BRENHAM CITY COUNCIL PROPOSES KEEPING SAME TAX RATE

  

The Brenham City Council today (Thursday) proposed to hold the city’s property tax rate at the same level as this past year.

Kevin Schmidt (right) is recognized by the Brenham
City Council for 15 years of service with the city's
Information Technology Department.

The total proposed rate of $0.4584 per $100 valuation is identical to the tax rate used in the current fiscal year, though due to higher property valuations, the average homeowner can anticipate paying more in taxes.  The tax on the average homestead is projected to increase by 13.51 percent, from $1,098 to $1,247.

The rate is less than the voter-approval rate of $0.4666 per $100, but it is more than the no-new-revenue rate of $0.4555 per $100, so public hearings will be held at the council’s meetings on September 5th and 19th prior to formal votes on adopting the rate.

Chief Financial Officer Julie Flagg said the city would bring in $685,522 in extra tax levy with this rate, over half of which would come from new properties on the tax roll this year.

The new rate is different from the existing one in terms of how it is calculated, as the city plans to slightly increase the maintenance and operations (M&O) side from $0.3102 to $0.3164.  Meanwhile, the interest and sinking (I&S) portion would fall from $0.1482 to $0.1420.

A memo included in the agenda packet for Thursday's Brenham City Council meeting shows the expected change in taxes from the current fiscal year to next year, based on increased homestead values. (courtesy City of Brenham)

In June 2019, the city established an ordinance freezing property taxes for homeowners who are over 65 years old or disabled.  The city has 1,735 homestead accounts with a tax freeze, totaling $413,419,705 in appraised value and representing a third of the city’s homestead-eligible properties.

In other business, the council:

  • Held work session discussion on the possible annexation of Dixie Road and Old Masonic Road, as well as their right-of-way, into city limits.  The city is seeking to annex Dixie Road from Highway 36 North to the existing city limit line, due to the ongoing development of the Vintage Farms subdivision.  The area to the west of Old Masonic Road was annexed in 1984 and is the Scenic Estates subdivision; this annexation would move the city limit line from the back of residential properties.  City Secretary Jeana Bellinger said public hearings will be held on August 15th and 22nd, followed by readings of an annexation ordinance on September 19th and October 3rd.
  • Approved agreements with United Healthcare, Surency and Alliance Work Partners for employee benefits for the plan year lasting from October 1, 2024 to September 30, 2025.  The renewal comes with a 5 percent increase in group medical coverage, which will be applied to the city’s premiums and employees’ premiums starting October 1st.
  • Performed the first reading of an ordinance amending the city’s code for buildings and structures, adopting the 2021 editions of the International Building Code Suite and 2020 National Electric Code.  The city is currently using 2018 International Building Code and 2017 National Electric Code.
  • Granted a specific use permit to Walt Edmunds to allow an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) in an R-1, single family residential zoning district on 0.1948 acres in the 300 block of West Third Street.  The lot has a pre-existing 612 square-foot accessory structure that was grandfathered from the 1970s to 2020, when the applicant purchased the property.  However, the ADU was vacant and in disrepair, so it lost its legally nonconforming status.  The applicant submitted building plans to restore the ADU, which would be provided to family and guests.  The approval, which was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission, is on the condition that the property be replatted.
  • Took no action on amending the rate tariff schedule for the city’s sanitary sewer system, adjusting surcharge rates for the industrial wastewater service rate schedule.
  • Held executive session discussion with the city attorney on five topics.  They included Commonwealth Development, Inc. v. City of Brenham, Texas, Fair Housing Case No. 06-22-3294-8, involving the proposed tax-credit housing development on Pecan Street that was rejected by the city council in February 2021; the Brenham Municipal Airport; administrative procedures related to various personnel issues; the impact of Lindke v. Freed, 601 U.S. 187 (2024) on First Amendment law, and elected officials’ responsibility related to social media use; and ETC Marketing, LTD v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas, and the City of Brenham, Texas, Cause No. D-1-GN-24-004577, 53rd Judicial District Court, Travis County, Texas.  No action was taken on any of the items. 

Click here to view the agenda packet for Thursday's meeting.

What’s your Reaction?
+1
0
+1
0
+1
0

5 Comments

  1. I own several houses and commercial property within the City of Brenham however I live about 2 miles outside the city limits of Brenham consequently I am unable to vote in the city elections. I call it taxation with absolutely no representation!!! As for the politicians, it seems they have a belief that the more tax money they spend and the faster they spend it the more successful they will appear.

  2. Once again the local government here decides to raise taxes when our state government gave tax breaks. We all see who the problem is. Now it’s time for the people of this town to stop voting for their friends and family and start voting for people who will do right by everyone in the town. Stop taxing people out of their homes. There are people who are struggling and to be strapped with another increase in taxes is just another example of greed in government. Only it’s worse here because the elected are our own people.

  3. It’s my belief that politicians just want your vote and after they are in power they get deals that involve cash and favors or both and we all know money does not have morals or conscience. You would think at the salaries they have someone could balance a checkbook and lower taxes. If I don’t have funds for something I just don’t get that item or service or I just DIY. Why do we need all of these fluff jobs? We need common sense leaders to stop pushing us over the cliff of higher taxes cause they can’t balance the books without out raising taxes.

  4. 13.5% more in just city property taxes. But this is under the smokescreen of just saying the tax rate remains the same. City council and mayor are sinfully deceptive. Washington county politicians are just as tainted as Washington DC politicians. Do our elected officials act purposely or do our elected officials act out of ignorance? Will someone please explain?

Back to top button