Skip to content
Amarillo Ledger

Storyline · 17 events · Nov 8, 2016 – Sep 29, 2026

Amarillo's property tax rate and voter-approved debt (2016-2026)

Each year the Amarillo City Council adopts a property tax rate made of a maintenance-and-operations (M&O) part and a debt-service (interest-and-sinking, I&S) part. In November 2016 voters approved two of seven bond propositions (streets and public safety). The total rate went from $0.35072 per $100 (FY2016/17) to $0.43070 (FY2025/26 and FY2026/27); the debt-service part went from $0.02374 to $0.10658 per $100 over the same span. In 2021 the council proposed $0.48404, voters rejected it at a Nov 2 tax rate election, and the rate became the $0.44334 voter-approval rate. In 2026 staff recalculated the rates after errors were found in figures sent to the county tax offices; council kept $0.43070 on a 4-1 vote.

A storyline groups dated events in order. It is a chronology, not an argument; it does not say why anything happened. All storylines

Where the story starts depends on the framing

  1. · Origin

    Voters approve 2 of 7 City bond propositions (streets, public safety)

    In a seven-proposition, roughly $340 million bond election, Amarillo voters approved the streets ($89.5M) and public safety ($20.1M) propositions and rejected five others totaling $230M (municipal facilities, neighborhood parks, Civic Center, fleet, athletics). The City said the approved bonds would be paid through tax-supported debt.[1][2]

    • ✓ Verified

      The November 8, 2016 City bond election had seven propositions totaling about $340 million.[2][1]

      Amount
      $340,000,000
      Propositions
      7
      Comparator
      approximately
    • ✓ Verified

      Voters approved the streets and public safety propositions; the approved total is given as $109 million by the City and as $89.5M + $20.1M by HPPR.

      Reported value 1[2]

      Amount
      $109,000,000

      City budget document: 'Propositions 1 and 2 ... in the total amount of $109 million'

      Reported value 2[1]

      Streets
      $89,500,000
      Public safety
      $20,100,000
      Total
      $109,600,000

      HPPR per-proposition amounts (sum computed)

    • ✓ Verified

      Five propositions totaling $230 million (municipal facilities, neighborhood parks, Civic Center, city fleet, athletic facilities) were rejected.[1]

      Amount
      $230,000,000
      Propositions
      5
    • ✓ Verified

      City of Amarillo (Nov 9, 2016 press release, as reported by HPPR): Per a City press release cited by HPPR, both approved propositions were to be paid through tax-supported debt over five years.[1]

  2. · Precursor

    FY2017/18 rate set at $0.36364 after first 2016-bond issue

    The total rate went from $0.35072 (FY2016/17) to $0.36364 per $100. The City issued the first of the 2016-election general obligation bonds ($21,280,000) in April 2017; its budget documents tie the FY2017/18 increase to that issue.[2][3]

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2017/18 rate was $0.36364 per $100 ($0.32698 general, $0.03666 debt), up from $0.35072 in FY2016/17 ($0.32698 general, $0.02374 debt).[3][2]

      Rate per 100
      $0.36364 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.32698 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.03666 per $100
      Prior rate per 100
      $0.35072 per $100
      Prior is rate per 100
      $0.02374 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      City of Amarillo FY2019/20 budget document: In April 2017 the City issued $21,280,000 in general obligation bonds, the first of five planned annual issues for the 2016 voter-approved projects; the City's budget narrative relates the FY2017/18 rate increase to this issue.[2]

      Amount
      $21,280,000

  3. · Related development

    FY2018/19 rate set at $0.36838 after second 2016-bond issue

    The total rate went from $0.36364 to $0.36838 per $100, with the debt-service part going from $0.03666 to $0.04140. The City issued the second 2016-election GO bond ($22,145,000) in July 2018.[2][3][4]

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2018/19 rate was $0.36838 per $100 ($0.32698 general, $0.04140 debt).[3][4]

