Scurry County appraisal district chief defends staffing, lawsuit costs as commissioners consider veto

Jackie, the chief appraiser for the local appraisal district, told the Scurry County Commissioners Court that the districthas maintained staffing through a lengthy top-taxpayer lawsuit and that the preliminary 2026 allocation largely mirrors prior years. She outlined hiring challenges, recent appointments (including deputy chief appraiser Beverly Silen), and said the district has preserved a 5% to 10% contingency while meeting reporting requirements for nine taxing units.

The presentation matters because the appraisal districtallocation sets the percentage of the tax roll that each unit pays and can shift the burden among the county, schools and other taxing entities. Jackie said the appraisal districtmust maintain accurate values to avoid state penalties to school districts and that recent changes in aerial photography and appeals have driven some reappraisals. "We have 9 taxing units and Scurry County is approximately 26.6% of the roll," Jackie said, explaining how valuation and levy changes affect relative shares.

Commissioners pressed the chief appraiser on apparent pay increases, step ranges and vacancies. Commissioner Speaker 2 challenged the salary step proposal for lower-paid positions and said it appeared to raise the bottom step by roughly $2,000 despite vacancies. Jackie responded that hiring market realities required higher entry wages and that licensure and training for appraisers can exceed $20,000 per employee. She also described a seven-year lawsuit dating to 2018 involving Kinder Morgan and other top taxpayers that has required significant staff time and contingency budgeting ahead of a trial scheduled in the coming year.

After extended questioning about the budgetestimates, step ranges and contingency handling, Speaker 2 moved to veto the appraisal district budget; the motion was seconded and the presiding official called for a vote. The available transcript records the motion and second but does not record the final tally or the immediate outcome in the provided segments.

Commissioners and the chief appraiser agreed on the importance of clear constituent communication about protests and appeals: Jackie urged residents to call the appraisal office and noted the districtmust physically inspect properties on a multi-year cycle and use recent photography overlays to improve accuracy. The court did not adopt a final budget during the recorded segments; next procedural steps were left to further action or formal adoption on a later agenda.

Ending

The appraisal district presentation consumed the bulk of the meeting, with commissioners divided about whether to accept the estimate or exercise the veto option. The transcript shows the motion to veto was made and seconded; the record provided here does not include a completed roll-call outcome. Further meetings or follow-up communications were indicated as likely next steps.