A Property Tax Increase for Ladue?

The City of Ladue is asking voters to approve a property tax increase on November 2. It costs money to run cities, and that money comes from taxes. While governments at all levels waste that tax money to varying degrees, sometimes it is necessary to increase certain taxes to fund necessary services. Ladue has been running significant deficits in recent years, both before and during the pandemic. To correct course, the city can either cut spending or raise taxes. It has proposed a 30-cent property tax increase per $100 of assessed valuation, an increase of almost fifty percent from the current 61 cents per $100. As this is a reassessment year in Missouri—and property values are increasing all over the country—I suspect supporters of the tax increase are hoping property tax bills don’t arrive in city mailboxes the day before the vote.

For a home with a market value of $1 million (of which there are many in Ladue), the 30-cent increase per $100 of assessed valuation would amount to a tax hike of $570. If similar recent proposals in neighboring cities are any guide, how Ladue voters will respond to this proposal is anyone’s guess. In August, voters in Frontenac approved a very large tax increase, while voters in Clayton rejected a much more modest one (18 cents per $100). In each case, turnout was light, as expected and (perhaps) intended.

The most interesting part of the proposed tax increase is that it’s only for residential property, not commercial. In other words, homeowners will pay it, but businesses won’t. Too often, governments try to export the costs of running their cities to outsiders with tourist taxes, sales taxes, special district taxes, and so on. The best thing you can say about this Ladue proposal is that it deals with property taxes that will be paid by the people who receive the public services. But don’t businesses also benefit from public services like police and fire protection? Of course they do. However, unlike both Frontenac and Clayton, where commercial property makes up a large part of the tax base, commercial property in Ladue is less than ten percent of the tax base. Including commercial property in this tax increase would not make that much of a difference in tax collections, but how voters react will be intriguing.

In Frontenac, the (voter-approved) tax increase actually targeted commercial property with especially large increases, while in Clayton the city proposed the same (voter-rejected) tax increase for each. What is the moral of the story? Voters apparently like targeting businesses to fund as much of their services as they can.

Does Ladue truly need this added money? As stated, the annual deficits Ladue has been running have been large, and that can’t continue. With most city funds going to public safety in recent years, cuts would have to come from police and fire protection. Ladue has very little crime and even fewer fires, but history has shown that people like having higher levels of police and fire protection than may be necessary.

Ladue has received over $900,000 in stimulus funds and will receive over a half-million more in the near future. This is on top of upcoming increases in local tax revenue from higher gas taxes and online sales tax collections passed in the state legislative session. (Ladue voters would have to pass a use tax, which they rejected in 2020, to collect all of the online sales taxes.) I don’t doubt that the cost of providing public services is increasing, but with the stimulus funds, increased property assessments, and other future taxes, do the people of Ladue really need to be hit with approximately $2.5 million in new taxes?

Residents, voters, and taxpayers (most people are all three, of course) generally like the high quality of services found in most St. Louis County suburbs, especially in the more prosperous cities like Ladue. But you can only ask for so much before people start saying “no.” People want quality services; they also like fair taxation and the idea that their cities aren’t just out to gouge them. One thing Ladue has a large number of is country clubs, and on election day, we will see how many voters in Ladue are yelling “Fore!” as they cast their votes.

St. Louis County Needs Federal Dollars to Stay Afloat

A recent article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that St. Louis County Executive Sam Page is asking the St. Louis County Council to use federal stimulus money to avoid budget cuts. Per the article, Page claims that $193 million from the American Rescue Plan Act will allow the county to avoid any cuts through 2024, but the county will have to find additional revenue sources to maintain current operations beyond that. My question is: Why can’t the county operate past 2024 without a $193 million boost from the federal government?

The county’s situation illustrates the point my colleague Elias Tsapelas and I made in our recent paper: Missouri local governments were not prepared for the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy decisions can affect how damaging a downturn is and how difficult it is to recover. If county lawmakers had made different policy decisions, they may not have ended up needing federal dollars to stay afloat.

Relying less on sales taxes, which have a volatile revenue stream, would make the county’s total revenue stream more stable. (It should be noted that the county’s participation in the sales tax pool has already decreased some of the harmful effects of sales tax competition in the county). In addition, less misuse and abuse of tax subsidies would keep private developers from siphoning away taxpayer dollars. (More of this and less of this and this).

Of course, the COVID-19 pandemic did have undeniable effects on government finances. As predicted, revenues fell in 2020. St. Louis County’s sales tax revenue alone dropped by $27.2 million from fiscal year 2019 to fiscal year 2020. In addition, the county incurred new, pandemic-related costs. But county citizens are struggling too and “additional revenue sources” is code for tax increases. Page suggested that a property tax increase or implementing a use tax could be in the cards for St. Louis County. From a policy standpoint, a use tax is the preferred consideration, but it’s also worth keeping in mind that the county will receive more revenue from the gas tax increase. Why must a short-lived economic downturn force a tax increase on taxpayers?

