KANSAS CITY, Missouri (KCTV) – A state order to roll back tax payments is unconstitutional and harmful, the county’s top attorney, County Councilman Bryan Covinsky, claimed Monday.
He made these statements at a press conference with Jackson County Executive Frank White, County Appraiser Gail McCann Beatty, Deputy County Appraiser Maureen Monaghan and County Administrator Troy Schulte.
Many homeowners faced tax rates that were more than double. State law requires rules for the physical inspection of properties with increases of more than 15%. The State Tax Commission (STC) ruled that the county had not thoroughly inspected many of these properties and subsequently ordered the county to reduce the tax rates across the board to no more than 15%.
WHO WINS?
Schulte sent a clear message that this is not the victory of the little man that some are celebrating.
Levies are not the same as property taxes. Property taxes are calculated by multiplying the assessed value by the levy, which is set by the counties that receive the property tax revenue. Those counties each set their own levies. School districts receive the most. When levies skyrocketed, they lowered their levy because state law does not allow them to make a windfall profit. If the county follows the STC’s order, counties will have to significantly increase their levies to compensate.
“I want to discourage people from thinking that they’re going to get a nice refund check because of this glaring error,” Schulte said. “That’s not going to happen. In most cases, you’re going to pay a lot more.”
This is especially true for people who have only had smaller increases. Their assessments will not change, so the higher levy will be applied to their existing assessed value. There is little doubt that they will see an increase in their property tax bills.
Those whose value was increased by more than 15% would have their assessment reduced if the order were followed, so they could seemingly expect a reduction in their final bill depending on how much the order lowers their assessment from the previous assessment.
District representative Sean Smith believes the result is fair because, in his opinion, an injustice was done to those who jumped the highest.
“The people who are being saved are the people who were wrongfully and illegally taxed with very, very high increases,” Smith said. “Those are the people we have really hurt.”
The decision applies regardless of whether an objection was lodged against the tax increase or whether the objection was successful.
WHY FIGHT AGAINST IT?
The county executive has announced that it will take action against the order, which it describes as unconstitutional. How this will be done has not yet been explained.
Covinsky said at Monday’s county assembly meeting that if the county does not challenge the order, it risks being sued by affected school districts and other jurisdictions.
At the press conference, he said he plans to mobilize these agencies to take action against the STC.
“We’re going to do our best to figure out what the legal challenge is going to be,” Covinsky said. “But we’re going to work with the subdivisions that were actually harmed by this decision. It’s going to be retroactive. That’s going to impact the future of their budgets, as well as what’s available at the end of September.”
That deadline is fast approaching. It’s six weeks away. That’s exactly why Smith said a dispute would do more harm than good to the districts. It’s hard to set a budget and levy when the tax rolls remain unknown. He argues the next six weeks are better spent finding a solution than taking a risk.
“The level of uncertainty that exists because the administration wants to remain stubborn and refuse to issue a lawful order means that the tax authorities do not know whether they will have to raise their taxes again and introduce the cap or whether the county will fight it and succeed,” he said.
He said he had spoken to Lee’s Summit school district officials and they were open to an idea he proposed.
If they raise taxes this fall to reflect the change, they will likely be able to raise them high enough to recoup the amounts they have to pay back for the previous tax year.
He suggested that the county then allow them to spread the amount owed over two years. He suggested that the county should handle things similarly for property owners by applying a loan spread over two years or cycles.
Nothing was officially proposed.
Pending in the legislative process
Smith filed a resolution directing the county council not to appeal the STC’s decision. The resolution also included an instruction that the legislature have a say in any lawsuit over $5,000.
The bill did not make it to the first reading. The Speaker of the House, Jeanie Lauer, rejected it because she had concerns about its legality.
Another matter related to the assessor’s office is just one vote away from being placed on the November ballot.
A few weeks ago, Assemblyman Manny Abarca filed an ordinance that would give voters the opportunity to decide on the November ballot whether to make the assessor position an elective office.
By a narrow majority of 5 to 4, the resolution was postponed to the meeting next Monday for a final vote. Lauer, his deputy Megan Marshall, Jalen Anderson and Charlie Franklin voted against it. The deadline for the final certification of the November ballot is August 27.
RELATED NEWS: Homeowners fear losing their homes due to 2023 property tax assessment
To get the latest news on your phone, download the KCTV5 News app here.
All rights reserved.
