State Tax Commission warns Cole County it may withhold assessment maintenance funds after sales‑ratio findings

Commissioners on June 3 made public a May 30 letter from the Missouri State Tax Commission (STC) to the Cole County assessor stating the county’s most recent residential sales‑ratio study indicated residential values were “below market value” and that state assessment maintenance funds will be withheld unless the county files a plan to return to compliance.

The STC letter, presented aloud at the commission meeting, said the office had attempted to contact the county assessor by phone and email and invited the assessor to work with state assessment representatives on a memorandum of understanding for 2025 maintenance activities. The letter warned that “state reimbursement monies will only be distributed to the county assessment fund if the county is in compliance with the State Tax Commission approved assessment maintenance plan,” and asked the assessor to submit “county circumstances, intended actions, and timeframe” before funds would be released.

A county official at the meeting summarized the fiscal exposure at roughly $117,000 in assessment maintenance payments that could be withheld. The official said the figure equates to approximately $3 per parcel across the county’s roughly 30,000 parcels, based on the county’s internal estimate presented to the commission.

County officials described the county’s recent performance on the residential sales‑ratio study: an earlier study result of about 94 percent (passing), a later result of about 84 percent (failing at the time and that led to an MOU), and the most recent, not yet fully published study at approximately 67 percent. Those results prompted state outreach and the request for a corrective plan.

The commissioner who read the letter advised residents who received notices of proposed value increases to contact the current serving assessor (the official stated the current assessor serves until the end of the current assumer term and that a newly elected assessor will take office after the turnover) rather than contacting the incoming assessor who is not yet in office. The county also advised that property owners who disagree with their assessment may request an informal meeting with the assessor’s office and, if unresolved, file an appeal with the county Board of Equalization (BOE). The BOE filing process and deadline were discussed at the meeting; the commission noted the BOE hearing date occurs on the second Monday in July (the presenter identified July 14 as the relevant date this year and advised residents to verify deadlines with the county clerk).

Commissioners urged residents with questions about notices to call the assessor’s office first for an informal review; the clerk’s office will provide BOE appeal forms if needed. County staff also noted that evidence such as a recent appraisal may be helpful at a BOE hearing but is not strictly required to file an appeal.

The commission did not take formal action on the letter at the meeting beyond making the correspondence public and advising residents on appeal procedures.