Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Property Taxation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council moves to approve second reading of ordinance transferring former lumber property back onto tax rolls

City of Buckner, Missouri · May 15, 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

Council read Ordinance No. 1097 (Bill No. 252), authorizing the mayor to execute a notice of termination of lease and a quitclaim deed for a property leased by a lumber company; council framed the transfer as returning the parcel to the tax rolls after an earlier PILOT payment arrangement.

Council members discussed Bill No. 252, identified in the meeting as Ordinance No. 1097, which would authorize the mayor to execute a notice of termination of a lease agreement and a quitclaim deed for property located in the city of Buckner. The ordinance was read and a motion to approve was made and seconded; the transcript records the motion and calls for approval but does not include a roll-call tally in the provided excerpt.

A council speaker described the property’s history: when the lumber operation received a lease exemption in the past, the company made a $75,000 payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) that was distributed to taxing jurisdictions. The ordinance, as described in the meeting, would give title to the company so the parcel could be placed on the tax rolls going forward, which council members said would likely increase annual tax revenue compared with the prior PILOT arrangement.

Councilers expressed that approving the ordinance would be beneficial financially for the city and the other taxing entities that previously received portions of the PILOT payment. The meeting record shows the motion to approve the ordinance and that council proceeded with a second reading; however, the transcript does not include a detailed vote tally or the names of the motion’s mover and seconder.

The council did not provide further substantive amendments in the transcript; staff and council indicated the item would go forward based on the recorded motion.