County stands to lose $463,000 in new revenue from the mistake

Presidio County

State law is forcing Presidio County to revoke its newly adopted budget and tax rate, with a resulting loss of $463,000 in property tax revenue after officials made an error in counting days.

In a Tuesday meeting, the Commissioners Court adopted a “de minimis” tax rate, a tool in the tax code that allows counties — especially small, rural ones — to avoid a 3.5% state cap on new revenue and adopt a rate above the “no new revenue” rate. The rate designated by the court would have meant a 7.4% property tax increase.

However, to adopt a de minimis rate, counties must do so at least 71 days before a general election, which is set for November 3 this year. The court’s adoption came only 70 days before the election, and under state law, it must scrap the de minimis and go to the no new revenue rate. Someone at the county — it’s unsure who at this point — didn’t count days correctly. That left officials scrambling to figure out the next steps.

Marfa resident Robert Halpern, former publisher of Big Bend Sentinel, noticed the mixup and talked to officials about what the county is required to do. The county auditor, county attorney and county judge all could not be immediately reached for comment.

Most likely, commissioners will gather at their next scheduled meeting on September 9, reset the rate and figure out if any budget adjustments are needed, said County Commissioner Deirdre Hisler. She said it may be possible to keep the budget as it is because the county has a request for proposals to sell a 5-acre plot out by Vizcaino Park, which could generate about $200,000, and an RFP for another property will go out soon.

“We’ll just have to deal with it and work around it,” said County Commissioner Obed Escontrias. “It’s a human error.” With regard to the budget that passed Tuesday, a few key items were the main topics of discussion. 

  • The court agreed to fund a $40,000/year salary for an elections administrator.
  • County commissioners will get a $5,000 bump in salary from $24,253 to $29,253. All other elected officials will receive a $4,000/year increase in salary, with the exception of the constables, county attorney, sheriff and county judge, which receive state stipends from Senate Bill 22 in addition to county-funded salaries. You can view all salaries and stipends here, but note that the $30,000 stipend for the Precinct 3 county commissioner to act as supervisor for the Road and Bridge Department was deleted and did not pass.
  • Two new Road and Bridge Department workers were added.
  • After lengthy discussions trying to ensure parity between north and county emergency medical services, the county upped its contribution to Marfa EMS from $60,000 to $100,00 and Presidio EMS from $120,000 to $162,000.
  • The court put $1 million as a placeholder for courthouse repairs, although County Attorney Blair Park and Hisler will be seeking grant money from the Texas Historical Commission for the estimated $3 million needed.

Sheriff’s salary grievance denied

Sheriff Danny Dominguez had filed a grievance with the county’s salary committee asking that he also get the $4,000 raise, even though he was set to get a $10,000 stipend in SB 22 money. The sheriff proposed not using $4,000 from the stipend and to instead get county funds. (SB 22 grants are intended to help rural counties attract and retain law enforcement and legal staff.)

Last year, Dominguez made $54,746 through county funds and $25,253 from the state for a total of $79,999. He said it wasn’t fair that he was not on the same level as other county elected officials. It would be better for the sheriff position in the future to be on par with other elected officials in county funds, he said.

Dominguez, who was paid slightly more than officials like the tax assessor-collector and treasurer, would now be paid slightly less when just looking at county funds. “Grant-funded supplements such as SB 22 should not have the unintended effect of leaving the underlying county-funded salary for the office below that of comparable elected officials,” he wrote in a letter asking for the grievance.

The salary committee deciding on the grievance, which met Saturday, is made up of county grand jury members, who voted 5-2 to approve the sheriff’s request. However, under the committee’s rules, a higher number of votes was needed for the Commissioners Court to even consider the proposal again. (Not all grand jury members could make the meeting.) The only way commissioners could change the salary schedule and grant the sheriff’s request  — as County Judge Joe Portillo said he’d be willing to do —  would be to repost the schedule in the newspaper, and the deadline for doing so had already passed. County Attorney Park said next year the county will pass and post the schedule much earlier so that if any changes are needed from a grievance, the court will have time to consider them.