I’m not here to judge how the county wants to use the stimulus money (but if I were, I would suggest the money be used in these ways). I’m here to point out that if the county had been more fiscally responsible prior to the economic downturn, we may have avoided this situation entirely. Policymakers should keep this in mind and prepare for inevitable downturns in the future.

If You Can’t Measure It, You Can’t Improve It

Some things are hard to face—the scale, your checking account balance—but ignoring them doesn’t make problems magically go away. The same can definitely said of education. Monitoring school performance and making the results available and easily understood by the public is critical. Because those in charge seem unwilling to do so, the Show-Me Institute has launched a website, MoSchoolRankings.org, on the performance of Missouri’s schools and districts.

The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) is preparing to launch the 6th version of the Missouri School Improvement Plan (MSIP 6). Less than half of one page of the 22-page document discusses academic achievement in English/Language Arts and math. Like the earlier versions, districts will be labeled as unaccredited, provisionally accredited, accredited, and accredited with distinction. Schools will continue to receive no label.

What does “accredited” even mean? And what does accredited mean if 99 percent of school districts in the state are currently labeled as accredited? What does it mean to a St. Louis parent that their child goes to school in an accredited district—St. Louis Public Schools—but fewer than 10 percent of the students at their child’s school can read or do math at grade level?

Before the pandemic hit, in the 2018–19 school year, 49 percent of Missouri students scored Proficient or higher in English/Language Arts and 42 percent did so in Math. What does Proficient mean? Are those numbers high or low?

DESE’s website has report cards for every school and district in the state. But they are difficult to find, difficult to understand, and come with no context. The website also has a Data Dashboard for districts, but not for schools. DESE clearly doesn’t have the appetite to compare schools to each other or to give schools grades.

The Show-Me Institute has been talking about the deficiencies in DESE’s data reporting for some time. We have written papers, produced podcasts, and blogged about the need for easy-to-understand information on the performance of each school in Missouri. Parents, legislators, and citizens need this information. Unfortunately, MSIP 6 will likely be more opaque than MSIP 5 and the school report cards have not improved.

The Missouri School Rankings website that we are launching provides school-level and district-level performance information. This information was used to rank all schools and districts in the state. We have also assigned grades across 10 academic indicators. The grades for each school or district were combined into a grade point average (GPA), which was also put into rank order.

Not everyone is going to love seeing these grades. Some will say that we’re kicking low-performing schools when they’re already down from COVID. Some will claim that it’s mean spirited. We believe that information is the key to improvement. We welcome any discussion of what a better report card format for Missouri schools might be. We do not, however, support keeping Missouri families in the dark any longer.

Community Improvement Districts Aren’t

The community improvement district (CID) that funds several programs in downtown St. Louis is having trouble. Big trouble. As in it may-not-continue-to-exist-type trouble. Many people who live and work in the area are not satisfied with how the CID has been operating, and that dissatisfaction is threatening its renewal.

The downtown St. Louis CID has to be renewed at various intervals, and renewal requires the signatures of the property owners within the district. This includes all property—condos, businesses, parking lots, etc. Because this CID actually serves an area where people live (which is one of the good things about it), renewal requires lots of signatures. COVID-related changes and restrictions have complicated this process. In addition, an organized group of downtown residents and property owners has been opposing its renewal.

The downtown CID collects money via special property taxes. If the CID does not get renewed soon, those taxes won’t be on the 2021 property tax bills sent in a few weeks to property owners. That could be the death of the CID right then and there.

What a special taxing district like this CID really forces one to admit is that the local government is failing. City businesses and residents pay property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, utility taxes, occupancy fees, business licenses, and more. Yet those taxes are not enough to keep the trash off of the streets and help maintain law and order (the two main uses of the CID funds, along with downtown “marketing”). So the business owners and residents decided to tax themselves more to address some of these issues. Clearly, many of them do not feel that those additional taxes ($3.6 million each year, to be precise) are paying off, and a termination date and renewal process gives a clear path for ending a CID, which isn’t often the case for many taxes.

The problems with these types of special taxing districts have been well documented around the state. While this CID does not share some of the most egregious characteristics of other special taxing districts, it is great to see people fighting back against government that is not serving their needs. That is what this country was founded on, whether we are talking about tea in Boston, or CIDs in the historic Village of Ballpark.

It should be noted that the leading proponents of getting rid of the current CID want to replace it with a new and differently organized CID, but that would require a separate and independent process with no guarantee of success. In any case, downtown property owners may soon see whether those extra taxes they were paying were really worth anything or not.

Policy Lunch: Missouri School Rankings Project (St. Louis)

Missouri schools are failing to teach the core subjects of reading and math, and the most recent test scores show that students are falling further behind. In response to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s (DESE) failure to perform one of its most basic functions, the Show-Me Institute, in conjunction with Show-Me Opportunity, launched The Missouri School Rankings Project and MoSchoolRankings.org.

On November 18, Susan Pendergrass, director of research and education policy, will present her findings from the Missouri School Rankings Project and give an overview of how to use the website.

Register

Sponsored by Show-Me Institute and Show-Me Opportunity

What’s Coming Is a Tragedy that Historians Will Only Wonder About

National Review Institute’s Douglas Murray joined The Tim Jones and Chris Arps Show on NewsTalkSTL to discuss the recent shift in American culture, his November 10 event in St. Louis, and more.