      Rate per 100
      $0.36838 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.32698 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.04140 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      City of Amarillo FY2019/20 budget document: In July 2018 the City issued the second 2016-election GO bond, $22,145,000; the City's budget narrative relates the FY2018/19 rate increase to this issue.[2]

      Amount
      $22,145,000

  4. · Related development

    FY2019/20 rate set at $0.38851; budget adopted 4-1

    The rate went from $0.36838 to $0.38851 per $100 ($0.34448 M&O, $0.04403 debt service). The City described the M&O increase as funding Fire and Animal Management positions tied to the 2016 public-safety proposition plus street maintenance, and the I&S increase as debt service on the voter-approved bonds. Council adopted the budget 4-1, Councilmember Elaine Hays against.[2][5][4]

    Ginger NelsonElaine Hays

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2019/20 rate was $0.38851 per $100, up from $0.36838: +$0.0175 M&O and +$0.00263 debt service.[2][4][5]

      Rate per 100
      $0.38851 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.34448 per $100
      Prior rate per 100
      $0.36838 per $100
    • ⚠ Sources differ

      The FY2019/20 debt-service rate is $0.04403 per $100 in the City budget; ABC7 printed it as $0.4403.

      Reported value 1[2][3]

      Is rate per 100
      $0.04403 per $100

      City budget book and historical rate table

      Reported value 2[5]

      Is rate per 100
      $0.44030 per $100

      As printed by ABC7 (inconsistent with its own $0.38851 total; apparent typographical error)

    • ✓ Verified

      City of Amarillo FY2019/20 budget document: The City's budget states the M&O increase funds Fire and Animal Management and Welfare personnel tied to the voter-approved Proposition 2 projects plus street maintenance, and the I&S increase is for debt service on the voter-approved bond projects.[2][5]

    • ✓ Verified

      The proposed FY2019/20 budget estimated total tax collections of $49,018,465, an increase of $3,029,641 from 2018.[5]

      Amount
      $49,018,465
      Levy change
      $3,029,641
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2019/20 budget was adopted 4-1: Mayor Ginger Nelson and Councilmembers Freda Powell, Eddy Sauer and Howard Smith for; Councilmember Elaine Hays against.[2]

      For
      4
      Against
      1

  5. · Related development

    FY2020/21 rate set at $0.39681; budget adopted 5-0

    The rate went from $0.38851 to $0.39681 per $100; the debt-tax rate went from $0.04976 to $0.05921 as listed in the City's statutory notice. The budget raised $1,931,428 (3.89%) more in property tax than the prior year. Council adopted it 5-0.[6][4]

    Ginger Nelson

    • ✓ Verified

      FY2020/21: rate $0.39681 (prior $0.38851); no-new-revenue rate $0.38070; voter-approval rate $0.41586; debt tax rate $0.05921 (prior $0.04976).[6][4]

      Rate per 100
      $0.39681 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.38070 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.41586 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.05921 per $100
      Prior rate per 100
      $0.38851 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2020/21 budget raised $1,931,428 (3.89%) more in property tax than the prior year; $528,990 from new property.[6]

      Levy change
      $1,931,428
      Levy change
      3.89%
      New property
      $528,990
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2020/21 budget was adopted 5-0 (Mayor Nelson; Councilmembers Hays, Powell, Sauer, Smith).[6]

      For
      5
      Against
      0
    • ✓ Verified

      City of Amarillo FY2020/21 budget document: The City's budget states the FY2020/21 increase was in the I&S portion, related to the 2016 voter-approved bond projects, the Thompson Park pool replacement, and a downtown South Johnson Street property purchase.[6]

  6. · Starting point

    Council proposes $0.48404 rate, above the voter-approval rate, triggering an election

    Council voted to set a proposed ceiling of about 48 cents per $100, above the $0.44334 voter-approval rate, which under state law required a November election. Councilmember Cole Stanley was the only vote against.[7][8][9]

    Cole StanleyGinger Nelson

    • ✓ Verified

      For FY2021/22 the City proposed $0.48404 per $100; the no-new-revenue rate was $0.38884 and the voter-approval rate $0.44334.[8]

      Rate per 100
      $0.48404 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.38884 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.44334 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      Councilmember Cole Stanley was the only vote against setting the proposed rate ceiling of about 48 cents; Stanley said he did not oppose what the money would fund.[7][9]

    • ⚠ Sources differ

      The proposed increase was described as 22 percent (NewsChannel10) and 24 percent (Texas Scorecard, Amarillo Pioneer).

