[{"_1":2,"_104":-5,"_105":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,84,94],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6138266,"mediaKeyId","5592018-46f4a7d20f2d7d7026a903fe9d6b30d6","parentId",5592018,"title","Court reviews tax‑rate options, reserve projection and departmental adjustments in FY2026 budget workshop","audioSeconds",374,"startMs",4830000,"endMs",5204000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5592018-46f4a7d20f2d7d7026a903fe9d6b30d6&start=4830&end=5204","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6138266/Coryell-County/Texas/Court-reviews-taxrate-options-reserve-projection-and-departmental-adjustments-in-FY2026-budget-workshop","mediaUrl","author","Coryell County TX","date","2025-07-25T00:00:00Z","article","Coryell County financial staff and the county tax assessor’s office presented tax‑rate worksheets and a general fund projection during the FY2026 budget workshop, showing the voter‑approval (rollback) and no‑new‑revenue calculations and preliminary reserve estimates.

County financial staff (Mister Wood) said the debt service portion of the tax rate is fixed for FY2026 at the amount required to meet principal and interest and that the voter‑approval rate (the maximum the court may adopt without voter approval) was computed and applied to current property valuations to produce a tax levy estimate. Using the voter‑approval rate in preliminary calculations produced an estimated general fund reserve of about 11.8 percent under the current departmental requests; staff noted that this projection did not yet incorporate the sheriff’s revised budget reductions discussed at the workshop.

Wood explained distribution of the tax rate across funds using the last year’s allocations as a model (roughly 72.4% to general fund, 22.5% to road and bridge, 2% to capital improvement, 3.1% to volunteer fire departments) and noted that assessments such as the appraisal district charge are tied to tax values. He also presented the “no new revenue” (effective) rate, which would generate roughly the same levy as last year and thus drive a different reserve outcome than the voter‑approval calculation.

Commissioners discussed several adjustments presented during the workshop: the sheriff’s office trimmed some requests, Road & Bridge staff proposed deferring a wheel loader to lower near‑term tax impacts, and county staff flagged other contingency items (e.g., solid waste event support to Citcog, indigent funerals reimbursement levels) for follow‑up. The court discussed whether to include an emergency management position in the FY2026 budget; some commissioners signaled reluctance to add that position, and the judge asked commissioners to indicate preferences so staff can model both scenarios.

Why it matters: The tax‑rate choice — voter‑approval vs. no‑new‑revenue — and departmental prioritization will determine the county’s fund balance and reserves as FY2026 is adopted. County staff and commissioners agreed to review sheriff reductions, capital deferrals and a limited set of new positions before the next meeting.

No formal adoption of a tax rate or final budget occurred at the workshop; staff said they will return with revised numbers incorporating the decisions and concessions discussed.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Coryell County Commissioners Court Meeting (Audio) 07/25/2025","oneSentenceSummary","County financial staff presented tax‑rate calculations (voter‑approval and no‑new‑revenue rates) and a preliminary general fund reserve projection of about 11.8 percent if the voter‑approval rate were applied to current requests.","taxTitle","Coryell County, Texas","taxId",52761,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6138271,"Road and Bridge seeks vehicle replacements, commissioners discuss scaling loader purchase to reduce tax impact",554,6857000,7411000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5592018-46f4a7d20f2d7d7026a903fe9d6b30d6&start=6857&end=7411","/articles/6138271/Coryell-County/Texas/Road-and-Bridge-seeks-vehicle-replacements-commissioners-discuss-scaling-loader-purchase-to-reduce-tax-impact","Road and Bridge staff presented vehicle and equipment requests during the budget workshop and commissioners discussed ways to reduce the immediate tax impact by delaying or scaling purchases.

Superintendent Justin Latham (Road and Bridge) presented a vehicle/equipment list that, as submitted, would raise department spending by roughly $500,000 year‑over‑year. Commissioners discussed cutting the $260,000 wheel loader from the capital package or reducing its scope to lower the near‑term impact on the tax rate. Several commissioners advocated a replacement schedule that cycles a small number of vehicles each year rather than purchasing multiple heavy assets in a single year.

Commissioners and road staff reviewed options including: (1) remove or defer the $260,000 wheel loader from the FY2026 capital list; (2) purchase fewer pickups this year and consider compensating a superintendent using a personal vehicle case‑by‑case while the county evaluates a pooled‑vehicle policy; or (3) lease equipment rather than purchasing to spread the cost across multiple budgets. One practical option discussed was to buy three pickups and pay a mileage/stipend to a superintendent who uses a personal vehicle for county duty, or buy four pickups and not pay a stipend. The court did not adopt a final purchase decision during the workshop.

