[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-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",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6498963,"mediaKeyId","5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5","parentId",5573868,"title","Guadalupe County sets proposed 2025 tax rate at 0.3304 after split vote; final rate to be adopted Sept. 2","audioSeconds",1037,"startMs",5891000,"endMs",6928000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5&start=5891&end=6928","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5/thumbnail_5891000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6498963/Guadalupe-County/Texas/Guadalupe-County-sets-proposed-2025-tax-rate-at-03304-after-split-vote-final-rate-to-be-adopted-Sept-2","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6498963-2c2c42cd1e2605091d984873d2212830/orig.mp4?Expires=1771142004&Signature=TOB4vSErd~qEmGtcNmlUKMiQv~WibJF26Eyhq0NogEhj82n3ntfHnO5pe61H3wI9RlXHIIympHx7IOlzR1Y6-7wrSAUzCoQaHRD~qRSkPd3ZbE0WESdZSlevd--k6gHkJE1bgPBK8-5fCLTFzzGJxl6RE0LiGYFo4COxdfG6CuubIndHuQ1RmGjEmmbs2aHWYmWMcCq36rBb8UCaBNfj0ww9n1NJ0DHBR4U5nXiLsMy~IHdSX3rcXoPpEALmInGC3i1LAFXRTq9ucOcMF3XMTASsMcbMyGLRhaHgL1ljlzBsEekyWdOv4f06GX5TkpWPDXAZGCMj4b3N2nWX4PEq3g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Guadalupe County Texas","date","2025-08-12T10:00:00Z","article","The Guadalupe County Commissioners Court voted Aug. 12 to set a proposed 2025 tax rate of 0.3304 per $100 of assessed value (comprised of a maintenance & operations rate of 0.2664, interest & sinking of 0.0120, and a road & bridge levy of 0.0520). The motion passed 3-2; the proposed rate is a not‑to‑exceed figure ahead of the statutory public‑notice and budget‑adoption process.

Why it matters: Setting a proposed rate is a procedural step that enables the county to publish required notices and continue budget adoption. Final adoption — and any changes to the rate — must happen at a public meeting, currently scheduled for Sept. 2.

Court debate and public context

Commissioners discussed competing demands in the budget: funding volunteer fire departments, addressing road and drainage needs, jail capacity concerns and maintaining a multi‑month operating fund balance. One commissioner said he could not vote in good conscience for “the highest increased tax rate since 2012” without ensuring fire and law‑enforcement needs were covered.

Staff and the judge described the county’s fund balance position and the challenges of revenue timing: property‑tax receipts generally come in December and January and sales‑tax receipts in December, which leaves the county relying on reserves to operate through the late fall and early winter. That timing underlies several commissioners’ reluctance to use fund balance for ongoing operational expenses.

Key points and next steps

- The proposed tax rate is the cap for the current budget cycle; the court may adopt a lower final rate but may not increase it above the proposed rate without further procedure.

- Court will hold required notices and hearings, and adopt a final budget and tax rate no later than Sept. 2. Staff and commissioners said they will continue to explore ways to reallocate expenditures or identify alternative revenue to meet needs without further burdening taxpayers.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Guadalupe County Texas - Commissioners Court","oneSentenceSummary","Guadalupe County set a proposed 2025 tax rate of 0.3304 per $100 of assessed value on Aug. 12; the vote was 3-2. The proposed rate is subject to final adoption after required public notices and hearings.","taxTitle","Guadalupe County, Texas","taxId",20432,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6498976,"Guadalupe County court approves budget items, tax changes and construction GMP; several votes unanimous",130,4850000,4980000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5&start=4850&end=4980","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5/thumbnail_4850000.jpg","/articles/6498976/Guadalupe-County/Texas/Guadalupe-County-court-approves-budget-items-tax-changes-and-construction-GMP-several-votes-unanimous","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6498976-24ed164d136852c1c1dc5fdd798233e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771142004&Signature=jMZZOiVxv4B3aKQkOKfKTA5VcDyI1Hs0Pb5ftQze9Ild-ra0nnxNXTi6~XlUI9czwZ2iaqgrmOaovqARY-I6q8GzdqkX4Z9DEuXu073US-v~tTREtAfCnCXIy85eoFyNdwfqT3qU3prhlBfdcGYx-jn5J4DEYlVPuypFB7uJAxK2BrPhZVErYqe08zu0TO7ro3X108NB9djk~xLHA9pMpM5mr8Qb1CPkwVUHQDXUu3bvWdfz688mPvHEjvas9Y5V3EtrMzlgzPGYVkDEhvwaCUt9mcPffLkcczEEujvCEuca9WS1nDIKd0gmO-vivo6bBTbWveKzcDbThlZxQGBVJg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Guadalupe County commissioners on Aug. 12 approved a series of budget and capital actions, including a 4% increase in employee medical and dental premiums, formal rescission of a previously invoked tax-abatement extension for CSP of Texas LLC (Teijin Automotive Technologies), and a $15,269,285 guaranteed maximum price for construction of two emergency response facilities.