      Reported value 1[7]

      Increase
      22%

      Reported value 2[9][10]

      Increase
      24%

  7. · Trigger

    FY2021/22 budget adopted 4-1; election set for Nov 2

    The FY2021/22 budget was adopted 4-1 with Councilmember Cole Stanley against. The City's materials said the proposed rate's additional revenue would fund police, fire, streets and parks; the City CFO described the election as putting the decision with voters.[8][7][11][12]

    Cole StanleyGinger NelsonLaura Storrs

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2021/22 budget was adopted 4-1: Mayor Ginger Nelson and Councilmembers Powell, Sauer and Smith for; Councilmember Cole Stanley against.[8]

      For
      4
      Against
      1
    • ✓ Verified

      Laura Storrs, Assistant City Manager and CFO: "Instead of our elected officials making the decision, they're putting it more in the hands of the tax payers, the voters."[11]

    • ✓ Verified

      Laura Storrs, Assistant City Manager and CFO (quote); NewsChannel10 (estimates): The City CFO said that under state law the rate would increase either way; NewsChannel10 estimated a $100,000 home would pay just under $8/month more if the measure passed and a little under $4/month more if it failed.[12]

    • ✓ Verified

      City of Amarillo FY2021/22 budget document: The City's budget states the $0.48404 rate would have generated an additional $4.8 million for Parks & Recreation capital, public safety personnel and equipment, wage increases and street improvements.[8]

      Amount
      $4,800,000

  8. · Peak

    Voters reject Proposition A; rate becomes the $0.44334 voter-approval rate

    Voters rejected the proposed $0.48404 rate by a reported 55-45 margin in both Potter and Randall counties. The FY2021/22 rate became $0.44334 per $100 (the voter-approval rate), up from $0.39681.[10][9][8][4]

    • ✓ Verified

      Voters rejected Proposition A, the $0.48404 rate, on Nov 2, 2021, by a reported 55-45 margin, with both Potter and Randall counties voting against.[10][9][8]

      For
      45%
      Against
      55%
    • ✓ Verified

      After the failed election the FY2021/22 rate was $0.44334 per $100 (the voter-approval rate), up from $0.39681; the debt tax rate was $0.07911.[8][4][3]

      Rate per 100
      $0.44334 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.36423 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.07911 per $100
      Prior rate per 100
      $0.39681 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2021/22 budget (at the revised rate) raised $7,024,921 (13.49%) more in property tax than the prior year; $702,794 from new property.[8]

      Levy change
      $7,024,921
      Levy change
      13.49%
      New property
      $702,794
    • ✓ Verified

      Vote for Kids Amarillo PAC supported Proposition A (park repairs, public safety); Save Amarillo PAC opposed it, saying there was no clear plan for the revenue.[10][9]

  9. · Related development

    FY2022/23 rate set at $0.40628 (4-0)

    Council approved the FY2022/23 budget and rate 4-0 (one member absent). The rate went from $0.44334 to $0.40628 per $100 ($0.07549 debt service). Council had earlier considered a rate near 49 cents that included Civic Center renovation funding.[13][14][4]

    Ginger NelsonCole Stanley

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2022/23 rate is reported as 40 cents (ABC7) and $0.40628 per $100 (City).

