09/16/2026
THE FUTURE OF HENRY COUNTY’S SENIOR PROPERTY-TAX FREEZE
LESS THAN TWO CENTS OUT OF EVERY PROPERTY-TAX DOLLAR.
For a representative home inside the City of Clinton and Clinton School District, using the official 2024 levied rates, the two levies directly controlled by the Henry County Commission represented approximately 1.4% of the combined residential real-estate tax rate.
The Clinton School District represented nearly 80% of that same rate.
The exact percentages vary throughout Henry County depending on the school district, township, city, fire district and other taxing entities appearing on a particular tax bill. But this example puts the current discussion into perspective.
I want to explain, as plainly as I can, what is happening with Henry County’s senior property-tax freeze.
At a Commission meeting last week, removing voter-approved bond debt from the freeze was discussed. That narrower change was then included in the first draft of a proposed amendment.
As it relates to the taxes covered by the freeze, that first draft would mean that increases tied to voter-approved bond debt would no longer be included when calculating an eligible senior’s credit.
Then, during the September 15 Commission meeting, the discussion went further.
Commissioner Jake Bradley stated that he does not believe Henry County should freeze taxes imposed by governmental entities the County Commission does not control, particularly the school districts.
Jake then stated:
“My solution, my compromise, is to freeze the two.”
He repeated:
“I just want to freeze the two as a solution going forward.” He was referring to the two levies directly controlled by Henry County.
That goes far beyond the first draft’s narrower proposal to remove voter-approved bond debt.
In the representative Clinton example, limiting the freeze to those two county levies would cover approximately 1.4% of the combined residential real-estate tax rate—less than two cents of every property-tax dollar.
Whether the proposed amendment will remain limited to voter-approved bond debt, expand to only the two county-controlled levies or change again is unknown at this time. No final amendment has been adopted.
Presiding Commissioner Jim Stone’s objection is not limited to debt service. He has made it clear that he opposes the legislation itself and believes the overall program has created serious problems for Henry County.
My position is equally clear: Leave the ordinance alone.
This credit was created by the Missouri General Assembly. State law authorized counties to adopt it by ordinance or through a public referendum.
Henry County chose to participate and adopted its ordinance.
In August 2025, Henry County amended that ordinance so the credit would apply to an eligible senior’s total real-property-tax liability from all taxing entities, except the State Blind Pension Fund.
All three commissioners signed that amendment.
Now part—or potentially nearly all—of that protection is being reconsidered.
This is not an argument over a few meaningless words in an ordinance. The Clinton School District’s official debt-service levy increased from $0.6668 in 2024 to $0.8096 in 2025 per $100 of assessed valuation. That is an approximate 21.4% increase in the debt-service rate in one year.
Removing debt service from the freeze would be a real change in how an eligible senior’s credit is calculated.
Some people hear “voter-approved bond debt” and naturally assume that including it in the credit cancels or interferes with the bond issue. It does not.
It does not repeal the bond authorization.
It does not cancel the school district’s debt.
It does not eliminate the debt-service levy.
It does not change the tax rate approved by voters.
Under Henry County’s current ordinance, changes tied to debt-service levies remain part of the calculation of the senior’s total real-property-tax liability and resulting credit.
The wording—and the timing—of the state law are important. When the original SB 190 was enacted in 2023, there was disagreement over whether the credit applied only to taxes levied directly by the county or to the homeowner’s total real-property-tax liability. Some counties considered narrower approaches based on the county-only interpretation.
But the General Assembly returned to the issue in 2024 and passed SB 756. SB 756 added language stating that a county may establish reasonable procedures to administer the program, but “shall not adopt any procedure that limits the definition or scope of eligible credit amount or eligible taxpayer.”
Henry County did not adopt its ordinance under the original 2023 language. Henry County adopted its ordinance after SB 756 had taken effect.
The current statute defines the credit using the eligible senior’s real-property-tax liability. It does not provide a list telling counties that they may include one levy while excluding another.
That does not mean every legal question has already been decided by a court. It does mean that limiting the credit to only two county-controlled levies—or selectively removing debt-service levies—raises a substantial question under the current language of the law.
Property-tax increases are a serious concern for seniors living on fixed incomes.
A higher assessed value may increase a homeowner’s property-tax liability, but it does not produce spendable income.
It does not increase a Social Security check.
It does not increase a pension.
It does not provide additional money to pay a higher property-tax bill.
The senior still owns the same home and may have lived there for decades. Being told that the home is now worth more does not provide the cash needed to pay higher taxes.
That is the problem this state-authorized credit was created to address.
As for the argument that the law might someday be challenged in court: The General Assembly passed the legislation. The Governor signed it. It became Missouri law.
Like any law, it can be challenged in court, amended or repealed—but it is the law today.
Henry County exercised the authority granted by that law and adopted an ordinance. Eligible seniors then applied for the credit under the ordinance approved by this Commission.
My position is that Henry County should follow the law and the ordinance as they are written. If someone believes the statute is unconstitutional or has been interpreted incorrectly, that question can be presented to a court.
I do not believe we should preemptively take protection away from Henry County seniors simply because someone might file a lawsuit.
The State of Missouri created this credit. Henry County chose to adopt it. Eligible seniors applied for it. All three commissioners approved the amendment establishing its current coverage.
I will not vote to remove that protection. I repeat, I will not vote to remove that protection.
This issue affects more than the seniors currently receiving the credit. It affects their families, future seniors and every Henry County taxpayer.
And please understand what this credit does: it does not mean eligible seniors stop paying property taxes.
The credit generally protects an eligible homeowner from increases above the property-tax liability established in the initial credit year, subject to the adjustments required by state law. New construction, improvements, annexation and a later reduction in the homeowner’s tax liability can affect that calculation.
To continue qualifying, the senior must retain an ownership or legal interest in the home, occupy it as a primary residence and remain liable for its real-property taxes.
These are homeowners who may have paid property taxes for decades. For someone living on Social Security, a pension or another fixed income, a higher property-tax bill can create a serious financial burden. Unpaid real-estate taxes can eventually result in delinquency and tax-sale proceedings under Missouri law.
That is why this credit is important to the people who qualify for it.
Whether you agree with my position or disagree with it, you have the right to make your voice heard. This matter is not expected to be discussed at next week’s Commission meetings. At this time, the discussion is anticipated to resume on Tuesday, September 29. Please confirm the meeting date and agenda.
I encourage Henry County citizens—whether you are a senior or not—to attend. Come to the Commission meeting. Listen to the discussion. Ask questions. Tell all three commissioners where you stand before a final decision is made. That is your right as a citizen.
Show up. Speak up. Make your position known.
https://www.youtube.com/live/RBGgE7OTopI?si=JwkKM996Dr-7B0un - Commission Meeting September 15, 2026.
Sources: Missouri Revised Statutes §137.1050, Missouri Senate record for SB 756, Missouri State Auditor’s 2024 Property Tax Rate Report, Missouri State Auditor’s 2025 Property Tax Rate Report, and Missouri’s delinquent real-estate tax statutes.