The court also set a proposed 2025 tax rate of $0.3304 per $100 of assessed value, authorized publication of notice for proposed increases in elected officials’ salaries and approved the purchase of a 7.106-acre tract at 1080 FM 78 in Schertz for $995,000 following a closed-session deliberation.

Why it matters: The package moves several budget and capital priorities into an approval pipeline and signals the court’s approach to balancing growing service needs — notably jail, road and volunteer fire department pressures discussed in public and court debate — with the county’s current fund balance and tax policy. The proposed tax rate is a “not to exceed” number; the court will set the final rate when it adopts the budget.

Key votes and outcomes

- Employee benefits premiums: Motion to increase medical and dental premiums by 4% — passed (no opposition recorded). The court directed staff to update plan materials and publish the rates.

- Amendment to tax abatement with CSP of Texas LLC (Teijin Automotive Technologies): Motion to accept the company’s letter rescinding its election to extend its abatement period and to reinstate the original termination date of Dec. 31, 2025 — passed (no opposition recorded). The city of Seguin had approved an identical action the previous week.

- Proposed tax rate for 2025 tax year: Motion to set a proposed combined rate of 0.3304 (M&O 0.2664; I&S 0.0120; Road & Bridge 0.0520) — passed 3-2. The number is the maximum the court may adopt this budget cycle; the final rate will be adopted on Sept. 2.

- Authorization to publish notice of proposed increases to salaries, expenses and allowances for elected county and precinct officials: Motion approved 4-1 (publication required by state law as part of the budget process).

- Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) — Emergency Operations Center (3040 N. Guadalupe St.) and Emergency Response Center (9940 Huber Rd.): Motion to approve a GMP of $15,269,285 to Guido Construction Company (CMAR) for the two facilities using ARPA funds — passed (no opposition recorded). Three alternates (metal panel upgrade, folding bay doors and heavier-gauge roof panels) were priced separately as add-alternates.

- Capital and land use items: Final plat (BASC Unlimited Subdivision, Precinct 1), capital project fund bill list and other consent items — approved (no opposition recorded).

- Real property acquisition: Motion to purchase a 7.106-acre tract at 1080 FM 78 (Schertz) for $995,000 and authorize the county judge to sign closing documents — passed (no opposition recorded) after closed-session deliberation under Texas Government Code, Chapter 551.

What the votes do (next steps)

- The proposed tax rate is subject to final adoption; the court must file the budget for public inspection and hold required hearings before adopting a final rate on Sept. 2.

- The GMP award allows construction to mobilize; the court and staff sign contracts and begin permitting and procurement for long‑lead items. Add-alternates remain optional and would require separate authorization and funding if the court elects to include them.

- The CSP/Teijin amendment places the facility fully back on the tax rolls at 100% beginning Jan. 1, 2026, unless other changes are later approved.

Quotes

“We will spend so much money over the long term if we fail to adequately plan for jail capacity,” County Judge (unnamed) said during discussion of funding pressures and revenue options. “We are obligated as a county created by the state of Texas to have a jail facility.”

“We want to keep a self funded insurance plan solvent and strong,” HR Director Dr. Teresa Salzedge said during the health‑insurance discussion. Gallagher client executive Ashley Lutz cautioned: “None of these [3–6%] increases are enough” to fully match projected claim trends.

