Jill Carter: Addressing the State Tax Commission problem

(From Sen. Jill Carter, R-Granby)

The pressure started with the State Tax Commission. County assessors like Newton County Assessor Cheryle Perkins, resisted mandated hikes from the State Tax Commission, and they responded back with threats and penalties.

Senators like me petitioned the Governor to expand the call to address the property tax issue during the special session he called last fall. He agreed to make it part of a bigger conversation about the KC Chiefs being able to use a portion of their sales to refurbish the stadium owned by Jackson County.

Late one evening during special session, each senator was called and asked which of the three they wanted for their district: A property tax freeze, cap, or leave property taxes alone.

Door #1: Allow the State Tax Commission to continue.

Door #2: A freeze. The Newton County Assessor had been the tip of the spear on pushback against the State Tax Commission.

There will not be time to amend or change on the floor.

I could not get assurance that there was language to allow bonds to go to a vote.

That meant potentially no new growth for my senate district's future.Local property taxes fund community essentials — schools, roads, libraries, fire protection, and developmental disability services. Without assurance of a bonding capacity, I had the potential to decimate our community's future.

At 10:30 p.m., I stated making calls. Local commissioners and others including some of our House Reps-where we debated what the best decision would be. Not being able to read the language was a major concern for everyone. No future growth. No new library. No fire district. That was a big gamble.

Door #3: We all agreed a cap would build a wall of protection against the State Tax Commission and buy us time for meaningful reform.

SB 3 dropped at 3 a.m., with no time to amend or discuss it.

• 22 counties received the full freeze, chosen by a handful of senators.

• 75 counties received the 5% cap. Chosen by a majority of Republicans, for the same reason I did.

• Roughly 17 counties (mostly Democratic areas) chose to do nothing.

SB 3 is being challenged in court. The intention was to put the Comission on notice and bring some relief, but rarely does good policy happen in the late hours with no time to read language.

Right after special session, an interim committee was established to work on a broad sweeping solution to address fundamental deficits in SB 3 and the State Tax Commission. We worked hard to come up with meaningful reform. A Bill advanced through both chambers but died the last day in House Fiscal.
The session had lots of successes. But this one failure, though it passed the Senate, weighs heavily on me.

I'm grateful to have brought some relief, but Missourians deserve predictability; local governments need stability. Getting both right is the real test of true policy reform.
Given the situation, which door would you have chosen?