08/25/2026
Good evening neighbors,
Once again, we are between semimonthly city council meetings, with the last one on 8/13 and the next in on 8/27. In between, I have also attended the Houston-Galveston Area Council board meeting (8/18) and the City Of Galveston Finance, Fiscal Affairs, and Investments committee meeting (8/24). There are many high priority items being addressed right now to close out this fiscal year and prepare for the next one. Additionally, there are countless discussions occurring with valuable external stakeholders, as the interest for major capital investment and critical resource allocations (very beneficial to taxpayers, ideally and hopefully) continues to grow. I am still trying to determine the best way to disseminate information and will make adjustments. Here is the summary from our 8/13 meeting (It is again so tedious, so bear with me, please; I will try to make this as palatable as possible, because it is supremely important.)
1. The subject of our FY27 budget proposal, tax rate, and capital improvements dominated the meeting. I am happy to report the tax rate discussion continues to focus on no new revenue as a ceiling, and city staff has developed a budget for this tax rate. The certified appraisal role was received from Galveston County on July 17th. There has been a drop in total taxable property values between FY26 and FY27. Therefore, the no new revenue rate is actually a tax rate hike year over year.
2. But, that does not necessarily we are looking at a tax increase. From a personal perspective, my appraisal value decreased year over year. Therefore, even with a higher rate, I would receive a tax cut. I have no idea if this is common or an aberration, so I have requested an assessment for how many taxpayer properties’ appraisals decreased and how many increased, and city staff agreed to provide that additional information. In my mind, the property tax system is flawed, and there is no way to know appraisals and rates will affect each taxpayer, and my situation demonstrates the flaws in the system. If the property tax values are lower and the rate is lower, I feel more confident tax cuts are being delivered to the taxpayers of Galveston, however.
3. One aspect that caught me eyes are the emergency funds the City Of Galveston on hand, which of course are primarily for hurricanes. The voters of Galveston in the past have mandated a 90-day reserve in the city charter. Comparatively speaking based on basic research, that seems higher than most municipalities. However, it was the will of the voters at one time, so it is indeed the floor unless voters change their minds.
4. In addition to the mandated 90-day reserve policy, there has been an additional policy by prior leadership to keep an additional 30-day reserve policy, for a total of 120-days. In my mind, this seems excessive. I realize there is an annual risk of a hurricane, but these are still outlier events. Repeating my prior city council term, I am opposed to developing policies based on outliers. Therefore, I requested to see adjusted tax rates based on 110-day, 105-day, and 100-day reserves. I do not think we need to necessarily spend down reserves. However, I believe there may be a reserve number that better balances taxpayer funds and emergency response. There may be a better reserve number that allows taxpayers to keep their own cash in a bank account rather than the City holding taxpayer cash in City bank accounts. There may be a better reserve number that allows taxpayers to spend more during the many years between hurricanes which could lead to greater sales tax revenue.
5. To the surprise of no one, health insurance costs are projected to increase 10% year over year. The City self insures, which may very well be the best way to do it. However, always the stubborn skeptic, I asked when the last time the potential plan was submitted for a public bid. While it is too late for FY27, perhaps that is something we can revisit for FY28. There also could be some cost reduction for the City’s general fund if we switch from a dollar amount for participants to a percentage. I also requested that research, but again, this is more interest for FY28 than FY27.
6. Two very specific projects I am pleased to report are budgeted for FY27 are the Lampasas Drive Bulkhead and Bridge Repair Maintenance, which will primarily benefit the Jones Drive bridge. Most city owned bridges are in District 6, so I am pleased to see this maintenance.
7. Unfortunately, the revenue generating parks (Dellanera Park, Lasker Pool, and Seawolf Park) are projected to combine to operate with deficit revenues. I requested an individual breakdown of those three parks to understand the situation better.
8. For FY26, Hotel Occupancy Tax is trending up. Realizing this tax revenue is highly restricted, I continue to believe we can find ways to use it that benefits the entire community. Once we identify those opportunities, perhaps then we will be more credible if/when we ask state legislature to expand its use. In some areas, we seem to be creative in its allocation. In other areas, it is a very strict interpretation. I would like to see more consistent interpretation.
9. Lastly, the in person interviews for Wharves Board and Planning Commission will not be necessary, as they were voted to discontinue, 5-2. I do not want to belabor a previous post, but my sentiments had not changed since the overall decision to keep the Park Board interviews, against my objection. No one is being more transparent than I am, when I confidently claim they are not a good use of anyone’s time, most importantly, the applicants. The thorough applications and selection processes are public. City council is still available to meet individually. If three or less city council want to meet with applicants as a group, they can still do that. I honestly do not feel qualified to publicly interview many of the applicants, who are either reapplying for a board position they know far more about than I, or are professionally niche oriented for the position they are seeking. I believe much more is learned about applicants in more personable settings. If I am wrong, we can always change it back for future application processes.
Congratulations again for making it to the end of another update primarily about the budget. Three more to go! I will try my best to not be repetitive, as I am waiting to expand on some budget line items until we get closer to final approval and details are understood better.
Your friend,
Jason Hardcastle