      Reported value 1[13]

      Rate per 100
      $0.40000 per $100

      Rounded in news coverage ('4-cents lower than the current rate')

      Reported value 2[14][4][3]

      Rate per 100
      $0.40628 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.33079 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.07549 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.39694 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.49086 per $100

      City statutory notice and rate tables

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2022/23 budget and rate were approved 4-0, with Councilmember Eddy Sauer absent.[13][14]

      For
      4
      Against
      0
      Absent
      1
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2022/23 budget raised $1,587,957 (2.62%) more in property tax than the prior year; $740,251 from new property.[14]

      Levy change
      $1,587,957
      Levy change
      2.62%
      New property
      $740,251
    • ✓ Verified

      Council had earlier considered a rate of about 49 cents that included Civic Center renovation funding; ABC7 reported that project was tied up in litigation.[13]

  10. · Related development

    FY2023/24 rate set at $0.39195 (5-0)

    The rate went from $0.40628 to $0.39195 per $100 ($0.07751 debt service). The budget raised $4,026,731 (6.46%) more in property tax than the prior year. Council adopted it 5-0; the same budget included fee increases in several utilities and services.[15][16][4]

    Cole StanleyLes SimpsonJosh CraftDon Tipps

    • ✓ Verified

      FY2023/24: rate $0.39195 (prior $0.40628); no-new-revenue $0.37598; voter-approval $0.39867; debt tax rate $0.07751.[15][4][16]

      Rate per 100
      $0.39195 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.31444 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.07751 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.37598 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.39867 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2023/24 budget raised $4,026,731 (6.46%) more in property tax than the prior year; $1,388,601 from new property.[15]

      Levy change
      $4,026,731
      Levy change
      6.46%
      New property
      $1,388,601
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2023/24 budget was adopted 5-0 (Mayor Cole Stanley; Councilmembers Josh Craft, Don Tipps, Tom Scherlen, Les Simpson).[15][16]

      For
      5
      Against
      0
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2023/24 budget included fee increases for drainage, solid waste, sewer, water, environmental health, golf, tennis, aquatics, zoo admission, athletics and city marshal.[16]

  11. · Related development

    FY2024/25 rate set at $0.38723 (4-0)

    The rate went from $0.39195 to $0.38723 per $100 ($0.31867 M&O, $0.06856 debt service), equal to that year's voter-approval rate. The budget raised $3,654,631 (5.43%) more in property tax than the prior year. Council adopted it 4-0 with one member absent.[17][18]

    Cole StanleyLes SimpsonJosh CraftDon Tipps

    • ✓ Verified

      FY2024/25: rate $0.38723 ($0.31867 M&O, $0.06856 debt); no-new-revenue $0.36659; voter-approval $0.38723.[17][18]

      Rate per 100
      $0.38723 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.31867 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.06856 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.36659 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.38723 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2024/25 budget raised $3,654,631 (5.43%) more in property tax than the prior year; $1,279,505 from new property.[17]

      Levy change
      $3,654,631
      Levy change
      5.43%
      New property
      $1,279,505
    • ✓ Verified

      The 2024 statutory notice lists $12,853,341 in tax-supported debt service, less $1,653,515 excess prior-year collections, for a total debt levy of $11,199,827.[18]

      Debt service
      $12,853,341
      Debt levy
      $11,199,827
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2024/25 budget was adopted 4-0 (Mayor Cole Stanley; Councilmembers Josh Craft, Don Tipps, Tom Scherlen), with Councilmember Les Simpson absent.[17]

      For
      4
      Against
      0
      Absent
      1

  12. · Related development

    FY2025/26 rate set at $0.43070 (5-0)

    Council unanimously adopted a $0.43070 rate (from $0.38723), equal to the voter-approval rate; the no-new-revenue rate was $0.37355. The debt-service part went from $0.06856 to $0.09956 and the M&O part from $0.31867 to $0.33114. The budget notice states property-tax revenue rises $8,475,975 (11.77%).[19][20][3][21][22]