Event Information

You are invited to join the Show-Me Institute, Show-Me Opportunity, National Review Institute, and NewsTalkSTL on Wednesday, November 10 for a complimentary event with Douglas Murray. Murray will give an outsider’s perspective on the recent shifts in American culture, the culture wars, and the attack on free speech and education. Please RSVP to secure your seat.

Murray is a best-selling author, an award-winning political commentator, and a senior fellow at the National Review Institute. He has written books on neoconservatism, terrorism and national security, freedom of speech, and the rise of woke culture and identity politics. His upcoming book, The War on the West: How to Prevail in the Age of Unreason, explores why in recent history it has become acceptable to discuss the flaws and crimes of Western culture, but celebrating the West’s contributions is condemned as hate speech. 

The reception begins at 5:30 p.m. with hors d’oeuvres and a cash bar. The presentation begins at 6 p.m.

Register Here

More Ways to Listen

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on Sticher 

Listen on SoundCloud

What Should Washington University Do with All of That Money?

Should non-profits pay taxes? Well, as someone who works at a small non-profit and believes in low taxes, I am going to start off with a “No.” But I can admit the question is actually more complicated than that.

A student at Washington University recently opined in his school newspaper that the university should be paying payments-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOTs) to the cities around the school where it owns property: University City, Clayton, and the City of St. Louis. A complicated question is what to do when Wash U buys homes or apartment buildings within those cities to house students or visiting faculty, and then those properties are removed from the tax rolls because Wash U is a non-profit. From an article in the Post-Dispatch:

To house some of those people, it has purchased many off-campus single-family homes, duplexes and apartment buildings – 11 in Clayton, 53 in the city and 121 in University City.

It also owns several commercial properties – with one of the largest being its 1991 purchase of the old Clayton Famous-Barr for $17.5 million. All those purchases have an impact: The university’s not-for-profit status removes them from the property tax rolls.

The residents in these buildings need police and fire protection, roads, and other public services. When a property is purchased by a university and comes off the tax rolls but still has residents, the cities continue providing services but no longer receive the property taxes. That puts cities in a bind, especially University City and Clayton, which depend more heavily on property taxes than the City of St. Louis. The Wash U writer documents how many other universities pay PILOTS for local services to their cities, including the second-best university in Southwest Connecticut: Yale.

You know who else has written about this issue? Me. I think larger non-profit organizations, such as Wash U, SLU, many senior citizen homes owned by non-profits, and others could be asked to make partial payments of property taxes to cities. As for the City of St. Louis, I definitely think that should be part of a trade-off for eliminating the earnings tax.

Without ending the earnings tax, I don’t think non-profits should be asked to pay PILOTs to the city. (Non-profits are also exempt from the half-percent payroll tax that for-profit companies pay to the city.) Wash U and SLU doctors, administrators, nurses, etc. pay plenty to the City of St. Louis via the earnings tax. University City and Clayton have no such alternative (nor should they). I think partial PILOTs by larger non-profits are a reasonable way to help fund local services so that the tax burden is not unfairly falling on local residents for services used by the non-profits as well.

A Policy Scare Story: TIF

Ghosts and chainsaws can be scary, but is there anything scarier than the misuse of tax dollars? Okay, maybe that’s over the top. But there is something scary about governments giving away millions of public tax dollars to private developers—tax dollars that are supposed to fund schools, police, roads, and critical public services. So yes, tax-increment financing (TIF) should scare taxpayers.

TIF is an economic development incentive tool used to try and spur development. When a TIF project is approved, governments return a portion of a developer’s tax payment back to the developer to help fund the development. It’s a classic case of the government picking winners and losers by choosing which developers receive handouts. This practice is almost always a misuse and waste of taxpayer dollars. Independence, MO, had a particularly frightening experience with TIF.

TIF is often financed through debt bonds. Normally, the increment (the extra taxes generated by a development) is returned to the developer. When TIF is financed via debt bonds, that money is returned to the developer, but the developer then uses those funds to make bond payments. A TIF district in Independence anchored by a Bass Pro Shop was funded with bonds issued by the city. However, when the project failed to meet sales tax revenues projections, the developers couldn’t make the bond payments. Independence lawmakers decided to use $3.5 million from the general fund to cover the shortfall in the bond payment. The city wasn’t required to do this because the bonds weren’t guaranteed, but it did so to “ensure the city’s strong financial credit rating.”

Independence’s bad bet cost taxpayers. Paying the $3.5 million to cover the shortfall and protect the city’s credit rating may or may not have been the right move, but the point is that the decision could have been avoided altogether. Taking money from the general fund to bail out a development that already received tax dollars means even less funding for other critical city services. TIF cases such as these, and other taxing district failures, are policy scare stories. Cities such as Webster Groves that are currently considering large TIF projects need to consider the considerable risks with tax subsidies. Maybe it’s time for lawmakers to end this nightmare for good and stop using TIF to fund private developments.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging