Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

Missouri Amendment 1, Property Tax Exemption for Childcare Establishments Measure (August 2024)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Missouri Amendment 1
Flag of Missouri.png
Election date
August 6, 2024
Topic
Taxes
Status
Defeatedd Defeated
Type
Constitutional amendment
Origin
State legislature

Missouri Amendment 1, the Property Exemption Tax for Childcare Establishments Measure, was on the ballot in Missouri as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on August 6, 2024.[1] The measure was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported allowing childcare establishments to be exempt from property tax.

A "no" vote opposed allowing childcare establishments to be exempt from property tax.

Election results

Missouri Amendment 1

Result Votes Percentage
Yes 491,161 45.28%

Defeated No

593,465 54.72%
Results are officially certified.
Source

Overview

What would this amendment have done regarding childcare establishments?

See also: Text of measure

This amendment would have exempted childcare establishments from property taxation, as well as other properties used primarily for the care of children outside of their homes. If a portion of the property of an individual or organization was used for childcare, the amendment would have provided for the authorization of an assessing authority to exempt a portion of the property that was used for childcare.[1]

How did this measure get on the ballot?

See also: Path to the ballot

To amend the Missouri Constitution, a constitutional amendment must be placed on the ballot for voters to approve by a simple majority. Constitutional amendments can be referred by the state legislature, or placed on the ballot through a successful citizen initiative campaign. For the state legislature to refer a constitutional amendment on the ballot in Missouri, a simple majority is required in both the Missouri House of Representatives and the Missouri State Senate.

The amendment was introduced to the 2023-2024 legislative session in the state legislature. On March 23, 2023, the Senate voted 33-0 to pass the amendment. On May 12, 2023, the House voted 91-27 to pass the amendment. Seventy Republicans and 21 Democrats voted for the amendment, while 25 Republicans and two Democrats voted against the amendment.[2]

What other property tax exemption measures have appeared on statewide ballots?

See also: Statewide property tax exemptions on the ballot

From 2010 to 2022, a total of 62 statewide property tax exemption measures were on the ballot in the United States. Among these measures, 48 (77.4%) were approved, while 14 (22.5%) were defeated. The year with the highest number of statewide measures related to property tax exemptions was 2012, with a total of 12 measures. In 2020, no statewide measures pertaining to property tax exemptions were presented to the voters.

On November 7, 2023, Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment that allowed counties or municipalities to authorize a property tax exemption from ad valorem taxation on all or part of the appraised value of real property used to operate childcare facilities.[3]

Text of measure

Ballot title

The official ballot title was as follows:[4]

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to allow places where individuals, corporations, organizations, and associations provide childcare outside of the child's home to be exempt from property tax? This is intended to make childcare more available, which would support the well-being of children, families, the workforce, and society as a whole.

State governmental entities estimate the state's Blind Pension Fund could have annual lost revenue of up to $400,000. Local governments expect an unknown fiscal impact.[5]

Ballot summary

The official ballot summary was as follows:

A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to grant the General Assembly statutory authority to exempt all property, real and personal, used primarily for the care of a child outside of his or her home by general law. An assessing authority may be authorized by general law to exempt from the assessment, levy, and collection of taxes such portion of the property of such individual, corporation, organization, or association that is used primarily for such childcare.

A "no" vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and childcare facilities will continue to be assessed, levied, and pay taxes.

If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes. [5]

Constitutional changes

See also: Missouri Constitution

The ballot measure would have amended Article X, Section 6 of the Missouri Constitution. The following underlined text would have been added and struck-through text would have been deleted:[1]

Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.

Section 6 Property exempt from taxation

1. All property, real and personal, of the state, counties and other political subdivisions, and nonprofit cemeteries, and all real property used as a homestead as defined by law of any citizen of this state who is a former prisoner of war, as defined by law, and who has a total service-connected disability, shall be exempt from taxation; all personal property held as industrial inventories, including raw materials, work in progress and finished work on hand, by manufacturers and refiners, and all personal property held as goods, wares, merchandise, stock in trade or inventory for resale by distributors, wholesalers, or retail merchants or establishments shall be exempt from taxation; and all property, real and personal, not held for private or corporate profit and used exclusively for religious worship, for schools and colleges, for purposes purely charitable, for agricultural and horticultural societies, or for veterans' organizations may be exempted from taxation by general law. In addition to the above, household goods, furniture, wearing apparel and articles of personal use and adornment owned and used by a person in his home or dwelling place may be exempt from taxation by general law but any such law may provide for approximate restitution to the respective political subdivisions of revenues lost by reason of the exemption. All laws exempting from taxation property other than the property enumerated in this article, shall be void. The provisions of this section exempting certain personal property of manufacturers, refiners, distributors, wholesalers, and retail merchants and establishments from taxation shall become effective, unless otherwise provided by law, in each county on January 1 of the year in which that county completes its first general reassessment as defined by law.

