Fallout from Monday’s Lubbock County Commissioners meeting includes a disagreement on how much money is at stake for homeowners. Commissioners adopted the no-new-revenue rate for the 2025/26 budget.
County Judge Curtis Parrish said in the meeting that keeping the rate the same (not lowering it to the no-new-revenue rate) would cost the average homeowner $2.63 per year. LubbockLights.com quoted the judge and then referenced the county’s “Notice of Meeting on the Tax Rate” which repeated $2.63.
Commissioner Cary Shaw said the number would be $13.63 per year.
Who’s right? They both are.
Parrish was relying on documentation provided by the county auditor, mandated by the state’s Truth in Taxation laws and published online by Lubbock County. Click here to see it.
And Shaw’s math looks like this if the tax rate stayed at $0.334702 per $100 for both years:
- The 2024/25 taxable value of $219,455 would be $734.52 in taxes.
- The 2025/26 taxable value of $223,528 would be $748.15 in taxes.
The tax bill would increase $13.63 under these conditions.
The numbers quoted by Parrish and Shaw measure different things. The number Parrish quoted must be presented to the public. The one Shaw used is a little harder to find for the average homeowner.
Parrish, the day after the meeting, told LubbockLights.com, “If he doesn’t trust those numbers from LCAD [the Lubbock Central Appraisal District], why is he standing firm on their NNR [no-new-revenue] numbers? You can’t pick and choose just because it doesn’t fit your narrative.”
“I advocated to keep the tax rate the same – neither raise the rate or lower it – and the amendment was rejected. The real story may be what monies we left on the table by not adopting the same tax rate, only to save the average homeowner $2.63 a year,” Parrish said.
If the county’s table value is roughly $35 billion, then the lower rate means reducing revenue by more than $2 million.
Math is hard
State officials have updated how the no-new-revenue rate is calculated this year which only added more confusion and difficulty for both the city and the county.
During Monday’s meeting, Kathy Williams, county auditor, said, “The no-new-revenue rate actually gave us a $2 million decrease from last year’s budget.”
The entire budget for 2024/25 was $345.4 million with the general fund accounting for $165 million.
Williams explained, “That brings us $5.8 million in a deficit that needs to be reduced in our expenses if reoccurring revenue is not provided.”
County departments were asked to cut their proposed 2025/26 budgets by 10 percent last week.
Shaw thinks that will kill previous plans for a 3 percent county employee pay raise.
“OK, they are losing cost of living. Period,” Shaw said.
When asked about layoffs, Shaw said, “I just don’t see it ever happening.”
There are a few departments overseen by the commissioners instead of elected officials. The employees overseen by commissioners could be subject to a hiring freeze or layoffs by the commissioners, according to a legal briefing the commissioners received on Monday.
But the employees of elected officials are treated differently, according to the briefing.
Respect for both employees and homeowners
Commissioners want to show appreciation for county employees, Shaw said.
“We do. They work hard,” he said.
There may be gestures of appreciation for them this year, he said, like a few extra days off at Christmas time. But it won’t be a pay raise because money is tight.
“Out in the public sector, you don’t get a cost of living raise every year. I have never gotten a cost of living raise except in the military,” Shaw said.
Shaw repeated his claim that once the county gets back to the no-new-revenue rate things will get better. But the initial adjustment will be hard, he said.
Shaw thinks a consumption tax or sales tax would be better – an idea we’ll explore in future coverage.
