Fulshear weighs police pay plan and ballot options; council votes to call May special election

City staff reported a three-year plan to raise police compensation toward peer-city medians, targeting the 55th percentile in year one, 65th in year two and 75th in year three. The plan includes new positions, benefits, vehicles and other recurring costs. Staff estimated the first-year recurring cost at about $1.7 million over current spending, followed by additional costs estimated at roughly $1.5 million and $1.0 million in subsequent fiscal years; dispatch program costs were projected at about $1.3 million by fiscal year 2030.

Council examined three principal funding approaches: relying on new taxable value on the roll, a voter-approved maintenance & operations (M&O) tax-rate increase, or reallocating sales tax presently collected by the EDCA A board. The committee also considered forming a Crime Control & Prevention District (CCPD), which would be voter-approved and limited to crime-control/prevention uses (police, courts, after-school programs, neighborhood watch, etc.). Staff warned that creating a CCPD would require appointment of a temporary board (possibly council), adoption of a draft budget, and its own election timetable; staff cautioned about ballot sequencing because the A-board reduction and CCPD creation could not be on the same ballot initiative in ways that would leave the city without committed funds if one passed and the other failed.

Under a recent change in state law discussed at the meeting, staff said the council could also place a single ballot proposition calling for a reduction in the A boards allocation (from a half-cent to a quarter-cent) while simultaneously authorizing the city to increase its general-fund sales-tax allocation from 1.00% to 1.25%, allowing both changes to appear on the same ballot. Staff noted Feb. 13 is the last day to put items on the May ballot; they advised May is possible but that some in the committee expected a November vote would be more practical for CCPD creation and to have certified appraisal rolls for more precise revenue estimates.

During debate, some council members favored the CCPD because it restricts funds to public-safety programs and automatically reverts after a set term, while others preferred the flexibility of the general fund and the speed of using a May ballot. Several council members expressed concern that placing the proceeds in the general fund could result in future reallocation if the council chose different priorities, while supporters of the general-fund approach said it allows the council to address urgent needs more quickly.

The council voted to adopt ordinance 20 26-15 29 to call a special election for May 2, 2026, on the proposed reallocation; members also discussed the option of moving the proposition to the November ballot if they wanted more complete fiscal data beforehand. The ordinance vote carried.

What happens next: staff will refine revenue projections, appraisals and timing assumptions for both CCPD and general-fund approaches and will return with detailed ballot language, estimated revenues and projected timing of any revenues to the city if voters approve.