By Karen Gleason
The 830 Times
Val Verde County Commissioners Court unanimously approved the county’s fiscal year 2026-27 budget and property tax rate during its regular meeting Wednesday, Sept. 9.
The court voted after public hearings on the budget and tax rate and a budget workshop. The budget, workshop and tax rate appeared as separate items on the court’s agenda.
County Judge Lewis G. Owens Jr. first opened a public hearing on the tax rate. No one commented.
Owens then opened the budget workshop. He noted the county had received $20,000 from Kinney County that was not included in the proposed budget. Owens said the district judge had asked in past years for the money to supplement salaries for personnel in his office and had made the same request this year. The court unanimously voted to add the $20,000 to the county’s general fund and distribute it to the district judge’s staff salaries.
Commissioner Precinct 3 Fernando Garcia asked the court to pass an order requiring individuals and organizations seeking county hotel occupancy tax funds to submit an application and appear before the court. He also asked that they not receive funding in advance.
The court then discussed a $6,000 request from the Animal Advocacy & Rescue Coalition to pay veterinarians for the group’s reduced-cost spay and neuter clinics. The court voted to fund the request. (See separate story.)
After that vote, Owens asked whether anyone else wished to address the court about the budget.
County Clerk Teresa Esther Chapoy distributed a handout to court members before speaking.
“Commissioners and Judge Owens, I just want to thank you all for all the considerations that you all have given us, for everything that we’re trying to do in the county clerk’s office,” Chapoy said.
Chapoy described her clerks’ responsibilities and the number of other county offices with which they work. She said her office compares to the county tax assessor-collector’s office and asked that her employees be paid similar salaries.
Owens responded that one reason employees in the tax assessor-collector’s office earn more is that they have worked for the county longer. He also noted the court had previously passed an order allowing elected officials to pay new hires anywhere from a position’s base salary up to the amount paid to the previous employee.
“What what we used to do at the county was everybody would always go back to the base pay (for a new hire). This court passed where you can go between base pay and whatever the position was making at the time.
“Her (tax assessor collector’s) positions today are making more money because they’ve been there longer, okay? It’s real hard to compare the dollars that they’re making, . . . because her people have been here longer. That’s how come they’re making more money, and it’s that simple,” Owens said.
Owens told Chapoy he appreciated her speaking on behalf of her employees and would do the same in her position. He said, however, that he would not vote for her requests and asked her to return during next year’s budget process.
“It’s up to the court. If you all want to do it, and move ’em up, I need a motion. If you all do not want to move them up, I don’t even need a motion to deny,” Owens said.
Chapoy said she appreciated the promotions given to employees who would be working in voter registration. She also asked the court to consider promoting one of her Clerk IIIs to assistant chief deputy or Clerk IV.
“Again, it’s a matter of a motion, if that’s what you want. It’s a matter of a motion. I won’t make the motion, and I won’t vote for it,” Owens responded.
Owens said that in nearly 16 years on commissioners court, he had seen each court try to do “a little bit more” for county employees than the one before it.
“When we came in with Judge Allen, the entry level, our Clerk Is, were making $16,000 and change. That first year, she went to $19,000, a $3,000 bump. They adjusted everybody’s salaries. Our (sheriff’s office) deputies were making $24,000 and change when Judge Allen came in, and I think they went to $29,000 or $32,000. Everybody was adjusted.
“Judge Valdez tried to do the same thing when he came in. We did the same thing when I came in as judge. . . This court and the other courts and every court that I’ve sat on have always tried to take care of our employees,” Owens said.
He added that the county is absorbing increases in employee health insurance costs, an expense of about $500,000.
“The only thing I’d like to say in addition is that we really appreciate your help, and I really appreciate that you and I have discussed this in the past, but I think sometimes people don’t really know what we do in the county clerk’s office,” Chapoy said.
“I know I didn’t know it when I took the job. It is a lot of work and now adding voter registration, which is something we really wanted and why I ran again, so that I could work in voter registration and help make the election process better, but if you all would at least consider giving a promotion to Ruby Nieto to at least a Clerk IV, if you would consider that, I would appreciate it,” Chapoy said.
