Jackson County Assessment Facts, Part Four

Posted on by David Stokes

Ongoing sagas, for movies at least, often get worse over time. Look at the Star Wars series. Three of the greatest films ever, followed by a depressing array of follow-ups ranging from terrible to maybe passable. Same with the Police Academy “comedies.”

Like these other ongoing sagas, Jackson County’s assessment practices have been getting worse, though they were never great to being with. As bad as the situation was in 2019 and earlier, in 2023 it hit bottom.

The Missouri State Tax Commission (STC) has taken the unprecedented step of ordering Jackson County to essentially ditch the 2023 reassessment and move every change in assessed valuation (AV) that was over a 15 percent increase down to 15 percent. The total AV increase for Jackson County was almost 25 percent, which is enormous. Obviously, if the total increase was 25 percent, a substantial number of individual properties had to go up more than that 15 percent number. (The 15 percent level is key because that is where additional taxpayer notification laws come into play.)

This change lowers the assessed valuation for tens of thousands of properties and involves hundreds of millions in AV. According to Jackson County, the total amount of tax revenue disputed here for various local governments is $117 million. (The AV would be significantly higher than the tax revenues.)

Jackson County has been underassessed for decades. Jackson County has been attempting to correct that in recent years (under direction from the STC), and that is a good thing. More accurate assessments don’t have to lead to higher taxes, except in the Kansas City 33 school district, but’s that another issue. However, Jackson County officials seem to think that their attempts to correct prior errors somehow exempt them from following the current laws. As a county official admits in the just-filed lawsuit against the STC order :

This filing is not just about the legalities—it’s about safeguarding the resources that support our schools, public safety and community programs. [emphasis mine]

Fortunately for taxpayers, good intent does not exempt you from following the laws in reassessment. As the STC order states, the Jackson County assessors made all sorts of mistakes in 2023:

9. The Commission finds and determines that in conducting its biennial reassessment for 2023, Jackson County assessing officials failed to give proper notice to property owners and failed to perform physical inspections as required by Section 137.115 RSMo. where the assessed valuation of residential real property increased by more than fifteen percent since the last assessment, resulting in mistaken or erroneous assessments and taxes that were mistakenly or erroneously levied or paid in 2023 . . .

The STC order goes into more detail on a number of failures by the assessor’s office.

The order may well impose a major burden on taxing agencies in Jackson County that must now redo their valuations and property tax rates. But just because it’s a major burden doesn’t mean taxpayers should have to accept having their rights violated.

I hope the Jackson County lawsuit fails and the STC order is upheld. The county assessor should not be allowed to ignore the very clear rules—rules that every other county assessor had managed to follow in recent years—that protect the rights of property owners. This may be a mess in Jackson County, but it is a mess of the county’s own creation.

Politicizing Charity Is Dangerous

Posted on by David Stokes

This November, Platte County voters will decide on whether to implement a quarter-cent sales tax in the county to support a new community children’s services fund. The tax was placed on a ballot last week by a judge after the election board, for reasons that are unclear, hesitated to put the item on the ballot.

Everyone is for this, right? I mean, who can be against supporting kids?

I’m all for supporting kids. I have three of them. What I don’t support is abusing the political process to turn voluntary charitable giving into mandated taxation and taking the wonderful aims of philanthropy and politicizing them.

The two charitable agencies that gathered these petition signatures and are supporting this tax do great work for kids. Those two agencies, Synergy Services and Beacon Mental Health, are also going to benefit from this tax, and will almost certainly seek grants from it. (Both agencies have received funding from the Jackson or Clay county children’s services funds.) There is nothing wrong with that, but let’s not pretend that these charities have no self-interest in this process.

The county board that will be created to distribute the funds to the various non-profits will likely have very little oversight, and that has been a real issue on boards like this before, especially in Lafayette County. The last thing Platte County—or any county—needs is another minor taxing body with limited oversight.

While I am not a doctor or counselor, I also think it is worth questioning the new assumption that more mental-health therapy is always good. Undoubtedly, many kids need mental-health services and some kids in Platte County would benefit from these expanded programs. But Abigail Shrier’s bestselling book, Bad Therapy, details some of the pitfalls of this approach. From a Commentary review of the book:

“With unprecedented help from mental health experts, we have raised the loneliest, most anxious, depressed, pessimistic, helpless, and fearful generation on record,” Shrier writes. Moreover, “as treatments for anxiety and depression have become more sophisticated and more readily available, adolescent anxiety and depression have ballooned.”