Staff and commissioners discussed fuel and materials price volatility and the effect on road work. Road and Bridge asked for some contingency in materials to respond to washouts and flood repairs; commissioners suggested lowering the capital purchase total (for example, trimming the loader request) and shifting more toward vehicle replacement to address high‑mileage aging pickups. Commissioners also discussed establishing a scheduled replacement plan so that large procurement needs do not all fall in one year.

Why it matters: Road and Bridge purchases affect service continuity on county roads and the county tax rate. Commissioners said they favored spreading equipment purchases over multiple years and leaving contingency for urgent washout repairs.

No final appropriation or formal vote was taken; staff said they would return with revised equipment prioritization.","Road and Bridge requested multiple vehicle and equipment purchases that would add roughly a half‑million dollars to the county budget. Commissioners discussed removing a $260,000 wheel loader from the FY2026 list and phasing vehicle replacements to spread cost across years.",{"_33":85,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":86,"_41":87,"_43":88,"_45":89,"_47":90,"_49":50,"_51":91,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":92,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":93,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6138276,"Sheriff's SWAT team details equipment gaps, requests $50,000 county contribution and $200,000 total to reach NTO capability",197,1713000,1910000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5592018-46f4a7d20f2d7d7026a903fe9d6b30d6&start=1713&end=1910","/articles/6138276/Coryell-County/Texas/Sheriffs-SWAT-team-details-equipment-gaps-requests-50000-county-contribution-and-200000-total-to-reach-NTO-capability","Sheriff’s Office SWAT leaders presented a detailed list of equipment shortfalls and a budget request to county commissioners during the FY2026 budget workshop, describing expired ballistic protection, incompatible communications gear and shortages in less‑lethal munitions and training ammunition. Lieutenant Schafer (Sheriff’s Office) and other SWAT staff asked the court to consider a $50,000 county contribution this year to start replacing critical items; their full equipment list totaled about $200,001.25 as presented.

Lieutenant Schafer told the court that some ballistic helmets and plates in use exceed a five‑year warranty window and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation recently advised the department that one of the contractors used for helmets had supplied equipment that was manufactured outside the advertised specifications. “Ballistic items are only warrantied for 5 years,” Lieutenant Schafer said, and older plates or helmets may not provide advertised protection.

SWAT leaders described practical problems with current masks and communications: filters for the masks cannot be kept attached while the mask is in the pouch, slowing donning in a tactical entry; legacy gas masks lack voice amplifiers; and older headset kits are worn, incompatible with newer county radios and difficult to use with gas masks and helmets. They recommended replacing tactical radios/headsets with in‑ear systems that integrate noise cancellation and remote push‑to‑talk capability to protect hearing and preserve communications when firearms are discharged.

The SWAT presentation listed many equipment needs and shortfalls, including (items and counts as reported): rifle‑rated body armor and helmets past warranty; tactical gas masks (m‑50 style); noise‑cancelling tactical headsets and in‑ear comms; weapon‑mounted lights and standardized holsters; individual first‑aid kits (6 of 15 team members currently equipped); outfitting for rifles and five additional rifles; additional less‑lethal launchers and rounds (40mm), reloads and diversionary devices (flashbangs) and replenishment of expiring CS grenades. Staff said they currently had three 40mm long‑range less lethal launchers, one less‑lethal full‑gauge shotgun, four legacy X26 Tasers (with scarce replacement batteries/cartridges) and two non‑expired CS grenades (plus older expired munitions).

On training and sustainment, the team asked for a running stock of diversionary device reloads (they requested a target of ~50 reloads because procurement lead times can approach six months) and requested training ammunition to allow each SWAT operator to shoot roughly 100 rounds per month to maintain proficiency. The presentation included a best‑practice checklist mapped to a national tactical standard and color‑coded items the department has (green), partially has (yellow) or lacks (red).

Captain Cruz and other sheriff’s staff said the team is part‑time and routinely draws officers from patrol and other duties, so equipment redundancy is necessary to ensure gear is on scene even when individual operators are off‑duty. The SWAT leaders said they would pursue grants to reduce county costs and that the sheriff’s office has grant writers working to close the gap if the court can provide an initial investment.