Owens again invited a motion. Garcia compared the proposed salaries for positions in the two offices.
“Your original request was for your chief deputy salary. But the base pay for the county clerk, chief deputy, is $38,495, and the base pay at the tax assessor (collector) is $38,499, so it’s the same. So, the proposed salary for your chief deputy is $41,600, and at the tax assessor, it’s $42,018, so that’s a $400 difference.
“And the second chief deputy, is only a $700 difference, so considering that they’ve been here longer, that’s not big gap for the amount of time, so I don’t see how we can do that. If her employees, they’ve been here longer, and they’ve received raises and stuff, it kind of makes it hard for someone who has been here less time to be making the same amount. That’s my justification for what I would think,” Garcia said.
“Anybody else? Again, it’s a matter of a motion to do it. We don’t even need a motion not to do it, but at this time, I’ll entertain a motion to do it or not to do it. But if there’s no motion, then there’s no action taken,” Owens said.
No commissioner made a motion.
“Again, we really do appreciate what you do. We really do,” Owens told Chapoy as she returned to her seat.
County Tax Assessor-Collector Elodia “Loly” Garcia then addressed the court. She said she realized she could not obtain raises for her employees but asked the court to reclassify several positions.
After further discussion, Owens said changing classifications could lead to a need for additional funding next year.
“I appreciate you all coming, but again, it’s going to muddy the water, and we had this discussion with the JPs (justices of the peace). We start changing classifications or job titles, then I have to give you the money. It might not be today, but it’s going to be next year,” Owens said.
“Again, it’s a matter of a motion. If you all want to do it, I’ll entertain a motion. If not, don’t need a motion. It stays the same. This is where we do one or the other,” he said.
Owens asked for a motion, but none was made.
The court then discussed carrying forward money remaining in several accounts at the end of the fiscal year.
“We have funds, paving account funds of $81,000, $111,000. Those monies will be rolled over in that line item. Whatever is not used, at the end of our fiscal year, will be rolled over, alright?” Owens said.
“What about capital outlay?” Commissioner Precinct 4 Gustavo “Gus” Flores asked.
“Your capital outlay money, if you have money in your capital outlay, any money in your tax notes, that will roll over. The paving, the capital outlay, the tax note, that covers it,” Owens replied.
The court unanimously approved the rollover.
Later in the meeting, Owens moved to adopt the budget.
“I move to adopt the Val Verde County Fiscal Year 2026-2027 budget as presented, now, after all the changes and amended,” Owens said.
Commissioner Precinct 2 Juan Carlos Vazquez seconded the motion. In a recorded vote, Owens and all four commissioners voted in favor.
The court then considered the components of the county’s property tax rate.
Owens moved to approve the debt service component at $0.065 per $100 of taxable value. Flores seconded the motion, and the court approved it unanimously in a recorded vote.
Owens next moved to approve the maintenance and operations component at $0.4327 per $100 of taxable value. That consists of $0.4149 for the general fund and $0.0178 for farm-to-market and flood control. Flores seconded the motion, and the court again voted unanimously in favor.
Finally, Owens moved to adopt the total rate of $0.4977 per $100 of taxable value. The required motion described it as an effective 4.3% increase.
“I don’t like this one because I’m not increasing the tax rate,” Owens said, departing from the prepared language.
“It’s comparing to the no new revenue (rate),” County Auditor Matthew Weingardt replied.
“So, for the record, I don’t like this. Just so we understand because we’re not increasing the tax rate. The tax rate is remaining the same at .4977 (per $100 of taxable value). The bottom line is, your values went up. You’re going to pay more taxes because your values went up. The tax rate remained the same, .4977,” Owens said.
Owens then read the required motion again.
“I really have heartburn with this. I know I have to (read) it, but it just does not make sense,” he said.
Flores seconded the motion, and every member of the court voted to approve the tax rate.
The writer can be reached at delriomagnoliafan@gmail.com.
