The La Marque City Council voted 4–1 on Sept. 8 to adopt a voter‑approval tax rate of 0.452161 (45.2161 cents per $100 of assessed value) after City Manager Barbara Holly and new Finance Director Worth Ferguson outlined a financial rescue plan for the city.

City Manager Barbara Holly told the council the city’s cash accounts have been pooled so that “our tax receipts, our debt service, our utility payments, hotel‑motel tax, and our savings account … was put into one ball of wax,” and that the consolidated position leaves the city with roughly $3.3 million in several bank and investment accounts but more than $5.1 million in immediately needed obligations. Holly said auditors reported the city ended fiscal 2023–24 “with a negative unrestricted general fund balance,” a finding she described as “unheard of.”

Holly and Finance Director Worth Ferguson presented a three‑part plan: (1) immediate steps to get cash on hand to pay bills already due, (2) measures to fund operations month‑to‑month through December, and (3) structural changes to restore stability for future years. Ferguson said the city would pursue a combination of short‑term loans (including a maintenance‑tax note against next year’s property tax receipts or a loan secured by expected FEMA reimbursements), a possible interfund agreement with the Economic Development Corporation, temporary rate increases for utilities, and a tax‑rate increase to the voter‑approval level.

“We need all of it,” Ferguson said. “We need a tax increase. We’re going to need a multi‑pronged approach … to keep the lights on in La Marque.”

Brad Eng, the city’s municipal adviser with Swiss People Public Finance, told the council a maintenance‑tax note or an emergency note could get cash into the city now and be repaid when property taxes are collected in January–March. Eng said those note structures are commonly used to bridge timing gaps in municipal cash flow.

After extended council discussion and public comment, the council voted to accept the report and administration recommendations earlier in the meeting (motion carried; vote recorded: 4 in favor, 1 opposed — Councilmember Lowery). Later the council moved to adopt the voter‑approval tax rate that finance staff recommended: 33.6908 cents for maintenance and operations (M&O) and 11.5253 cents for interest and sinking (I&S), total 45.2161 cents. City Clerk Miss Lott read the voice vote as: District A — yes; District B — yes; District C — no; District D — yes; Mayor — yes.

Holly and Ferguson provided line‑item details to council during the presentation: TexFirst Bank and other accounts totalled about $3.3 million in cash and short‑term investments; checks outstanding and restricted funds plus upcoming bond payments created an immediate cash shortfall that Holly described as about $1.7 million against available cash. Ferguson said administration was seeking roughly $3 million in short‑term liquidity from a combination of loans, EDC borrowing, and internal fund reconciliations to bridge the period until property tax receipts arrive.

Council members pressed administration on alternatives to a tax increase: hiring freezes, delaying capital spending, reassigning or sharing staff, enforcing collection of delinquent revenue streams, and pursuing every outstanding federal/state reimbursement for storm cleanup. Holly said the city will produce monthly cash reports, reconcile accounting and cash balances, and migrate to a new accounting system with live‑ish reporting (OpenGov) so council can see daily cash positions and check registers.

Ferguson said administration will review 2025 spending line by line to move any eligible capital or grant‑funded expenses back to their appropriate funds to restore general‑fund cash, a process he warned will take weeks. He said auditors have not identified fraud; Holly and Ferguson said they will refer any evidence of wrongdoing to law enforcement if they find it.

The council also approved formation of a short‑term finance review committee — to include the city manager, two council members, the finance director, the EDC director, an EDC board member and a citizen at large — to help administration and council work through the cash‑flow and budget adjustments.

What the vote means: by adopting the voter‑approval tax rate, the council makes additional property‑tax revenue available for the next budget year and increases the city’s ability to secure short‑term borrowing backed by future collections. Administration cautioned the increase can be revisited in the next budget cycle and said any surplus or unexpected one‑time reimbursements could be considered for rebate or rate reductions in future years.

Public comment at the meeting included repeated demands for transparency and requests for forensic audits from residents who said they had repeatedly tried to obtain bank statements and records. Several residents urged the council to seek forensic review; Holly said a targeted forensic audit is a separate, resource‑intensive step and recommended parsing any forensic work into specific scopes rather than an immediate, city‑wide forensic audit.

Next steps: administration will publish monthly cash and accounting reconciliations, return to council with the amended budget and formal tax‑rate public hearings and notices required by state law, and pursue short‑term borrowing and intergovernmental options to stabilize operations through the property‑tax collection period.

— End —