WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1790

Zoning ordinances; residential district classifications may include affordable housing.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Bobby Orrock

Missouri HB 1790 would require political subdivisions to adjust real property tax levies after reassessments to keep roughly the same revenue, within voter approved caps.

Left in Counties, Cities and Towns
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1790

Summary — HB 1790

Note on source material
- The materials provided for “HB 1790” include text from multiple, different bills and states (an Arkansas short‑term rental bill, an Illinois income‑tax credit amendment, and a Missouri rewrite of statutes on tax levies). Because the bill title and subject you gave ("Modifies provisions relating to tax levies by political subdivisions" / TAXATION AND REVENUE - PROPERTY; Elections, Political Subdivisions) best match the Missouri text included in the packet, this summary focuses on the Missouri provisions (replacement of §137.073 and addition of §§115.240 and 137.067). I also briefly note the other distinct texts present. The Missouri text appears truncated in places; consult the official enrolled bill or legislative record for full authoritative language.

Purpose and intent

The Missouri provisions in HB 1790 would (1) change how election authorities label tax ballot measures, (2) require ballot language for real‑property tax changes to state the dollar impact per $100,000 of market value, and (3) substantially revise statutory rules governing how political subdivisions adjust tax levies after reassessments so that levy rates are revised to maintain substantially the same tax revenue as the prior year, subject to voter‑approved ceilings and other limits.

Key provisions (Missouri text)

  • New §115.240 — Ballot labeling

    • Requires election authorities to assign only a numeric or alphabetic label to ballot measures relating to taxation (no descriptive labels).
    • Encourages coordination so identical measures across multiple ballots receive the same label.

  • New §137.067 — Ballot language for property tax measures

    • Mandates that any ballot measure seeking approval to add, change, or modify a real‑property tax must express the effect of the proposed change in terms of dollars owed per $100,000 of a property’s market valuation.

  • Revised §137.073 — Definitions and levy revision after reassessment

    • Adds/clarifies definitions (e.g., “general reassessment,” “tax rate,” “tax revenue,” and “tax rate ceiling”).
    • Requires county clerks/assessors to notify political subdivisions of changes in assessed valuations (by subclass of real property and aggregate personal property).
    • Requires political subdivisions to immediately revise applicable rates of levy for each subclass so as to produce, from taxable property excluding new construction/improvements, substantially the same tax revenue as the previous year — subject to not exceeding the greater of the most recent voter‑approved rate or adjusted voter‑approved rate.
    • Provides special rules for school districts (apportionment of state‑assessed property revenue, ability to levy operating levy subject to constitutional limits).
    • Allows for an inflationary assessment growth adjustment limited to actual assessment growth (text truncated before completion).

Who would be affected

  • Political subdivisions and taxing authorities (counties, cities, school districts, special districts) — new procedural requirements for rate revisions and notifications.
  • Election authorities — new constraints on ballot labeling.
  • Voters — different ballot presentation and required dollar‑per‑$100,000 impact statements for property tax measures.
  • Property owners — potential changes in how levy rates are set after revaluations; the law seeks revenue neutrality after reassessments unless voters approve otherwise.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • The provided legislative actions indicate the bill received readings and committee referrals, amendments, and was ultimately read the third time and failed on 2025‑04‑08; it “Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment” on 2025‑05‑05. That means, in this iteration, it did not become law in the 2025 session.
  • The Missouri text requires political subdivisions to act “immediately” after notification of valuation changes; effective date language is not included in the excerpt.

Other texts present in the packet (brief)

  • Arkansas bill (95th General Assembly): A substantive act to regulate short‑term rentals by local governments (definitions, limits on jurisdiction‑wide bans or numeric limits, permitting rules, enforcement and revocation conditions, zoning classification). Sponsors: Rep. B. McKenzie and Sen. J. Bryant.
  • Illinois amendment (Rep. Maura Hirschauer): Proposed new income‑tax credit for purchases of firearm safety devices (nonrefundable credit up to $300 per taxpayer, subject to $5 million annual aggregate cap, taxable years beginning on/after Jan 1, 2026). This appears unrelated to the Missouri subject and likely reflects an amendment text inserted from another state’s file.

Notes and next steps

  • The packet conflates materials from multiple states and bill versions; for analysis, rely on the officially enrolled bill text and state legislative records for the jurisdiction of interest (here, Missouri).
  • If you want, I can (a) produce a detailed section‑by‑section analysis of the Missouri levy revisions (using the full bill text if you provide it), (b) provide a standalone summary of the Arkansas short‑term‑rental bill, or (c) summarize the Illinois firearm safety device tax credit amendment.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.