Lebanon council approves placing use tax question on April ballot to fund public projects

The Lebanon City Council voted to place a use tax question before voters in the April municipal election, adopting an ordinance that staff said would create a new revenue stream to fund a police and fire training facility, a new animal shelter and improvements to the Boswell Aquatic Center.

City staff presented the ordinance and ballot language, telling the council the proposal would place a use tax “at the rate equal to the total local sales tax rates in effect” and that revenue would be allocated across public safety, parks, stormwater, general fund and capital projects. “It is very difficult for any city in Missouri to figure out how much revenue is actually generated from a use tax,” the presenter said during the discussion. “Every city that has tried to estimate it has been way off.”

The measure was presented as a calendarized sequence of proposed local tax proposals; staff said the council had discussed timing at prior work sessions and that the ordinance simply formalized a schedule for putting taxes on future ballots. The council completed two readings of Council Bill 6803 and on second reading approved the ordinance, which the clerk recorded as becoming Ordinance 7047.

Why it matters: Council members and staff said the use tax would create a dedicated revenue source for projects the council has prioritized. Staff and council repeatedly noted the difficulty of estimating revenue from a use tax and said the city would break receipts into the multiple funds specified in the ballot language.

Discussion highlights - Scope and voter messaging: Several council members said the ballot language, as written, is technical and may confuse voters. One council member told the council, “If you just read this and you just said, what does that mean? I think the average person would say, ‘they're gonna charge me 3% more on everything.’ And that's not what it's gonna do.” That council member urged sharper, plain‑language materials for voters and suggested an explanatory “script” or open‑house outreach before the election. - Limits of statutory language: Staff cautioned the council that state statute limits how use tax ballot language can be written and that overly specific or informal wording can risk legal challenges. “We are somewhat limited in that the state statute scribe specific language that we have to use,” a staff member said, but added staff would review the council’s requests for clearer wording. - Project tie‑ins and timing: Staff said proceeds would be split per the allocations in the ordinance (including a half‑percent to public safety and other percentages to parks, stormwater and capital). The presenter and council discussed prior attempts and local experience, noting communities that tied use tax measures to visible projects generally saw clearer voter support.

Action and vote - Council Bill 6803 (use tax ballot placement) — approved on second reading and recorded as Ordinance 7047. Roll call was recorded as a unanimous approval; the council took no amendments at the meeting.

What remains: City staff said they would finalize voter education materials and are prepared to provide renderings and explanatory materials (for police and fire training, animal shelter and pool options) if the council requests them. Staff also said the municipal election certification deadlines require timely finalization of ballot language if the council wants changes before the election.

Speakers quoted in this article are identified in the meeting record as the presenting staff member and an unnamed council member who raised concerns about language and voter understanding; both appear in the transcript during the discussion on Council Bill 6803.