Property taxes: Laredo candidates and facts 2026

Why it matters

The impact on your daily life

The bill depends on both taxable value and the rate. A nearly unchanged rate can produce a higher bill if property value increases.

City taxes fund daily operations and tax-backed debt, but they are only one part of a bill that may include the county, schools, and other entities.

Capital and borrowing decisions can increase future tax pressure. Tax-funded debt should be compared with the projects and schedules it pays for.

The mayor participates in budget and tax priorities with the Council; a general promise of fiscal responsibility is not a specific rate commitment.

Current situation

What we know

The proposed FY 2026–27 city budget totals $1.019 billion. The proposed rate is $0.506080 per $100 of taxable value: $0.380253 for maintenance and operations and $0.125827 for debt.

The adopted rate for FY 2025–26 was $0.506090. The proposal is only $0.000010 lower per $100, while the allocation between operations and debt service changes.

The proposed rate is above the no-new-revenue rate of $0.492235 and below the voter-approval rate of $0.522329 calculated by the city under state law.

The city projects 7.74% growth in taxable value and approximately $140.58 million in property-tax revenue for FY 2027, about $9.01 million more than budgeted for FY 2026.

The public materials reviewed still identified the FY 2026–27 budget and rate as proposed. The final ordinance and Council vote should be confirmed before publishing final figures.

Webb CAD determines appraisals; taxing entities approve their rates. Challenging an appraisal before the appraisal review board is different from questioning the city tax rate.

Key facts

The numbers behind the debate

Proposed 2026 city rate

$0.506080

Per $100 of taxable value. On $100,000 taxable value, the city portion would be $506.08 before exemptions.

Prior adopted rate

$0.506090

The proposal is virtually unchanged; it does not guarantee that an individual bill will decrease if taxable value changes.

No-new-revenue rate

$0.492235

Official calculation designed to produce approximately the same revenue from properties taxed in both years.

Projected value growth

7.74%

Assumption in the City of Laredo FY 2026–27 budget.

Budgeted revenue

$140.58 million

FY 2027 proposal combining maintenance, operations, and debt service.

Tax-backed debt

$328.905 million

Balance reported for FY 2025 by the Texas Bond Review Board.

Audited FY 2025 taxes

$121.620 million

Revenue recognized in the audited financial summary; it does not correspond directly to a proposed rate.

Civic analysis

The strengths. The concerns.

The strengths

The proposed total rate is virtually unchanged from the prior rate and is below the voter-approval rate calculated by the city.
Revenue supports city services and capital capacity; the proposed debt component decreases from $0.128491 to $0.125827.
The city publishes rate worksheets, hearing notices, the budget, and fiscal-transparency links.
Rate decisions are local and allow public review, hearing participation, and electoral accountability.

The concerns

Individual bills can still increase because the city projects 7.74% growth in taxable value and the proposal exceeds the no-new-revenue rate.
Tax-backed debt and the use of certificates of obligation make it especially important to publish projects, payments, and outcomes.
A broad capital program can create future pressure if growth in values or revenue does not meet projections.
The documents reviewed still did not clearly show a final adopted rate, and most candidates did not have a specific municipal tax platform located.

Did this guide help?

One vote per device. You can change it.

Demand answers

Questions for every candidate

01What was the final adopted rate, ordinance number, and Council vote?
02Why does the proposal exceed the no-new-revenue rate, and how much additional revenue comes from existing properties versus new construction?
03Which services, positions, or projects would change under a lower rate?
04Which specific projects and payments does the $0.125827 debt component cover?
05Which future work will use voter-approved bonds, certificates of obligation, tax notes, fees, or grants?
06Which exemptions apply to each property, and when is it appropriate to challenge an appraisal before Webb CAD?
07What exact target for the rate, levy, debt, and exemptions does each candidate propose?

The candidates

Documented positions

Victor D. Treviño

No specific campaign commitment on the rate, levy, exemptions, or debt was located. The municipal proposal during his incumbency should not automatically be attributed as a personal promise.

JD Gonzalez

His campaign discusses fiscal responsibility and resource management but does not publish a specific target for the rate, levy, exemptions, or debt.

Jorge A. Garza

No specific municipal property-tax position was found in the sources reviewed.

Poncho Casso

In 2025, he advocated for the no-new-revenue rate for Webb County and argued that a lower nominal rate can still increase revenue when values rise. This is not yet a documented commitment on a specific 2026 city rate.

Alyssa Cigarroa

No specific rate or exemption proposal was found. Her record includes the unanimous final vote for the FY 2025–26 budget, which kept the total rate at $0.506090.

Sources and verification