Jackson County property assessments

I think I see a pattern emerging. Tax revenue is down, because taxes are down, because people are spending less, because they have less to spend, because they are earning less, because — well, I don’t know. Could it be that the economy isn’t doing well?

I understand the Jackson County school districts’ consternation that falling real estate prices lead to lower tax bills, leading to lower school district revenues. Could it be that Charley Lunchbucket’s reduced work hours or job loss unfavorably affects their bottom line?

I also notice the propensity to talk about laying off teachers and staff as a means of reducing costs. What I have not heard, however, is any school district superintendent, associate superintendent or member of the alleged leadership volunteering to forgo any part of their salaries. That’s a subject The Star should explore. What financial pain are the top levels in the food chain enduring? Show me how they’re hurting, and I’ll be more sympathetic.

Paul Rodriguez
Kansas City

It’s outrageous the Jackson County school districts think strapped property owners have printing presses in the basement and can print out all the money the districts need. Property owners are economizing, so why are the school districts immune? Our homes and property are more important than the schools. We can’t live in the schools.

Years ago, when we voted gambling into Missouri, it was with the promise these revenues would be earmarked for the school districts and not the general fund and would greatly reduce the property tax burden. Maybe this empty promise could be fulfilled and the districts could cut expenses right along with the rest of the folks.

Wade Williams 
Kansas City

I have been following the dispute between the school districts and the Jackson County assessor. Nobody seems to be putting the blame where it belongs, namely on the elephant in the room better known as the Hancock Amendment.

As a retired fire chief for a small volunteer fire district in Cass County, I was responsible for several years in preparing the annual budget for the fire district. As assessed valuations went up, the tax levy had to be rolled back to ensure that a tax entity would not collect any more than it collected prior to the reassessment. We were allowed the additional tax increase that came with new construction. This was all due to the Hancock Amendment. There was, however, no provision for what is happening today: a decrease in assessed valuations.

Shouldn’t tax entities be allowed to “roll up” their tax levies in the same way they have rolled them back all these years? It would appear to me that the state legislature and Gov. Nixon need to address and fix the problem.

David L. Ullery
Freeman, Mo.

Comments

[whispering_to_kc]

Barney Frank "gay slur" coming here in 1, 2, 3 ...

[JoCo]

If Barn ignored warnings from the 2 FMs, then the crisis had already reared its ugly head. It probably took many, many brokerages and bankers to bring it to that level, didn't it? And, as we know from some highly visibile local cases, it wasn't hard to find knowing, as well as unsuspicious, buyers.

Didn't WE dedicate 3/4 of a trillion to that relief? How's that going with your R.E. appraisal and for people who had to walk away from equity?

[JoCo]

http://bitsandpieces.us/2009/08/28/real-estate-downfall/#comments

I dunno if this is clickable, but it ACTUALLY does incriminate some of the real estate pros

[Kee]

Not hardly they did not Chair the House Banking committee and ignore all warnings the Fannie and Freddie were going south.

[JoCo]

I'm sorry, Kee. Me too. But aren't the "pros" as responsible for this as a single Democratic congressman?

[Kee]

Mr. Ullery I got a whopping roll back of less than a hundred bucks. But he pros say my home value dropped after the Barney Frank mortgage crash by some 20%. I don't have much sympathy for your whine about the Hancock amend.