    Cole StanleyLes SimpsonTim ReidDon TippsDavid PrescottLaura Storrs

    • ✓ Verified

      FY2025/26: rate $0.43070 ($0.33114 M&O, $0.09956 debt); no-new-revenue $0.37355; voter-approval $0.43070; prior rate $0.38723.[19][3]

      Rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.33114 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.09956 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.37355 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100
      Prior rate per 100
      $0.38723 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      From FY2024/25 to FY2025/26 the debt-service part went from $0.06856 to $0.09956 (+$0.03100) and the M&O part from $0.31867 to $0.33114 (+$0.01247).[3]

      Is change per 100
      $0.03100 per $100
      Mo change per 100
      $0.01247 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2025/26 property-tax increase is stated as $8,475,975 (11.77%) in the budget notice, $8.4 million (11.77%) by the City release, and nearly $8.5 million by NewsChannel10; the hearing notice's total levy on all properties rises $7,648,192 (10.58%).

      Reported value 1[3]

      Levy change
      $8,475,975
      Levy change
      11.77%
      New property
      $1,245,224

      LGC 102.007 budget notice: revenue from property taxes vs last year's budget

      Reported value 2[20]

      Levy change
      $8,400,000
      Levy change
      11.77%

      City news release (rounded)

      Reported value 3[21]

      Levy change
      $8,500,000
      Comparator
      approximately

      NewsChannel10 ('nearly $8.5 million')

      Reported value 4[19]

      Levy total prior
      $72,268,651
      Levy total
      $79,916,843
      Levy change
      $7,648,192
      Levy change
      10.58%

      Truth-in-taxation hearing notice: total tax levy on all properties, 2024 vs 2025 tax year

    • ✓ Verified

      The 2025 hearing notice estimates City tax on the average homestead going from $838.28 to $975.36 (+$137.08, 16.35%), with average homestead taxable value rising from $216,481 to $226,040.[19]

      Prior
      $838
      Amount
      $975
      Change
      $137
      Change
      16.35%
    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2025/26 budget and tax rate were adopted unanimously (Mayor Cole Stanley; Councilmembers Tim Reid, Don Tipps, David Prescott, Les Simpson) on Sept 16, 2025.[20][3][19][21]

      For
      5
      Against
      0
    • ✓ Verified

      Mayor Cole Stanley: "The money is there, it's now stewardship."[21]

    • ✓ Verified

      Councilmember David Prescott: "Costs have gone up, they're going up in areas that we never expected."[21]

  13. · Trigger

    Staff propose a $0.44728 voter-approval rate for FY2026/27; NNR is $0.42170

    At a budget workshop, staff proposed the voter-approval rate of $0.44728; the no-new-revenue rate was $0.42170. Councilmember Les Simpson asked to explore the budget at the no-new-revenue rate. Coverage reported total City debt of $566.8 million, about half for water and sewer.[23]

    Les SimpsonCole StanleyGrayson Path

    • ✓ Verified

      Staff proposed the $0.44728 voter-approval rate for the 2026 tax year; the no-new-revenue rate was $0.42170, below the 2025 rate of $0.43070.[23]

      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.44728 per $100
      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.42170 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The Tribune reported total City debt of $566.8 million, almost 50% for water and sewer, with annual debt service at 10.8% of the proposed budget and about $7.3 million rolling off after FY2026/27.[23][24]

      Amount
      $566,800,000

  14. · Context

    September 8 budget workshop notice lists a proposed FY2026/27 rate of $0.44744

    The minutes of the September 8, 2026 City Council budget work session (draft, in the October 13 agenda packet) reproduce the taxpayer impact statement posted for that meeting, which lists a proposed FY2026/27 total rate of $0.44744 per $100, against the current $0.43070 and a no-new-revenue rate of $0.42170. Deputy City Manager Andrew Freeman and the Finance team presented; no vote is taken at a work session. Six days later the council set a not-to-exceed rate of $0.4307.[25]