Why it matters: SWAT teams respond to high‑risk situations (hostage/barricade/rescue and active‑shooter incidents). SWAT presenters framed the request as a matter of officer and public safety and asked the court to prioritize replacement of expired ballistic protections and communications, replenish less‑lethal munitions and fund training ammunition.

No formal appropriation or vote was taken during the workshop; presenters said they would work with the sheriff’s office and grant staff on possible external funding sources and return with refined requests.","Sheriff's Office SWAT leaders told the commissioners the team lacks current ballistic plates, modern gas masks, communications headsets, less‑lethal munitions and other equipment. They presented a 2026 equipment list totaling roughly $200,001.25 and asked commissioners for an initial $50,000 to begin upgrades while seeking grant funding.",{"_33":95,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":96,"_41":97,"_43":98,"_45":99,"_47":100,"_49":50,"_51":101,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":102,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":103,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6138281,"Hill Country Transit District seeks $50,000 commitment to continue Gatesville microtransit service",685,233000,918000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5592018-46f4a7d20f2d7d7026a903fe9d6b30d6&start=233&end=918","/articles/6138281/Coryell-County/Texas/Hill-Country-Transit-District-seeks-50000-commitment-to-continue-Gatesville-microtransit-service","Hill Country Transit District representatives outlined a shift from fixed-route service to a microtransit demand‑response model and asked the Coryell County Commissioners Court for a continued $50,000 commitment to support microtransit in Gatesville and a reduced, Monday/Wednesday/Friday demand‑response schedule for the county. Judge and commissioners asked for clarifying usage and cost details during the budget development workshop.

The district’s presenter, Tony (director of public engagement, Hill Country Transit District), said microtransit is “basically a demand response transit system” and compared the service to ride‑share apps while stressing it is a shared‑ride public system. He described three levels of service in Coryell County: microtransit inside Gatesville, demand‑response in outlying county areas (24‑hour advance bookings), and a commuter service that links into urbanized systems such as Temple and Belton. Tony said the district has been operating microtransit in Gatesville since March and provided a quarterly performance snapshot to the court.

The district reported 1,436 trip requests for Gatesville’s microtransit area and discussed a high number of cancellations during the transition to the new system. Tony said the program’s cancellation rate was about 27.92 percent, and that the average on‑vehicle time for city microtransit trips is approximately 9 minutes, with average trip distances of about 2.4 miles; county trips averaged about 9.35 miles. He also said riders still make most bookings by phone (about 77 percent) rather than the app (about 22.8 percent).

Tony asked the court to keep its current $50,000 annual commitment to sustain microtransit inside Gatesville and to support demand‑response service in the county on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays only, a change the district said would concentrate trips when demand is highest and reduce costs. He told commissioners the district’s statewide and federal apportionments declined from 2025 to 2026 and that the transit district cut roughly $2.5 million in expenses system‑wide; he said the reduction in apportionments also reflects the district’s reshaped service area (fewer counties in the apportionment pool).

Commissioners asked practical questions about demographics and fares. Tony said the district does not capture full demographic data through the app — only name and phone number are required — but staff can report trips booked under senior discounts. Fare structure as presented: $2 for microtransit inside Gatesville, $4 for county demand‑response; eligible seniors (60+), disabled riders and veterans receive a 50 percent discount (city trips $1, outside trips $2).

On outreach, Tony said the district has added a media manager, conducted travel trainings at the senior center, attended community events and plans more online and in‑person travel training to boost app use and reduce telephone demand. He also said the district is pursuing private/public partnerships with non‑profits and hospitals and plans a roundtable of potential partners.

Why it matters: The district framed the commitment as sustaining a more efficient, demand‑driven local service while reducing longer, low‑efficiency commuter routes into urban systems. Commissioners asked for more demographic and utilization data and said they would consider the district’s funding request during broader budget deliberations.

The presentation concluded without a formal vote; district staff said they will provide additional data and continue public hearings on commuter changes.","Representatives from the Hill Country Transit District told Coryell County commissioners the agency has shifted to a microtransit model in Gatesville and asked the court to renew a $50,000 funding commitment to continue a city microtransit program and a scaled county demand‑response schedule.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Court reviews tax‑rate options, reserve projection and departmental adjustments in FY2026 budget workshop

Road and Bridge seeks vehicle replacements, commissioners discuss scaling loader purchase to reduce tax impact

Sheriff's SWAT team details equipment gaps, requests $50,000 county contribution and $200,000 total to reach NTO capability

Hill Country Transit District seeks $50,000 commitment to continue Gatesville microtransit service