ends Property Taxes on the Home.”An email he sent, Aug. 3, 2026
his own model
Under his recommended option, the school's taxable digest gets smaller every year from 2027 to 2031, from $3.29 billion to $3.13 billion, while the total value of property in the county grows 16.5%. By 2031 his plan takes about $755 million of homestead value off the school tax rolls, beyond the exemptions homeowners already get.
He can raise the rate to keep the money coming in. That's the funding promise. But a shrinking digest is what he modeled, and it's the opposite of what he guaranteed.
5 · "Everybody signed up" vs. the 46% cap his model runs on
“…my numbers are even if all 84% say I want the homestead exemption. So that's what that has, if everybody went and signed up for it.”Public recording, Aug. 5, 2026, describing the printout of his model he'd shared with the hosts
his own model
Homestead uptake is capped at 46% of the gross digest: roughly 1,278 new filings, not "everybody."
If he doesn't know his own uptake assumption, "trust my model" doesn't hold up.
1 · The 20-mill cap: "a material risk" in private, "the benefit" in public
“I agree that operating at 20 mills would remove the district's ability to respond to future costs through an additional millage-rate increase. That is a material risk and should be addressed directly rather than minimized…”A private email he sent, July 13, 2026
“It will also have the benefit of them getting closer to their 20 mil cap which means they can't raise taxes as much as the current baseline.”Public Facebook comment reply, August 17, 2026, five weeks later
The same fact, told two ways depending on who's listening.
2 · "Qualifying homeowners" vs. "ending any possibility"
“Qualifying homeowners could see their county and city M&O property taxes reduced to $0…”His own Facebook post and graphic, August 5, 2026
“No this option comes with a full homestead exemption ending any possibility on taxing the home.”Facebook comment reply, August 10, 2026, five days later
When he controls the language precisely, there's a qualifier. When he's reassuring one voter directly, it vanishes.
3 · "Impacts were done" vs. three written disclaimers that no study exists
“yes, impacts were done…”Facebook comment reply, July 22, 2026
“The model is not an independent or certified fiscal-impact study.”A private email he sent, July 13, 2026, opening paragraph
Careful about the model's limits with people who can check his work. Confident with a voter asking the simple version.
4 · "Guarantees" vs. "open to negotiation," same email
“The Plans provide: Guarantees School Funding. Guarantees School Tax Digest. Guarantees General Fund Reserve Protection.”An email he sent, Aug. 3, 2026
“The details, implementation schedule, and proposed guardrails remain open to negotiation and discussion with the Board.”Same email
A "guarantee" that's simultaneously "open to negotiation" isn't a guarantee.
Where this could be wrong. Rep. Horner has not commissioned an independent fiscal impact study, and neither has anyone else. These are his numbers, corrected with the county and school system's own figures, and every correction is listed with its source so anyone can check it. If a number here is wrong, tell us and it gets fixed.