Ending: The court’s actions move multiple items into implementation phases while preserving statutory steps (public notice and hearings) for final budget adoption. The proposed tax rate and several funding decisions remain subject to final action at the statutory public hearings in August and the Sept. 2 budget adoption session.","Guadalupe County commissioners on Aug. 12 approved several budget and capital items, including a 4% increase in employee medical and dental premiums, a rescission of an abatement-extension for CSP of Texas LLC (Teijin Automotive Technologies), and a $15,269,285 guaranteed maximum price for two emergency response facilities.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6498968,"Guadalupe County OKs 4% medical and dental premium increase; officials say incremental steps needed to protect self‑funded plan",1593,3363000,4956000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5&start=3363&end=4956","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5/thumbnail_3363000.jpg","/articles/6498968/Guadalupe-County/Texas/Guadalupe-County-OKs-4-medical-and-dental-premium-increase-officials-say-incremental-steps-needed-to-protect-selffunded-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6498968-3b6d119626074e7d4af7783b222b9272/orig.mp4?Expires=1771142004&Signature=iF5BFIYWhzZogO7ilbiaW01iYMUU6oaU72IJRatQEjDzaTUFN3Of5TvQDoVXnmwQ7jm494DuLDFRa9QpcK~~cszm3luvOfI0u2KGeR4nrZyVJHzR~Os6nzbln3h9F~FtmYNQIwKyMOiXK~ccG7zOTGSr213NRs9gUojQ1VW0vPNfx9qQkqN~GFdyT6qNoj5TowYos0-2z48ZI6en2KSgZ9dOA3QhktVsWHMfevAvnZbuwphlzDJabV0bxdaVb2em8VXsJPnn1WSlGk8a5T-s05-Lappz13mFEanxPC4dAmAx9-5xnh9l9UuzOy6NxWm8MJsvSRDHFMdGMYuihX5Ieg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Guadalupe County commissioners voted Aug. 12 to raise employee medical and dental premiums by 4% for the county’s 2026 plan year, a move county staff said is intended to stabilize the county’s self‑funded insurance program amid rising claims.

Why it matters: The county operates a self‑funded health program that county leaders say has historically built a fund balance to smooth year‑to‑year volatility. Staff and consultants said the program is now trending toward a deficit because of larger, recurring claim costs; they urged modest, planned increases to avoid a future abrupt premium spike or the need to move into an external pool with less local control.

What the court approved

- A 4% increase to employee medical premiums and a 4% increase to dental premiums for plan year 2026. The court instructed HR to publish updated rates and benefit material. The motion passed with no recorded opposition.

What staff said

- Dr. Teresa Salzedge, the county’s HR director, and Ashley Lutz of Gallagher presented claim history and plan projections. Lutz said current actuarial projections show increased claim activity — including several high‑cost claimants — and that small annual increases reduce the risk of large, sudden premium changes.

- Staff highlighted the county’s long‑running self‑funded approach and a fund balance set aside to meet obligations during the year. County officials said the plan remains solvent today but warned that projected trends could require larger adjustments without incremental action.

Numbers and context

- Council staff presented incremental premium scenarios ranging from 3% to 6%; commissioners selected 4% with the expectation that the court would revisit rates annually.

- Staff noted a separate chart showing a projected 36% increase in dental claims for next year; the court elected to apply a uniform 4% increase to dental as a manageable, near‑term step.

Quotes

“We want to keep a self funded insurance plan solvent and strong,” Dr. Teresa Salzedge said. Gallagher’s Ashley Lutz said, “None of these [3–6%] increases are enough” to fully match long‑term claim trends, urging a methodical approach.