    Andrew Freeman

    • ✓ Verified

      The taxpayer impact statement in the September 8, 2026 work session minutes lists a FY2026/27 proposed total rate of $0.44744 per $100, a current rate of $0.43070 and a no-new-revenue rate of $0.42170. For a median Randall County homestead ($249,956) it shows a proposed-rate bill of $1,118.40, $59.39 more than the current-year $1,059.02; for a median Potter County homestead ($155,852), $697.34, $85.29 more than $612.05. [25]

      Proposed rate per 100
      $0.44744 per $100
      Current rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100
      Nnr rate per 100
      $0.42170 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      The rate adopted for FY2026/27 was $0.43070. The September 22 and 29 impact statements, using that rate, show a median Randall County homestead bill of $1,076.56 ($17.54 more than the prior year) and a median Potter County homestead bill of $671.25 ($59.20 more), with homestead values from the Potter-Randall Appraisal District. [25]

      Adopted rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100

  15. · Related development

    Rates recalculated after errors in figures sent to tax offices; ceiling set at $0.4307

    At a special meeting, staff presented recalculated rates after errors were found in numbers used to calculate them (debt figures, a fleet debt item, and a TIRZ value deduction). The voter-approval rate rose to $0.45252; the no-new-revenue rate stayed $0.42170. After several failed motions, council set a not-to-exceed rate of $0.4307 (Stanley, Reid and Tipps for; Simpson against all motions).[24][26]

    Cole StanleyLes SimpsonTim ReidDon TippsDavid PrescottAndrew Freeman

    • ✓ Verified

      The Tribune reported the original rates used debt collection numbers more than $2 million too high, counted $1.1 million in fee-paid fleet debt in general revenue, and double-deducted TIRZ value (about $1.2 million for the upcoming budget).[24]

    • ✓ Verified

      After recalculation the no-new-revenue rate stayed $0.42170 and the voter-approval rate rose $0.00508 to $0.45252.[24]

      No new revenue rate per 100
      $0.42170 per $100
      Voter approval rate per 100
      $0.45252 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      Potter County Tax Assessor-Collector: The Potter County tax assessor-collector said the incorrect number appeared, based on his office's internal research, to have been provided by City staff.[24]

    • ✓ Verified

      Mayor Cole Stanley: "They were essentially taking that value and deducting it from our revenues twice."[24]

    • ✓ Verified

      Simpson's motion to cap the rate at the no-new-revenue rate got no second; after three failed motions, Stanley, Reid and Don Tipps voted to set the not-to-exceed rate at $0.4307. Simpson voted against every motion.[24][26]

      Not to exceed rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      Councilmember Les Simpson: "I really think we owe it to the taxpayers to provide relief to them and that's the budget I'm going to be looking for."[26]

  16. · Context

    Budget and $0.43070 tax-rate ordinances pass first reading 4-1

    On September 22, 2026 the council passed on first reading Ordinance No. 8270 (FY2026/27 budget) and Ordinance No. 8271 (2026 tax roll and a $0.43070 rate: $0.32412 maintenance and operations, $0.10658 debt), each 4-1 with Councilmember Les Simpson against, according to draft minutes in the October 13 agenda packet. The tax-rate motion described the rate as "effectively a 2.13% increase in the tax rate," while the ordinance's statutory notice says it "will effectively be raised by 2.9 percent" for maintenance and operations. Both ordinances passed second reading September 29.[25][27]

    Lola OgunremiLes SimpsonDavid PrescottDon TippsTim ReidCole Stanley

    • ✓ Verified

      Draft minutes of September 22, 2026 record Ordinance No. 8270 (budget) adopted on first reading on a motion by Councilmember Prescott, seconded by Councilmember Reid, and Ordinance No. 8271 (tax rate) on a motion by Prescott, seconded by Councilmember Tipps, each 4-1 (Stanley, Reid, Tipps, Prescott for; Simpson against). [25]

    • ⚠ Sources differ

      City documents state the size of the FY2026/27 increase in different terms.

