Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Property Taxes topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Town and Country adopts 2025 property tax levy after accepting substituted rates

Board of Aldermen · September 23, 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

On Sept. 22 the Town and Country Board of Aldermen approved Ordinance No. 4712 (Bill 25‑41 as substituted) setting the 2025 property tax levy; the board accepted updated county Board of Equalization values and adopted rates reflecting those adjustments.

The Town and Country Board of Aldermen on Sept. 22 adopted Ordinance No. 4712 (Bill 25‑41 as substituted), approving the city's annual property tax levy for 2025 after accepting a substitute that updated rates to reflect post-Board of Equalization valuations from St. Louis County.

Mayor called for a motion and Alderman Sawyer moved to accept the substitute, which the board described as numerically updating the levy based on final county valuation figures. The substitute set the residential rate at 21.1¢ per $100 of assessed value; an amendment offered to hold the residential levy at 21¢ was discussed but not adopted. The ordinance was adopted unanimously.

The city's CFO told the board the substitute numbers "are based on the board of equalization, those final numbers," and that the council could reduce rates but the goal was to keep levy revenue close to last year's 23¢ so the city would collect approximately the same total revenue. The person who urged keeping the rate at 21¢ argued the smaller change would be easier to explain to constituents, saying the substitute made the rate "more exact" by moving from 21¢ to "21.1¢ per 100." The City Attorney cautioned that if the board chose to roll rates back in a future year, "you have to document the reasons" and related assessment implications.

Board members also raised concerns about the uncertain effect of a senior citizen tax cap on municipal revenues; members noted the municipal share of a typical property tax bill is a minority of the total but emphasized the cap could reduce projected revenue. The Ways and Means Commission had reviewed the bill Sept. 10 and recommended approval after the adjustments.

The ordinance was recorded as No. 4712 after roll-call votes accepting the substitute and approving the bill as substituted. No changes to the ordinance text beyond the substitute's numeric adjustments were recorded at the Sept. 22 meeting. The board scheduled no further action on this ordinance at the meeting; implementation will follow the normal tax-collection process administered by St. Louis County.