As St. Charles County eyes sweeping property tax freeze, service providers fear the hit

UPDATE: St. Charles County voters reject sweeping tax freeze

An upcoming ballot measure on a broad “tax freeze” in St. Charles County could have a big impact on services for disabled children, and a major advocacy agency there is sounding the alarm—as much as legally possible.

St. Charles County is poised to vote on a major upheaval of its tax structure next month. If approved by voters, Proposition RT would allow all residents of St. Charles County to freeze property taxes at their current rate, guarding them from subsequent increases as property values rise. A previous freeze was only available to seniors age 62 and older.

After a state law passed authorizing tax freezes for seniors in 2023, counties across the state have adopted those programs to varying degrees. Already, in its first year, St. Louis County lost out on more than $30 million by freezing taxes for seniors with no means testing to ensure only those on fixed incomes benefit. That’s caused alarm among school districts and other entities that rely on property taxes, like fire districts.

Prop RT would be an escalation of the form. If voters say yes on April 7, anyone in St. Charles County could apply to freeze their taxes, potentially leading to decades of homeownership in appreciating neighborhoods even as tax bills stay frozen in amber.

The fact St. Charles County is even allowed to consider such a wide-ranging freeze is thanks to a state law now subject to more than one court challenge. In the same bill giving major subsidies to keep the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals in Missouri, legislators also approved a series of selective tax relief votes. St. Charles County was among a few Missouri counties permitted to vote on a total freeze. Reportedly, some of the larger counties in the state asked not to be included in the bill, including St. Louis city and county.

Earlier this month, St. Charles County collector of revenue Michelle McBride said county seniors have already saved $5 million from the senior tax freeze. Most of that lost revenue will come at the expense of schools. Proposition RT would mean an additional $15 million in annual savings, she added.

Among the few voices that have spoken up in express favor of the measure, at least at some point, are County Executive Steve Ehlmann and St. Charles County Republican Central Committee chair Bob Eno. Eno told KSDK that rising tax and insurance burdens necessitated some relief. Through a spokesman, Ehlmann declined an interview with SLM, saying “the entities that would be affected by Prop RT should be the focus, not St. Charles County, which only receives a small amount of property tax for two restricted funds.” Ehlmann has highlighted at various points both sides of the case for the measure. 

Leaders of some districts have rallied opposition, to varying degrees. Francis Howell School Board president Steven Blair urged voters to veto the measure, writing on Facebook, “The fight against Prop RT is both bipartisan and nonpartisan,” referencing opposition by the libertarian think tank the Show Me Institute. The Wentzville School district said the proposition “has the potential to significantly impact a major source of revenue for school districts,” adding that it gets 61 percent of its revenue from property taxes. The Fort Zumwalt School District has also published materials raising concern about the lack of a replacement revenue stream.

The passage of Prop RT could also hurt the Developmental Disabilities Resource Board of St. Charles County, or DDRB, which projects a $4 million reduction from projected revenues over the next five years in funding if Prop RT passes.

The DDRB reported getting $15.4 million in property tax revenue for fiscal year 2025. It says 93 percent of the property tax money it’s gotten over the past five years has gone directly to service providers. “Proposition RT will essentially serve to flatten our revenue,” says executive director Denise Cross. “So, as costs to do business increase for us and, more importantly, for the agencies that we provide funding to, the DDRB would not be able to keep up.” 

Like school boards, the DDRB can’t exactly come out and tell voters not to vote for Prop RT. It’s a government body authorized by St. Charles County voters in the mid-1970s, and state law prohibits government entities from using tax dollars to take a stance on ballot measures or political causes. The DDRB says, though, “we are, however, allowed—and often asked—to explain how public policy proposals could affect the services we provide and the people we support.”

Through grants, the DDRB supports more than 30 organizations in St. Charles County that provide services to people with disabilities, and all of that money comes from property taxes. It also handles some case management services for teens and adults through Medicaid.

One of the organizations the DDRB supports is the nonprofit United Services for Children. It provides early intervention services for children ages 3 or younger, and it operates a pediatric outpatient with aqua therapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy programming for children. It serves around 400 children a year.

Julie Turner, United Services for Children’s CEO, says Prop RT’s passage wouldn’t mean immediate drastic cuts to their work or services. Instead, she says, “It basically arrests [funding] at a certain level, which makes it incredibly difficult for us to project our ability to increase services.” That’s especially damaging as they project the cost of service delivery per child to rise.

Turner is skeptical that people will voluntarily make up the difference. She says, “The argument could be made, ‘Well, what about private donations?’ It’s short sighted to think that the communities will just rise up and give away a lot of money to support causes, because that just isn’t practical.” 

Yet the need for services from agencies the DDRB supports is growing. “You also have to factor in the fact that the rates at which children are being diagnosed earlier with delays and disabilities is rising,” she says. “There’s this window of opportunity for us to be able to really help support a young person, and then that window closes, so we can’t afford to wait.”

Paige Jacquin, who now works with United Services for Children, first came into contact with the organization following a referral to help her daughter with speech delays and low muscle tone. 

“The process was super easy, everybody’s amazing at United Services,” she says. “I really don’t know what I would have done without them.”

She’s now nervous about the impact of lost funding.  “It’s so crucial for, not just my daughter but for so many students who need that early intervention, to get in these programs,” she says. “Because, without it, they’re going to be going into school without any assistance. While she was in United Services, they got her registered and got her on a talking device, and I wouldn’t have known to do that on my own. They had us set up with an IEP. 

“There’s so many things that I wouldn’t have known how to do on my own, and she wouldn’t be ready for school without them.”

Why it matters: Experts say well-funded schools are major engines for economic mobility for poorer and working people, but education is not a one-size-fits-all solution. For children with disabilities, early intervention is crucial to developing, and sometimes prevents the need for more services down the road, the Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center says.

By keeping property tax revenue frozen at current levels, even as costs increase for services and staff, freezes deprive schools and other institutions of growing revenue. That’s what played out in California following the 1978 passage of a ballot initiative that capped the year-to-year growth of property tax values for California homeowners of all ages. Even with increased state funding to help make up the difference, per-student funding in California dropped from fifth in the country to 47th, the California School Boards Association wrote in 2022. It seems unlikely that Missouri schools would see a similar state infusion; the main tax policy being contemplated in Jefferson City involves eliminating the state’s income tax and potentially using a sales tax to make up the difference.

What’s next: St. Charles County voters will decide on Prop RT on April 7. But even if it passes, a legal challenge is underway, the Missouri Independent reports, on the basis that it arbitrarily treats some counties differently from others.

UPDATE: St. Charles County voters reject sweeping tax freeze