I will read the info later, but I can say that this is in general something I was trying to warn about with Blunt family and Monsanto. I ran against Eric Schmitt in the elections for US senate in 2022 as a write-in candidate hoping to bring light to this info a long time ago, and Schmitt’s history within our State politics as a state senator. I would guess that because of Schmitt’s history with China, and his participation in SB 9 in 2011 as a state senator, that he is also deeply connected in some bad crap for Missouri (and lying comparatively low key now in office because of it). Notice how he was in the headlines all year long leading up to elections but now is pretty low key with following through with some of the issues promised before? A lot of our entrenched politicians have connections with nefarious bodies and need to be investigated thoroughly.
Regarding SB 756, I wanted to thank the legislature for letting each County determine how to promulgate their own rules, include what political subdivisions will or will not be included in determining the credit or not have a credit at all. This is in theory the exact kind of governance I as a conservative want. Allowing the counties to implement the rules and scope of the credits is exactly what I want to see. Since each County is different, it follows that each County will have different rules, procedures and scope and expecting uniformity is saying that as conservatives we prefer top-down government.
The counties are arguing that this is too much work for us or even worse we have elected local political leaders, the lawyers and County staffs that are too inept or overworked to figure out how to implement this law. Many County Clerks and Counties are doing all they can to delay, obfuscate, and basically not put together a program. It is ridiculous. If a county does not want the seniors to get the credits, man up and vote it down. They have all they need to implement or not implement this law. Good luck to the political subdivision that sues. Wait until they ask for another Bond Issue and watch the seniors rise and vote it down. Go ahead and sue and watch what that gets you as every board member of that political subdivision who votes to approve the suit gets thrown off the board for going against the seniors, in the next election.
In 3 (2) this paragraph does NOT expand the authority of the Assessor or their procedures in any way. If an eligible taxpayer improves their property and the Assessor charges more in taxes for that improvement, the county must INCREASE the credit also going back to the original eligibility rate. No boogie man from the Assessor’s office will now be able to kick your door down and assess your improvements. If it is an addition or separate structure and they can see it from the outside, you will be assessed exactly how it would have been assessed before this law went into effect.
The guard rail this sets up is to make sure the Counties do not increase taxes on improvements and not give the appropriate credits to the eligible taxpayer. Would you like it not to be there and then if a senior improves, they are charged the full rate? Is that what you are asking for?
This law is not intended to be implemented in every county the same. Each County must make their own rules and regulations, other than the clear guard rails set in the act. It’s about time our elected County officials have to figure this out for themselves in my opinion and not have BIG BROTHER tell them what to do.
I was amazed that you ladies wanted this State Law enforced uniformly in every County. I realize that is how most State Laws are implemented. However, we finally have a law asking the Counties to structure and implement it and we cry “NO, WE NEED BIG GOVERNEMENT”. AMAZING!
As always, I really appreciate you ladies keeping us all informed.
I wonder if it would be possible to know about and dissect these bills before they are brought to the floor for a vote. That way, maybe the public would be able to express disapproval via email, phone calls and letters to our representatives, and apparently even educate them on what they are voting on since they do not seem to read anything, before they are voted into law. Maybe shining a bright spotlight before the vote would be enough to stop passage of these bad bills.
I will read the info later, but I can say that this is in general something I was trying to warn about with Blunt family and Monsanto. I ran against Eric Schmitt in the elections for US senate in 2022 as a write-in candidate hoping to bring light to this info a long time ago, and Schmitt’s history within our State politics as a state senator. I would guess that because of Schmitt’s history with China, and his participation in SB 9 in 2011 as a state senator, that he is also deeply connected in some bad crap for Missouri (and lying comparatively low key now in office because of it). Notice how he was in the headlines all year long leading up to elections but now is pretty low key with following through with some of the issues promised before? A lot of our entrenched politicians have connections with nefarious bodies and need to be investigated thoroughly.
Regarding SB 756, I wanted to thank the legislature for letting each County determine how to promulgate their own rules, include what political subdivisions will or will not be included in determining the credit or not have a credit at all. This is in theory the exact kind of governance I as a conservative want. Allowing the counties to implement the rules and scope of the credits is exactly what I want to see. Since each County is different, it follows that each County will have different rules, procedures and scope and expecting uniformity is saying that as conservatives we prefer top-down government.
The counties are arguing that this is too much work for us or even worse we have elected local political leaders, the lawyers and County staffs that are too inept or overworked to figure out how to implement this law. Many County Clerks and Counties are doing all they can to delay, obfuscate, and basically not put together a program. It is ridiculous. If a county does not want the seniors to get the credits, man up and vote it down. They have all they need to implement or not implement this law. Good luck to the political subdivision that sues. Wait until they ask for another Bond Issue and watch the seniors rise and vote it down. Go ahead and sue and watch what that gets you as every board member of that political subdivision who votes to approve the suit gets thrown off the board for going against the seniors, in the next election.
In 3 (2) this paragraph does NOT expand the authority of the Assessor or their procedures in any way. If an eligible taxpayer improves their property and the Assessor charges more in taxes for that improvement, the county must INCREASE the credit also going back to the original eligibility rate. No boogie man from the Assessor’s office will now be able to kick your door down and assess your improvements. If it is an addition or separate structure and they can see it from the outside, you will be assessed exactly how it would have been assessed before this law went into effect.
The guard rail this sets up is to make sure the Counties do not increase taxes on improvements and not give the appropriate credits to the eligible taxpayer. Would you like it not to be there and then if a senior improves, they are charged the full rate? Is that what you are asking for?
This law is not intended to be implemented in every county the same. Each County must make their own rules and regulations, other than the clear guard rails set in the act. It’s about time our elected County officials have to figure this out for themselves in my opinion and not have BIG BROTHER tell them what to do.
I was amazed that you ladies wanted this State Law enforced uniformly in every County. I realize that is how most State Laws are implemented. However, we finally have a law asking the Counties to structure and implement it and we cry “NO, WE NEED BIG GOVERNEMENT”. AMAZING!
As always, I really appreciate you ladies keeping us all informed.
I wonder if it would be possible to know about and dissect these bills before they are brought to the floor for a vote. That way, maybe the public would be able to express disapproval via email, phone calls and letters to our representatives, and apparently even educate them on what they are voting on since they do not seem to read anything, before they are voted into law. Maybe shining a bright spotlight before the vote would be enough to stop passage of these bad bills.