KCUR.org
Jackson County will cap 2025 property assessments at 15%, but that doesn't solve the legal battle over the 2023 assessments.
The county announced today (Thursday) that it will cap assessment increases at 15% this year. It has been embroiled in a monthslong legal battle over an order to roll back its 2023 assessments, which shocked property owners with a major tax increase.
Property owners in Jackson County may get some relief on their property tax assessments this year. County Executive Frank White Jr. announced today that the county will preemptively cap all assessment increases at 15%.
The move comes after taxpayers were hit with higher bills on their 2023 assessments. Property values, which had been undervalued for years, rose by an average of 30%. In some cases the increase was more than 100%.
Missouri’s State Tax Commission ordered Jackson County to roll back the 2023 assessments, which some county legislators applauded. But the county challenged that ruling, saying it was unenforceable and that the county didn’t intend to follow it.
Earlier this month, a judge found that the county didn’t follow Missouri’s requirements to send out notices in a timely manner and didn’t always inform homeowners that they were entitled to request an interior inspection if their property values rose by more than 15%. But White said that ruling conflicted with an earlier ruling, when the same judge dismissed the commission’s efforts to force the county to comply.
White said the decision to cap this year’s assessments at 15% was made after consultation with legal counsel because the commission “continues to shift rules, issue contradictory mandates and leaves local governments exposed to legal and financial harm.”
“While others point fingers or promise what they know can’t be delivered, we’re making the hard choice to protect property owners, preserve public services and ensure that our assessment process can continue under the most difficult of circumstances,” White said in a statement.
In a release about the cap, White said the commission’s order, while lawful, was unenforceable and destabilized the reassessment process.
Under state law, any property facing an increase of more than 15% in value must have a physical exterior inspection. Property owners can also request an interior inspection. But the county executive’s office said assessors don’t determine whether a property will exceed that threshold until after the assessor has gone to the property, meaning it could have two physical exterior inspections and an interior inspection.
Gail McCann Beatty, the county assessor, said that’s not possible when inspections can’t begin until after Jan. 1.
“With more than 300,000 parcels, who do we inspect? Who do we leave out?” McCann Beatty said. “And how is it fair that those we manage to reach may end up with higher taxes than those we physically couldn’t? Why should either group be penalized?”
Limiting the 2025 assessments could cause property taxes to increase even more in the future. The county still can't agree on whether to roll back the 2023 assessments or how to do it.
Conflicting county actions
The decision to cap assessments comes after the county legislature voted last week to roll them back.
The county and taxing jurisdictions, like schools, cannot issue refunds to give the money back to taxpayers without causing severe financial problems. The legislature’s vote to issue a rollback gave no direction on how to do so, but the refunds would likely be issued as a tax credit applied to a property owner’s bills for the next few years.
But that doesn’t mean taxpayers would get their money back. To pay for those tax credits, the taxing jurisdictions would use what’s called a “recoupment levy,” a tax rate increase that would adjust for property assessment appeals.
That would mean all taxpayers would pay a higher tax rate next year to fund the tax credits that would be applied to the property owners whose assessments increased the most.
The legislature passed that resolution with a vote of 5-4, and Legislator Sean Smith, who sponsored it, said he expects White to veto it. In response to the vote, White said he would review the ordinance and “take appropriate action moving forward.”
“I commend the Legislature for ... openly acknowledging the serious complications associated with implementing the State Tax Commission’s order,” White said in the letter. “For the first time, a public body has recognized what we’ve long known, that this is not about tax savings but about shifting the burden onto others.”
White has so far not yet vetoed the ordinance. He said the county cannot comply with the commission’s ruling to roll back the assessments, just as the legislature narrowly voted in favor of doing.
It’s also likely that the county will appeal the judge’s ruling earlier this month that sided with the commission. In the release announcing the assessment cap, a spokesperson said county officials will continue evaluating the ruling and “will provide additional information as developments emerge.”
County officials acknowledged that the assessment cap is not a perfect solution, but said it is the “most responsible and legally sound path available.” The county said the cap will likely create more problems down the road, as property values continue to rise.
“Artificially suppressing property values does not fix the system. It simply delays the consequences,” McCann Beatty said. “This shifts the burden to others and sets us up for even larger increases in 2027. That’s not fair, equitable or sustainable.”
The story was first published on KCUR.org and is being republished here under a Creative Commons license.