2. All revenues lost because of the exemption of certain personal property of manufacturers, refiners, distributors, wholesalers, and retail merchants and establishments shall be replaced to each taxing authority within a county from a countywide tax hereby imposed on all property in subclass 3 of class 1 in each county. For the year in which the exemption becomes effective, the county clerk shall calculate the total revenue lost by all taxing authorities in the county and extend upon all property in subclass 3 of class 1 within the county, a tax at the rate necessary to produce that amount. The rate of tax levied in each county according to this subsection shall not be increased above the rate first imposed and will stand levied at that rate unless later reduced according to the provisions of subsection 3. The county collector shall disburse the proceeds according to the revenue lost by each taxing authority because of the exemption of such property in that county. Restitution of the revenues lost by any taxing district contained in more than one county shall be from the several counties according to the revenue lost because of the exemption of property in each county. Each year after the first year the replacement tax is imposed, the amount distributed to each taxing authority in a county shall be increased or decreased by an amount equal to the amount resulting from the change in that district's total assessed value of property in subclass 3 of class 1 at the countywide replacement tax rate. In order to implement the provisions of this subsection, the limits set in section 11(b) of this article may be exceeded, without voter approval, if necessary to allow each county listed in section 11(b) to comply with this subsection.

3. Any increase in the tax rate imposed pursuant to subsection 2 of this section shall be decreased if such decrease is approved by a majority of the voters of the county voting on such decrease. A decrease in the increased tax rate imposed under subsection 2 of this section may be submitted to the voters of a county by the governing body thereof upon its own order, ordinance, or resolution and shall be submitted upon the petition of at least eight percent of the qualified voters who voted in the immediately preceding gubernatorial election.

4. As used in this section, the terms "revenues lost" and "lost revenues" shall mean that revenue which each taxing authority received from the imposition of a tangible personal property tax on all personal property held as industrial inventories, including raw materials, work in progress and finished work on hand, by manufacturers and refiners, and all personal property held as goods, wares, merchandise, stock in trade or inventory for resale by distributors, wholesalers, or retail merchants or establishments in the last full tax year immediately preceding the effective date of the exemption from taxation granted for such property under subsection 1 of this section, and which was no longer received after such exemption became effective.

5. Because the availability of childcare supports the well-being of children, families, the workforce, and society as a whole, all property, real and personal, used primarily for the care of a child outside of his or her home may be exempted from taxation by general law. If a portion of the property of an individual or a for profit or nonprofit corporation, organization, or association is used for such childcare, an assessing authority may be authorized by general law to exempt from the assessment, levy, and collection of taxes such portion of the property of such individual, corporation, organization, or association that is used primarily for such childcare. [5]

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2024

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The secretary of state wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 13, and the FRE is 34. The word count for the ballot title is 76.

The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 16, and the FRE is 31. The word count for the ballot summary is 108.


Support

Supporters

Officials

Organizations

  • Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce
  • Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry

Arguments

  • State Sen. Travis Fitzwater: "We obviously have a child care facility shortage in our state; we need to provide opportunities for folks that get child care. This is just one incentive to try to make it easier for the facilities to provide child care. We just want to encourage child care facilities in the state to expand and have opportunities to keep more of their money, because they’re providing a real necessity of a service in the state of Missouri."
  • Nancy Giddens, affiliated with United WE and the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce: "We all know that employers are having problems finding employees. We all understand that employees are having problems finding childcare. We've seen it during COVID. We see it today. And so you will see us support anything that helps ease that burden and mitigate those issues. And so we certainly see this as one of those issues."
  • State Rep. Wendy Hausman (R): "This bill is hopefully to help with the child care costs. And so, the child care facilities can also have a little bit extra money so they can stay open. We want to make sure that they stay open. We also want to encourage more child care facilities to be opened.”

Opposition

Opponents

Ballotpedia did not locate a campaign in opposition to the ballot measure.

Arguments

Ballotpedia did not locate arguments in opposition to the ballot measure.

