Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Property Tax topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lindbergh Schools staff: reassessment raises district values; residential levy at state minimum, debt service held at 83.3 cents

6439508 · September 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Joel Scheibel, a Lindbergh Schools staff member, told the Board of Education at a special tax-rate hearing that preliminary St. Louis County assessment data show assessed valuation in the district has grown in this reassessment year, triggering required tax-rate rollbacks under Missouri’s Hancock Amendment.

Joel Scheibel, a Lindbergh Schools staff member, told the Board of Education at a special tax-rate hearing that preliminary St. Louis County assessment data show assessed valuation in the district has grown in this reassessment year, triggering required tax-rate rollbacks under Missouri’s Hancock Amendment.

"This is [a] very important part of the year for our budget," Scheibel said, summarizing the timeline and mechanics by which the St. Louis County Assessor’s Office, the county Board of Equalization and, when necessary, the Missouri State Tax Commission determine final assessed values that the district uses to calculate levies.

Scheibel said the district receives preliminary assessed-value estimates in March and July, expects final assessed-valuation data from St. Louis County ‘‘sometime this week or early next week,’’ and expects a final, final assessment in December after any state commission protest settlements. He explained that protests of property valuations may remain unresolved for months or years, and that the county releases protested values to the district each May; if protests later settle differently, the district may be required to reimburse the county.

Why it matters: Rollbacks and limits. Scheibel said that when assessed valuation grows, the district is required to roll tax rates back under the Hancock Amendment to protect taxpayers from sharp increases in tax burden. He said the district’s residential levy has already reached the state minimum of "275" (as presented to the board), so the district cannot roll that class of levy back further without jeopardizing state aid. Scheibel said losing that aid would cost the district about $10 million to $11 million a year, as presented.

Scheibel gave the following figures and descriptions as part of the presentation (values and units shown as presented): assessed valuation growth in the district; an estimated blended operating levy of "376" (as presented); a debt-service levy maintained at 83.3 cents; reported commercial- and agricultural-class valuation increases leading to rollbacks (he said commercial was being rolled "from 3,339 till 308" as presented); and an estimated tax-collection rate of about 98 percent based on recent protest-collection performance. Scheibel also said the district’s total levy was 445 in 2016–17 and that the overall tax rate has decreased since 2016 by 68 cents, a change he attributed to rising assessed values in the district.

Scheibel noted that the district has little agricultural property; he named Grants Farm and a local parcel he referred to as the Himos property (which he said transferred ownership to the Hoffmans) as examples mentioned in the assessment discussion. He said agricultural value increases affected the agricultural levy class and, in the district’s presentation, resulted in that class now sitting at "275".

Scheibel said the county is the only county in Missouri that sets levies by classification and that Lindbergh must set separate levies for residential, commercial, agricultural and personal property; the district’s materials use a ‘‘blended’’ levy to compare with districts that set one uniform levy.

Public comment and next steps. Scheibel said the district posted the estimated tax rate in several local community locations (he named the city of Sunset Hills and Crestwood High School in his remarks) and that no callers or signups had been received about the rate. The board opened the public comment portion of the tax-rate hearing and, after reviewing the signup sheet, reported that no members of the public had signed up to speak.

Formal action. With no public comments, the board proceeded to adjourn. A motion to adjourn was made by board member Andy and seconded by board member Jen; the board voted to adjourn by voice vote and the clerk recorded the outcome as 7–0 in favor.

Scheibel concluded, "That's all I have."