      Reported value 1[25]

      Increase
      2.13%

      Motion wording on September 22 and 29: the $0.43070 rate 'is effectively a 2.13% increase in the tax rate'

      Reported value 2[25][27]

      Increase
      2.9%

      Statutory notice in Ordinance No. 8271: the rate 'will effectively be raised by 2.9 percent' for maintenance and operations, about $9.00 on a $100,000 home

      Reported value 3[25]

      Increase
      2.58%

      Budget hearing notice: property tax revenue up $2,063,963, a 2.58% increase over the prior budget

  17. · Resolution

    FY2026/27 rate adopted at $0.43070 (4-1)

    Council adopted the FY2026/27 budget and a $0.43070 rate ($0.32412 M&O, $0.10658 debt service), the same total as FY2025/26, by 4-1 votes with Councilmember Les Simpson against. The City says the budget raises $2,063,963 (2.58%) more in property tax, including $1,295,675 from new property.[28][29][30][25]

    Les SimpsonCole Stanley

    • ⚠ Sources differ

      The FY2026/27 rate is $0.43070 per $100, the same total as FY2025/26; the proposed budget book and the adoption release give different M&O/I&S splits.

      Reported value 1[28][30]

      Rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.32412 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.10658 per $100

      Adopted split, City release of Sept 30, 2026 (also ABC7)

      Reported value 2[31]

      Rate per 100
      $0.43070 per $100
      Mo rate per 100
      $0.33714 per $100
      Is rate per 100
      $0.09356 per $100

      Proposed budget book dated 09-24-26 (before final adoption)

    • ✓ Verified

      The FY2026/27 budget raises $2,063,963 (2.58%) more in property tax than the prior year; $1,295,675 from new property. The City says the rate will effectively be raised by 2.9 percent and raise M&O taxes on a $100,000 home by about $9.[28][31][30]

      Levy change
      $2,063,963
      Levy change
      2.58%
      New property
      $1,295,675
    • ✓ Verified

      All FY2026/27 budget and tax-rate votes were 4-1, with Councilmember Les Simpson against.[28][29][25]

      For
      4
      Against
      1
    • ✓ Verified

      The City's release states the $0.43070 rate is 'greater than the current rate' (statutory wording), while the Tribune describes it as the same rate as 2025.[28][29]

    • ✓ Verified

      The debt-service (I&S/I&R) part of the City rate went from $0.02374 per $100 in FY2016/17 to $0.10658 in FY2026/27.[3][28]

      Is rate fy2016 17 per 100
      $0.02374 per $100
      Is rate fy2024 25 per 100
      $0.06856 per $100
      Is rate fy2025 26 per 100
      $0.09956 per $100
      Is rate fy2026 27 per 100
      $0.10658 per $100
    • ✓ Verified

      Texas Comptroller data record City of Amarillo general obligation principal of $123,738,733 in FY2016 and $212,736,000 in FY2025 ($622.91 and $1,044.21 per capita).[32]

      Go principal fy2016
      $123,738,733
      Go principal fy2025
      $212,736,000
      Per capita fy2016
      $623
      Per capita fy2025
      $1,044
    • ✓ Verified

      Draft minutes of the September 29, 2026 meeting record a separate ratification vote, required by Texas Local Government Code Sec. 102.007(c) when an adopted budget requires more property tax revenue than the prior year's, passing 4-1 on a motion by Councilmember Prescott seconded by Councilmember Reid (Simpson against). Acting City Manager Andrew Freeman presented the hearings; two residents spoke at the budget hearing and one at the tax-rate hearing. [25]

Related storylines: Financing the Amarillo Civic Center expansion and renovation (2016-2026)Amarillo's wastewater plants: failures, enforcement, expansion financing and rate increases (2022-2026)Moving Amarillo City Hall into the renovated Amarillo Hardware building (2016-2025)Downtown TIRZ #1 and Local Government Corporation financing (2006-2026)