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Nevada ballot measures

Ballotpedia did not identify ballot measure committees registered to support or oppose the ballot measure.[6]

Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Oppose $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Media editorials

See also: 2024 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

The following media editorial boards published an editorial supporting the ballot measure:

  • The Kansas City Star Editorial Board: "There is no question that exempting property taxes paid by child care providers would cost local jurisdictions some money ... Yet child care is without a doubt an essential service. It enables tens of thousands of parents to enter the workplace while their children are protected and fed. Daily child care is a fact of life for young families across the state. At the same time, child care — which is labor-intensive — is extraordinarily expensive. Anything that can reduce providers’ costs would eventually help parents. The tax exemption might also improve the quality of child care. On balance, cheaper child care with better quality and wider availability are worthwhile goals in Missouri. And there is a chance the damage to local government budgets may be smaller than estimated. That’s particularly true if more parents enter the workforce if the amendment passes."

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not locate media editorial boards in opposition to the ballot measure.

Background

Property tax exemptions in Missouri

Article X, Section 6 of the Missouri Constitution provided for certain property tax exemptions, including:

  • All property, real and personal, of the state, counties and other political subdivisions
  • Nonprofit cemeteries
  • Homestead properties of former prisoners of war with total service-connected disabilities
  • Personal property held as industrial inventories
  • Personal property held as goods, wares, merchandise, stock in trade or inventory for resale by distributors, wholesalers, or retail merchants or establishments
  • Property used for religious worship not held for private or corporate profit, for schools and colleges, or for purposes purely charitable
  • Agricultural and horticultural societies
  • Veterans organizations
  • Household goods, furniture, wearing apparel and articles of personal use and adornment owned and used by a person in his home or dwelling place may be exempt from taxation by general law.

Within the Missouri Revised Statutes, Title X, Chapter 137, § 137.100 also exempted additional property from taxes, including motor vehicles leased for a period of at least one year to the state or to any city, county, or political subdivision or to any religious, educational, or charitable organization which has obtained an exemption from the payment of federal income taxes.[7]

Statewide property tax exemptions on the ballot

See also: Taxes on the ballot

Between 2010 and 2022, there were 62 statewide property tax exemption measures on the ballot throughout the United States. Out of the 62 measures, 48 (77.4%) were approved and 14 (22.5%) were defeated. Between 2010-2022, the highest amount of statewide measures concerning property tax exemptions was 12 in 2012, while in 2020 there were zero statewide measures on the ballot regarding property tax exemptions.

Missouri ballot measure historical facts

See also: List of Missouri ballot measures and History of Initiative & Referendum in Missouri

In Missouri, a total of 136 ballot measures appeared on statewide ballots between 1985 and 2022. Eighty-six ballot measures were approved, and 50 ballot measures were defeated.

Missouri statewide ballot measures, 1985-2022
Total number Annual average Annual minimum Annual maximum Approved Defeated
# % # %
136
3.37
0
10
86
63.24
50
36.76

Path to the ballot

Amending the Missouri Constitution

See also: Amending the Missouri Constitution

To put a legislatively referred constitutional amendment before voters, a simple majority vote is required in both the Missouri State Senate and the Missouri House of Representatives.

Amendment in the state Legislature

The amendment, SJR 26, was prefiled in the Missouri State Senate on December 12, 2022. On March 23, 2023, the Senate voted 33-0 to pass the amendment. On May 12, 2023, the House voted 91-27 to pass the amendment.[2]

Vote in the Missouri State Senate
March 23, 2023
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 18  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total3300
Total percent100%0%0%
Democrat900
Republican2400

Vote in the Missouri House of Representatives
May 12, 2023
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 82  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total912744
Total percent56.17%16.66%27.1%
Democrat21229
Republican702515

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Missouri

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Missouri.

How to vote in Missouri


See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 Missouri Senate, "SJR 26," accessed March 25, 2023
  2. 2.0 2.1 Missouri State Senate, "Votes," accessed March 25, 2023
  3. Texas State Legislature, "SJR 64 Overview," accessed May 4, 2023
  4. St. Louis Missouri, "Sample Ballot," accessed July 29, 2024
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content
  6. Nevada Secretary of State, "Campaign Finance," accessed March 2, 2023
  7. Justia US Law, "2005 Missouri Revised Statutes - § 137.100. — Certain property exempt from taxes.," accessed June 16, 2023
  8. Missouri Secretary of State - Elections and Voting, "Frequently Asked Questions," accessed April 4, 2023
  9. 9.0 9.1 9.2 Missouri Secretary of State, "Register to Vote," accessed April 4, 2023
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 NCSL, "State Profiles: Elections," accessed August 27, 2024
  11. BillTrack50, "MO HB1878," accessed April 4, 2023
  12. Missouri Secretary of State, "FAQs Voter Registration," accessed August 27, 2024
  13. Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  14. Missouri Secretary of State, "How To Vote," accessed August 27, 2024
  15. Missouri Secretary of State, "Do I need an ID to vote?" accessed April 3, 2023