10/30/2026 - JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (October 30, 2026) - More than 200,000 Jackson County
property owners will soon see a credit on their property tax bill and while
many of them may know some of the issues that made the credits necessary, a new
report from Missouri State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick now gives taxpayers the
rest of the story on the catastrophic failure that was the 2023 reassessment
process. The audit released today by Auditor Fitzpatrick gives the Jackson
County Assessment Department (AD) and the 2023 reassessment process the lowest
possible rating of "poor" while detailing the numerous ways the
process was doomed from the start and ultimately necessitated involvement from
the State Auditor's Office and the State Tax Commission (STC) to set things
right for taxpayers.
"When we started this process we made sure to put as much
information as we could into the hands of taxpayers as quickly as possible and
it was our preliminary review that paved the way for the State Tax Commission
order that capped assessed valuations at 15 percent. Now our final audit report
fully details why this unprecedented level of intervention was necessary to
protect taxpayers from a process that trampled on their rights and failed in
every possible way," said Auditor Fitzpatrick. "The notification
issues we uncovered in 2023 were enough to invalidate increases over 15% but it
is now clear that was just one of many failures that doomed the reassessment
process from the very start. Taxpayers should be outraged by the ineffective
leadership of Gail McCann Beatty and the Assessment Department who never had a
plan in place to comply with the law or county code, or to respect the rights
of property owners."
The audit report finds the 2023 reassessment process was flawed
from the outset and a failure to address issues early and pursue incremental
increases to residential real property reassessments placed a significant
burden on taxpayers. One contributing factor to the inadequacies documented by
the report was the Assessment Department's (AD) ineffective leadership as it
failed to recognize the importance of addressing statutory changes made in 2020
that impacted the 2023 reassessment process. In fact, the Request for Proposal
(RFP) and contract with Tyler Technologies for the CAMA and reassessment
services did not specifically address the August 2020 statutory changes or how
the parcel-by-parcel reviews would meet statutory inspection requirements.
Additionally, former AD Director Gail McCann Beatty went so far as to say she
didn't "deal in percentages because the state statutes don't tell me to
deal in percentages" even though state law does in fact require assessors
to consider the percentage increase in residential real property assessments if
using a Computer-Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) system.
The AD's ineffective leadership also manifested in its refusal to
consider a more incremental approach to assessed valuation increases. A ratio
study issued by the STC in 2021 showed Jackson County's assessed values were
close to the state average and a study released in 2023 showed the county's
values were within the STC's compliance standards. The report notes the 2023
study could have been used by the county to
reevaluate the need for full fair market value assessed valuations.
The report also
details how delays in issuing contracts for and implementing the CAMA system
reduced the time the AD and Tyler had to complete the 2023 reassessment
process. Furthermore, even though AD officials knew the implementation of the
CAMA system was delayed and despite the fact AD personnel knew they were unlikely
to be able to provide notice to all taxpayers of their valuation increases over
15% as required, there is no evidence that former Director Beatty reconsidered
assessed valuation increases over 15%. The report also notes that AD leadership
did not participate in almost half of the CAMA implementation status meetings,
which reduced the AD's ability to ensure the project was implemented in
accordance with contract requirements.
Another finding in the report further documents the issues
uncovered in the preliminary review released by Auditor Fitzpatrick's office in
2023, which found the AD
failed to provide clear written notification to taxpayers of their rights
regarding physical inspections, and what notification was given was inaccurate
and often untimely. The AD informed the majority of taxpayers whose
assessed valuation increased over 15% of the right to an interior inspection
too late for them to make informed decisions about requesting an interior
inspection. In addition, the AD completely failed to notify over 49,000
taxpayers whose assessed valuations increased by any amount by the June 15
statutory deadline. The AD also used doorhangers that did not comply with
county code and were ineffective in notifying taxpayers of visits and/or
gathering information for reassessment purposes. Additionally, the AD did not
process the doorhangers filled out by the taxpayers and submitted to the AD.
The audit report also finds the AD's parcel-by-parcel review
process did not qualify as an
inspection that would allow the county to increase assessed valuations of
residential properties in excess of 15%, and it is questionable if the reviews
provided a sufficient basis to support any of the valuations. The AD incorrectly considered the
parcel-by-parcel reviews conducted in 2021, 2022, and 2023 to fulfill the
physical inspection requirement for the 2023 reassessment cycle. The report
notes that, to qualify, inspections would have had to be conducted after a
taxpayer was appropriately notified of an increase in excess of 15% but Tyler
Technologies conducted only 764 (less than 1%) exterior inspections after the
taxpayer received any notice. Data also
indicates parcel-by-parcel reviews were sometimes completed in less time than
they should have been, away from the parcel site, and outside of suggested
timeframes. For the 385 parcels reviewed, 197 (51%) did not have a GPS data
time stamp, picture time stamp, and entrance time stamp within the same time
period and near the parcel GPS location. Also, 20% of parcels reviewed (76 of
385) had data (including entrance data and uploaded photograph) modified in
less than 5 minutes, and 36% (139 of 385 parcels) were edited in between 5 and
15 minutes. If projected to the population, this would indicate data collectors
edited information for approximately 112,064 parcels with assessed valuation
increases over 15% in 15 minutes or less each. There is also not sufficient
documentation to support that data collectors reviewed all exterior portions of
each property in 272 of 295 (92%) applicable parcels reviewed. Additionally, there is
little evidence to support if interior inspections always took place as
requested and once performed, if any information obtained during the interior
inspection was considered in valuing the property. Of the 11 parcels reviewed
by the audit for which the taxpayer requested an interior inspection, 5 did not
receive the inspection. For the other 6, there is nothing in the CAMA system to
indicate any property characteristics or values were updated based on the
interior inspection.
The final finding in the report documents the significant deficiencies that existed in the county's
controls over the reassessment process resulting in inadequate oversight during
parcel-by-parcel reviews and the risk of unsupported system changes. The report
notes how the AD did not ensure required quality control reviews
were conducted, did not ensure the Mobile Assessor system records of data
collector activity and parcel-by-parcel reviews were used to monitor the data
collection process, and did not ensure the photographs always represented
contemporaneous inspection information.
The audit report also notes the persistent resistance
from the AD, the Board of Equalization (BOE), and other county officials, who
acted to prevent the State Auditor's Office from conducting the audit. These
actions included providing limited information and only providing access to
necessary AD and BOE records after serving multiple subpoenas. As a result,
delays occurred in completing the audit.
"I'm glad we are able to share this information with taxpayers but
extremely disappointed that it took longer than it should have because of the concerted
efforts made by the previous administration to keep Jackson County residents in
the dark by denying us access to the information we needed to complete our
work," said Auditor Fitzpatrick. "Fortunately, the current county
leadership is now taking the right steps to clean up the mess made by the
previous administration and I encourage them to put all of our recommendations
into place so that in future reassessment periods the rights of taxpayers are
respected and protected."
The audit of the Jackson County Assessment Department and the
reassessment process is located here. The preliminary review released
by Auditor Fitzpatrick's office in 2023 is available here. The previously
released audit of the Jackson County Assessment Appeals Process can be found here.
