Hidalgo says Ramsey's no vote let the tax increase pass. Texas law says four members have to be in the room.

Lina Hidalgo said Thursday’s property tax increase passed because Tom Ramsey stayed in the room to vote against it. On the statute, she is right. Texas law lets a county levy a tax only when at least four of the five members of Commissioners Court are present, and exactly four were.

Why it matters

The adopted rate raises the county’s share of a Harris County tax bill about 7.6 percent. Every property owner in the county pays it.

The mechanism that let it pass is not in the coverage, and it is the thing that decides whether one commissioner could have stopped it. It is also the thing that decides what would have happened next if he had.

By the numbers

3 to 1. Adrian Garcia, Rodney Ellis and Lesley Briones voted for the rate on September 17. Ramsey voted against. Hidalgo left the room.
Four members present. Texas Local Government Code 81.006(b) allows a county tax to be levied “at any regularly scheduled meeting of the court when at least four members of the court are present.” Four were. Three is not enough. Subsection (a) makes three a quorum for county business “except the levying of a county tax.”
Three votes. That is the floor to levy under 81.006(c). It is also 60 percent of a five member body, which is the share Texas Tax Code 26.05(b) requires, by record vote, for any rate above the no-new-revenue rate.
67.147 cents per $100 of taxable value, up from 62.41 cents. That is a 7.6 percent increase.
$3.09 billion budget, adopted on a separate 3 to 2 vote. Hidalgo voted on that one, against.

What the coverage buried

KPRC 2 printed Hidalgo’s claim and reported that with two members absent, “the court could have had another month to revisit the budget.” Neither KPRC 2 nor Community Impact printed the statute that governs what a walkout actually produces.

It does not produce another month. Tax Code 26.05(a) sets the adoption deadline at the later of September 30 or the 60th day after the county receives its certified appraisal roll. Counted from September 17, that is weeks, not a month.

And 26.05(c) says a taxing unit that misses the deadline does not get more time to argue. Its rate for the year becomes the lower of the no-new-revenue rate or the rate it adopted the year before. The alternative to Thursday’s vote was not a longer debate. It was a lower rate, set by default.

The other side

The strongest case for Ramsey is one he has not made himself. KPRC 2 reported on September 18 that it had asked his office for comment and had not received one.

That case runs like this. A recorded vote is accountable and a reader can look it up. An empty chair is not a vote, and a county that can be shut down by two members who stay home can be shut down by whichever two are willing to do it next. There is also a budget on the other side of the argument, and it funds the jail, the courts and the sheriff.

The concession is that the argument is about process, and it carried a price that residents pay in October. Hidalgo’s position is not clean either. She left rather than vote no, and had she stayed and voted against alongside Ramsey, the rate still passes, because three of five is 60 percent. A walkout was her only route, which is the reason she is arguing for one now.

What to watch

Whether Ramsey answers. The request for comment was outstanding as of September 18.
The Commissioners Court business meeting set for September 22.
The date the county received its certified appraisal roll. It fixes the real adoption deadline and it has not appeared in any coverage read here.
October tax statements, where the 7.6 percent arrives.

Bottom line

Hidalgo’s claim holds up against the statute. Four members in the room was the legal requirement to levy, and four were in the room.

What neither she nor the coverage said is what the walkout would have produced. Not more debate. A lower rate, by operation of law.

Sources

Editorial