This tax vote may seem like an easy “yes” vote in Platte County. I hope the voters think long and hard about it first.

Missouri Ranked as Second Most Dangerous State to Drive in

Posted on by Avery Frank

When I first moved to the City of St. Louis, I became instantly aware of the danger of driving in the city. Frankly, I have seen some maneuvers on the road that you would not even believe—some of them are just close calls, but too many turn into fatal crashes. Recently, Forbes Advisor released a ranking of the 50 riskiest states to drive in. Missouri received the silver medal, coming in as the second- riskiest state to drive in. My anecdotes are supported in the data. There have been improvements, but the city needs stronger enforcement in the courts and on the streets.

Forbes’s data were compiled from an array of federal organizations, including the FBI. The rankings are based on fatal accident rates, DUI arrests, road rage incidents, car thefts, risk of wildlife collision, condition of roads, and more.

Breaking the rankings down further, Missouri has the:

  • 5th highest rate of car thefts
  • 6th highest percentage of drivers who experienced a road rage incident
  • 10th highest number of drunk drivers involved fatal car crashes
  • 10th highest wildlife collision risk
  • 12th highest number of people killed in fatal car accidents

The City of St. Louis likely contributes to the overall high riskiness measured in Forbes’s metric. Last year, I wrote a post during the height of mass Hyundai and Kia thefts, when thefts of those two brands soared from 273 to 3,958 in one year. During a two-week period in that August, there were 462 cars stolen or attempted to be stolen in the City of St. Louis, yet shockingly, only 1 person was charged in city courts for a crime related to auto theft over that same time period.

I’ve lived in the city for two years now, and I still haven’t seen someone in the city get pulled over for driving into oncoming traffic or running red lights. The data confirm this observation, as vehicle stops, citations, and arrests in the city have all greatly decreased.

Since 1995, the City of St. Louis has lost 22% of its residents and 40% of its police force. Police staffing shortages are real in the city. In 2024, the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department is budgeted to have 1,220 officers on staff, but currently only has 894.

For a city that is shrinking, the reputation and reality of having unsafe roads is a huge problem. It is imperative for St. Louis and Missouri at-large that we make a U-turn and make our roads safer.

STL Q Down the Loo

Posted on by Patrick Tuohey

One of my family’s favorite Kansas City events is the Ethnic Enrichment Festival. Representatives of so many different cultures and ethnicities set up tables and tents and sell the food and drink of their countries to the general public. Its value is not just the cultural presentations on hand, but the mixing of attendees in Swope Park. This coming weekend I’ll be volunteering at the Kansas City Irish Fest, another event hosted in the city, albeit focusing more on one particular ethnicity. Slainte!

But regardless of what is being celebrated, events like these point to a vibrant city.

Sadly, this may not be the case on the other side of the state in St. Louis.

On July 25, St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones was on hand to help hype the “Q in the Lou” barbecue festival, scheduled to be held on the grounds of the Gateway Arch in early September. Jason Hall, CEO of Greater St. Louis, a non-profit dedicated to revitalizing the city, was triumphal in saying that bringing this “signature national festival back to downtown St Louis is showing how this community is answering that call taking action and making us stronger.”

Apparently not.

Q in the Lou has been canceled. According the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Sean Hadley, one of the organizers of the event, confirmed the cancellation Monday afternoon, citing trouble garnering corporate sponsorship and VIP ticket sales — and public safety concerns disputed by the mayor’s office.

“We’re seeing a lack of support,” Hadley said. “It’s not there.”

This truly is a shame. St. Louis has a real problem with public safety and the public perception. Subsidized events and buildings won’t change that. It can only be solved by the slow and difficult work of public policy, including increasing public safety, keeping the city clean and orderly, maintaining infrastructure, and doing all of this in a cost-efficient manner.

There is no shortcut, no matter how good the ribs are.

