Lubbock County commissioners debate restoring dedicated parks tax and use of park reserves

Lubbock County commissioners discussed restoring a dedicated parks tax rate and how to treat recent increases in park rental revenue at a work session on June 26, 2025 in the Commissioners Courtroom.

The issue matters because the county’s decision affects how property tax revenue and precinct reserves will be allocated between parks, roads and other county priorities at a time when park rental revenue has risen since the county implemented a reservation and credit-card payment system.

County staff said they will bring finalized revenue numbers in August after July collections are posted. “My plan for that is not to set the revenues for contributions for your parks until July,” said a county staff member who presented parks revenue figures. The staff member said the July data will show whether the new reservation system is producing sustained revenue increases that could affect each precinct’s budget.

Commissioners disputed the underlying philosophy. One commissioner argued the county should move away from dedicated tax line items and fund parks from the general fund so the county can allocate resources where they are most needed. “I don’t like a dedicated tax out of there,” that commissioner said, adding the county should fund needs from a single general fund tax rate. Another commissioner pushed back, saying the court previously moved away from the dedicated rate only last year and that some precincts rely on their park allocations for maintenance and operations.

Officials identified concrete numbers and past decisions. County staff said the previous parks tax rate had been 0.005 and that parks’ share from that rate would have amounted to roughly $600,000 last year when split across precincts. Commissioners also recalled a one-time distribution of ARPA funds — described in the meeting as $200,000 for park upgrades in some precincts — that some precincts used for sprinkler systems and other improvements. One commissioner said precinct-level ARPA projects included sprinkler-system upgrades and picnic-shade structures paid with those federal funds.

Several commissioners also raised equity and operational questions: precinct park facilities vary in size and amenities, some precincts contract out maintenance, and some elected precinct officials use clubhouses as satellite offices. Commissioners discussed whether equipment and staff positions historically funded through precinct park allocations could be reassigned to Road & Bridge if the court opts to repurpose some park-percentage revenue for road repairs.

No formal action or vote was recorded during the work session. Staff will return in August with updated July revenue results and a recommendation; commissioners indicated they expect another discussion to reach a consensus on whether to restore the dedicated parks tax rate or continue funding parks from the general fund.

The court recessed after the parks discussion and proceeded to other budget items.—Reporters’ note: the court’s parks discussion combined precinct-by-precinct budget presentations and a broader policy debate about dedicated tax line items versus general-fund financing.