Willacy County Commissioners Court approved renewal of bonds for the county tax collector-collector at a meeting Dec. 30, 2025, at 10 a.m. in Raymondville.

The action came after brief discussion about the outgoing tax collector (referred to in the meeting as "Missy") and confusion over whether the bond should cover one year or a multi-year term. An unidentified commissioner told the court she had contacted an agent at State Farm for a quote and said, "last year I paid 900, and this year's gonna be 2,400 for the 3 years." The court moved to approve renewal of the bonds, and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Teherina; the presiding official stated that the motion carried. The meeting record did not include a roll-call tally of votes.

Why it matters: County officials are required to carry surety bonds for certain elected or appointed officers; changes in premium cost can affect budget lines for small counties. During the discussion, speakers noted the tax collector is retiring and that prior renewals had sometimes been done annually.

Details of the debate and outcome: Participants differed on whether the bond should be purchased for one year or for the remaining multi-year term of the office. The unidentified commissioner explained she was referred to "Brianna at State Farm" and said the company provided a quote that would cover multiple years. The same speaker said she had examined the prior officeholder's files and observed annual renewals in the past. The speaker also said the quoted multi-year premium represented a substantial increase from what had been paid previously and indicated the cost was not in that official's budget.

The court did not state a numeric vote tally in the public record. The presiding official asked for a motion to approve the renewal; an unidentified commissioner moved to approve and Commissioner Teherina seconded. The presiding official announced, "Motion carries." The court then moved to the next item and adjourned.

Next steps: The minutes should record the exact bond terms and the premium amount charged to the county budget. The meeting record as provided does not identify which vendor will be invoiced or which line-item will cover the premium; those details were discussed but not finalized on the public record.

The meeting adjourned immediately after the bond approval.