New Schools, Old Problems: The KCPS Bond Proposal with Patrick Tuohey

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

Susan Pendergrass speaks with Patrick Tuohey, senior fellow at the Show-Me Institute, about the Kansas City 33 School District’s recent proposal to issue $424 million in bonds for building improvements. Despite a significant decline in enrollment and a previous failed bond referendum, KCPS is asking taxpayers to fund this initiative through increased property taxes. They discuss whether new buildings can truly address the district’s deeper issues, such as poor academic performance and declining enrollment, if the funds could be better spent elsewhere, and more.

Listen on Spotify

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

More Districts to Try New Standardized Testing System

Posted on by Avery Frank

This school year, six St. Louis-area school districts will begin using a new adaptive testing system to assess student performance in key subjects. Unlike the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP), which is administered at the end of the year, this new testing system will be administered several times throughout the year. In the St. Louis metropolitan area, Kirkwood, Jennings, Ferguson-Florissant, Hazelwood, Ladue, and Maplewood-Richmond Heights are now joining Affton, Lindbergh, Mehlville, Parkway, Pattonville, Ritenour, and Confluence Academies who, as part of the “Demonstration Project,” implemented this system last year.

Last year, 20 districts statewide implemented this new system as part of the Demonstration Project. Public data on this initiative will be released soon on September 30. These districts are primarily seeking exemptions because administrators in those districts do not feel the MAP is an adequate tool to improve student performance. The test is administered to students at the end of the year, which means districts do not receive test results back until the fall of the following year.

The system adopted by these district tests students  three times per year in English/language arts and math. Missouri could also consider pairing this model with a teacher rating system (like Tennessee’s) to gauge how effective a teacher’s class and curriculum are.

The fact that many districts believe that they could develop better testing than DESE speaks volumes. The MAP needs to be timelier, and it needs to be more informative for students, parents, and teachers. My colleague, James Shuls, lamented the lack of detail in a 2018 blog post.

Even with the shortcomings of the MAP test, Missouri ought to have a uniform statewide test that allows researchers, district officials, and policymakers to learn about different education strategies and trends. If a district implements a new strategy for teaching algebra, and it sees great improvement on the MAP, another district could mimic its practices.

There will be more clarity when statistics for the Demonstration Project are released in a month. If the results are encouraging, fully transitioning to this new testing system statewide might be worth considering.

Addressing Crime in Our Cities with Charles Fain Lehman

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

Susan Pendergrass speaks with Charles Fain Lehman, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, about his recent report titled Doing Less with Less: Crime and Punishment in Washington, DC. They explore the factors contributing to the rise in violent crime and public disorder, the impact of reduced law enforcement capacity, the broader implications for public safety, potential reforms to improve the criminal justice system, strategies for better resource allocation, and more.

Listen on Spotify

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

Bullying and Public School Funding

Posted on by James V. Shuls

I recently came upon a news story that claimed, “Education researchers say Missouri could do more to prevent bullying.” The story featured a bullying prevention expert from the University of Missouri. I am not familiar with the researcher’s work, but the news report provided several examples of how the state could do more. One of those recommendations was more funding to implement bullying prevention policies. While well-meaning, this is the wrong way to go about education funding.

Dedicated funding for specific purposes creates an incentive for inefficient spending. We can think of a multitude of programs and pet projects for which policymakers might want to dedicate funds, but doing so creates restricted pots of funds that often get spent on unneeded items. For example, if funds are dedicated to technology, a school district may continually spend those funds to purchase gadgets and upgraded devices that are not really needed. Similarly, if funds are dedicated to a bullying prevention program schools will have to spend those funds on those programs. For some schools, this could be dollars well spent. In other places, this might mean hiring unneeded staff or purchasing useless curriculum.

The problem with dedicated funding for these kinds of programs is that the needs for all schools are not the same. Earmarking funds for a program will lead to useful programs in some districts and pointless spending in others.

A better policy is to provide a clear, transparent funding system that properly incentivizes school leaders to make wise decisions with their dollars. School leaders need more discretion over their spending, not less. They need the ability to shift more dollars toward curriculum when resources are needed to support instruction, or to spend more on after-school tutoring when remediation is required. Instead of telling districts how they have to spend their money, we could just let bullied students choose a school where they feel safe, like Florida has.

We can all agree that we want to see less bullying in schools, but we also want to see our tax dollars used wisely and effectively. Carving out dedicated funds for specific purposes is not the way to accomplish those goals.

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