Fort Worth officials face a significant budget shortfall for fiscal year 2027 after certified property tax rolls came in lower than projected. The projected general fund gap rose from an earlier estimate of roughly $49 million to approximately $77–78 million1 once the rolls arrived showing only 0.89% growth. By the time City Manager Jay Chapa presented the recommended budget,2 the shortfall being closed had grown to $94 million.3
In standard big-government fashion, the response has centered on raising the property tax rate and increasing fees. Chapa’s recommended budget includes a 3.2-cent increase to 70.2 cents per $100 of valuation, along with fee hikes across multiple departments. This 70.2 cent rate is higher than the No New Revenue (NNR) Rate of 67.0416 cents,4 which would (ideally) bring in the same amount of revenue as the previous tax year. Any rate that a local government adopts above the NNR Rate is an overall property tax increase on the local taxpayers. Texans for Fiscal Responsibility (TFR) has maintained for years that when tax revenue comes up short compared to planned budgets, officials should rein in spending the same way hardworking Texas families must when times get tough.
But instead, city leadership is justifying continued spending growth alongside higher taxes and fees. Rather than treating the shortfall as an obvious signal to prioritize core services and cut waste and unnecessary spending, the conversation is already defaulting to the familiar path of extracting more revenue from taxpayers.
The Survey
A city survey5 of more than 2,000 respondents,6 conducted from May 12 to June 30, 2026, is being cited in the process. According to the official results, 42% preferred to maintain or improve city services even if taxes or fees needed to rise. Meanwhile, 23% preferred reducing some services to keep taxes and fees the same, 18% preferred keeping both services and taxes/fees the same, and 11% preferred reducing services to lower taxes and fees.
It must be noted that the pure “keep services the same, with no change to taxes/fees” option was never realistic given the size of the shortfall, another example of the games local governments play7 when presenting constrained choices to the public.
Either way, however, a majority of survey respondents preferred a solution that would NOT include raising taxes or fees.
Property Values
City officials have pointed to a supposed decline in the average homeowner’s city tax bill under the proposed rate, attributing part of the softer rolls to appraisal cycles and higher valuation protests. That explanation does not fully hold up for typical existing homeowners. Tarrant Appraisal District shifted residential properties to a two-year reappraisal cycle rather than annual reviews, and successful protests and litigation further reduced some values on the rolls. Individual property appraisals do not reliably fall simply because of the timing change. Meaningful reductions for specific properties almost always require the owner or their agent to navigate the lengthy protest process through the appraisal district. Without that effort, values for existing homes typically hold or rise with market conditions.
The more straightforward reason the overall average has been pulled lower is new development. Commercial valuations rose and new residential construction added more than $2 billion in value, while existing residential valuations declined. A significant share of recent construction consists of homes priced below the prior citywide average, driven in large part by major builders such as Lennar and D.R. Horton active across the Fort Worth area.8 Adding lower-valued properties to the tax roll mathematically reduces the average without delivering corresponding relief to longtime homeowners whose properties have not been revalued downward.
For the typical existing homeowner, the relevant comparison is last year’s appraised value taxed at last year’s rate versus this year’s valuation taxed at the new, higher rate. That homeowner can expect a higher bill, not a lower one. Layer on the proposed fee increases for city services, and the total, overall cost of local government continues to climb even as officials highlight a diluted “average.”
Taxpayers Must be the Priority
The recommended budget does include some spending reductions, such as eliminating 51 positions, freezing dozens more vacant positions, cutting or reducing certain programs, and scaling back some economic development incentives, alongside the tax rate and fee increases.9 Those cuts are welcome but insufficient if the primary response remains asking residents to pay more.
TFR has long maintained that the proper response to revenue shortfalls is not to extract more from the wallets of property owners or increase fees. It is to prioritize core services, eliminate waste, restrain the growth of government, and, if necessary, cut spending to close deficit gaps. Fort Worth’s situation illustrates the point clearly. The deficit should prompt a hard look at spending levels and long-term obligations, not a round of tax hikes or service-charge increases that hit working families the hardest.
Fiscal Discipline is Possible. And Necessary
In fact, actually lowering property taxes has proven to be possible in north Texas. Just this week, on August 13th, Tarrant County Judge Tim O’hare announced preliminary approval for a new county budget that lowers the county property tax rate and the JPS Hospital tax rate below the NNR Rate, actually lowering property taxes for property owners across the county. This is the fourth straight year that Tarrant county will be lowering property taxes. At the same time, the budget fully funds public safety, and raises pay for county employees and law enforcement.10
If Tarrant county can do it, the city of Fort Worth ought to be able to do the same, or at the very least, keep property taxes steady.
Texas property owners already face one of the highest combined property tax burdens in the nation. Fort Worth has an opportunity to follow the lead of Tarrant county. It can, and should, choose spending discipline over the “easier” path of asking residents to pay even more. That is the approach consistent with fiscal responsibility and with the interests of the people who ultimately fund the city government.
Texans for Fiscal Responsibility relies on the support of private donors across the Lone Star State in order to promote fiscal responsibility and pro-taxpayer government in Texas. Please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
Get The Fiscal Note, our free weekly roll-up on all the current events that could impact your wallet. Subscribe today!
- https://fortworthreport.org/2026/08/04/fort-worth-resets-as-tax-rolls-come-in-lower-than-projected-spiking-shortfall-for-2027 ↩︎
- https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/fort-worth-city-manager-set-to-unveil-budget-proposal-amid-growing-financial-shortfall/4060978/ ↩︎
- https://fortworthreport.org/2026/08/11/fort-worth-proposes-property-tax-rate-bump-cost-cuts-to-close-94m-shortfall-for-2027/ ↩︎
- https://www.fortworthtexas.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/the-fwlab/documents/budget/fy2027/budget-responses/27-003-ir-tnt-fy27-submission-of-rates-8-11-26.pdf ↩︎
- https://www.fortworthtexas.gov/news/2026/7/budget-survey-results ↩︎
- https://data.fortworthtexas.gov/apps/a3501300273d42949bd8cf516bf15b21/explore ↩︎
- https://texastaxpayers.com/the-games-local-governments-play/ ↩︎
- https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2026/01/08/dr-horton-lennar-builders-dfw.html ↩︎
- https://fortworthreport.org/2026/08/11/fort-worth-proposes-property-tax-rate-bump-cost-cuts-to-close-94m-shortfall-for-2027/ ↩︎
- https://x.com/bwaltens/status/2087968150897762680?s=20 ↩︎
