Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Tax Rate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Fe staff project a roughly $0.20 no-new-revenue tax rate in preliminary FY25-26 budget
Summary
City staff presented a preliminary FY2025–26 budget outlook showing a projected no-new-revenue tax rate near $0.20, options for voter-approval scenarios and a July 1 draft deadline under the city charter; council and staff discussed potential homestead exemptions and timing for a preliminary budget.
City of Santa Fe staff told the City Council on May 20 that the city’s preliminary fiscal 2025–26 budget currently projects a no-new-revenue tax rate near $0.20 per $100 of assessed value.
Rudy, a city staff member presenting the budget, said the projection comes from early tax roll estimates from the county and a municipal tax calculator that applies Texas truth-in-taxation conventions. He said the rate is a “no new revenue” estimate and that staff had also modeled voter-approval scenarios and the effect of allowed homestead-exemption options.
The discussion matters because the tax-rate calculation determines how much revenue the city can raise without voter approval and shapes the next draft budget. Rudy told the council that staff aim to present a preliminary budget at the council’s second June meeting and a draft budget by July 1 “per our charter.”
Council members asked for concrete examples for typical homeowners. Rudy ran an example for a $300,000 homestead showing an average household could see a net decrease under the current forecast; he also showed scenarios where a 10% increase in individual taxable value would still produce a net decrease in some modeled cases. He cautioned that outcomes vary by property type: “for commercial properties and for people that aren’t homestead, their taxes would actually go up,” he said.
Councilors and staff also discussed whether the city should adopt a homestead exemption. Rudy presented illustrative options, noting a homestead exemption would reduce revenue and that the council could choose amounts “anywhere from $5,000” upward; he did not recommend a specific exemption. The council offered no formal direction during the session beyond asking staff to continue work on the numbers.
Rudy closed by reminding the council that many departmental detail sheets are still active and will be updated; he said staff will return with revised department requests and tax-rate materials at the June meeting.
Looking ahead, the city’s July 1 charter deadline for a draft budget remains the guiding date for finalizing numbers and formal council choices.