Ending: County leaders described the 4% action as one step in a multiyear approach to protect a valued employee benefit and maintain budget predictability; staff will return with updated plan materials and may bring further options in future budget cycles.","The Commissioners Court voted Aug. 12 to raise county employee medical and dental premiums by 4% for the 2026 plan year. County HR and consultant Gallagher warned higher claims are driving fund depletion and urged periodic increases to avoid sudden large hikes or exiting a self‑funded pool.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6498972,"Public hearings draw sustained opposition and questions over use of county sales tax to fund roads, jail and fire services",567,753000,1320000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5&start=753&end=1320","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5573868-75f0f0eb836e6d784d1005fe461641e5/thumbnail_753000.jpg","/articles/6498972/Guadalupe-County/Texas/Public-hearings-draw-sustained-opposition-and-questions-over-use-of-county-sales-tax-to-fund-roads-jail-and-fire-services","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6498972-872fb553875583f64c54cbc0488ca793/orig.mp4?Expires=1771142004&Signature=e9lX4y0n24CNbvZf6oXGDD5I5pGw7qyYOJcuskQkYywRWf2-z-3vPIsNmaYihcXWhYNTyQGnKoRDRyEroTTvDCNlzlwFyT0TM1fAG~8E-0oRkWWpIZBIqB91scRFK-6BehXzv9e12Z1srQDGtZma6pQoHpRwLXFRRzf2LHtchcNbFnpJtE-YELfIUZzNIVUM5F-Ey02-DOnozlxJYCxAyjT8WfabWle3D8s4izbMe85iSinh9sVhnoLPi0OD~3Qr4OmYEBPx5rNGtQknd4kZ6Jp9Ju~H2iorOHO~gBXrha9L88TvCrIMlipk4RQhC94oja4ckX6w0U~2o6I1mPuzig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Guadalupe County held a public hearing Aug. 12 to solicit input on whether to put a sales tax increase for one or more County Assistance Districts (CADs) on the ballot. The court did not vote to call an election; commissioners said the record of public comment would inform decisions as the budget process moves toward final adoption on Sept. 2.

Why it matters: CADs would allow counties to ask voters to increase the local sales tax — a consumption tax — to fund a limited set of services: road construction, law enforcement, detention and jail facilities, fire protection, and economic development. The proposal would not raise property taxes but would increase the sales tax paid by anyone who makes taxable purchases in the district.

Public comments and concerns

Residents and community members who spoke opposed putting the question on the ballot at this time. Terry Harper, who identified himself as active in Republican Party politics, told the court that increased taxes are politically unpopular and said elected officials should be reluctant to use a ballot measure to shift political responsibility. A different commenter said: “I would like to see the abatement end … ending that abatement would generate more revenue.”

Questions from the public and commissioners focused on: whether the tax could include city extraterritorial jurisdictions (ETJs); how much revenue a CAD would realistically generate in largely unincorporated precincts; and what specific services would be cut if voters rejected a CAD. The court’s staff said state law allows notice to cities 60 days before calling an election and that cities may opt to participate; the court’s adviser explained that CAD funds can be spent only on five enumerated categories under state law, and that CADs are limited to sales-tax increases rather than property taxes.

Court discussion

County officials described pressures driving the conversation: rapid residential development in unincorporated areas, growing costs for roads and drainage, jail capacity concerns and unfunded state mandates. The County Judge said the county receives significant revenue late in the year (property-tax receipts arrive in December/January; the first sales‑tax receipts in December), creating a practical need for a fund balance. He outlined that Guadalupe County maintains several months of operating reserves and noted that neighboring counties carry far higher debt levels.

Several commissioners voiced concern about fairness if ETJs were excluded; one commissioner said they had only a handful of businesses in his precinct that would collect the additional tax and opposed taxing a small group of local businesses if ETJs were not included. Other commissioners urged continued public engagement and said the hearings are intended to gather ideas and alternatives rather than to set an immediate plan.

Clarifying details

- The proposed CAD would be a sales-tax increase (consumption tax), not a property-tax increase. Court staff said the county’s current sales-tax rate outside cities is 6.75% and that statutory maximums constrain additional levies until the allowed caps are met.

- Statutory reference: court counsel cited the Texas Local Government Code (transcript reference to “Local Government Code 387”) regarding district formation and permitted uses.

What’s next

No vote was taken to call an election. Court members said any decision to call an election would require public notice to cities, further study of revenue estimates (including whether to include ETJs) and additional public workshops. The court’s timeline requires that an election cannot be called this year for the proposed measure; commissioners discussed further outreach over the coming 12 months and additional public workshops prior to any formal action.","Guadalupe County held public hearings on Aug. 12 about calling an election to establish county assistance districts (sales-tax increase). Multiple residents and several commissioners questioned projected revenue, the geographic reach (ETJs) and whether fund balance or other cuts could avoid a tax increase.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Guadalupe County sets proposed 2025 tax rate at 0.3304 after split vote; final rate to be adopted Sept. 2

Guadalupe County court approves budget items, tax changes and construction GMP; several votes unanimous

Guadalupe County OKs 4% medical and dental premium increase; officials say incremental steps needed to protect self‑funded plan

Public hearings draw sustained opposition and questions over use of county sales tax to fund roads, jail and fire services