A Cole County judge on Wednesday rejected a constitutional challenge to property tax caps lawmakers added to a bill aimed at keeping the Kansas City Chiefs in Missouri.
The caps, structured as credits against property tax bills, applied to 97 of Missouri’s 114 counties. The caps, voted on in April, will mean this year’s property tax bill cannot be higher than last year in up to 22 counties, and cannot increase more than 5% in 75 others.
Of the 97 counties listed in the legislation, 61 passed it, 14 designated for tax bill freezes and 47 with the 5% cap; 12 counties rejected it; and 23 counties did not hold elections.
The law was challenged by two individuals, six school districts and one fire district. Forty-three counties, as well as individual county commissioners, later joined the case.
In his decision, Cole County Circuit Judge Christopher Limbaugh ruled that none of the plaintiffs had the right to sue and that they were wrong on the legal issues they raised.
Individuals do not have a right to sue simply because they believe they are at a disadvantage to a person in another county because of a property tax law, Limbaugh wrote. And the taxing districts can’t sue because they haven’t lost any money, he ruled.
The counties didn’t have the right to sue either, he wrote. They can’t raise issues on behalf of the school districts and other agencies they collect money for, he ruled.
“Missouri case law does not recognize standing based on dissatisfaction that other jurisdictions may impose different local taxes or conduct assessments differently; rather, Missouri case law recognizes standing where the plaintiff can show a present, direct adverse effect,” Limbaugh wrote.
The lawsuit was filed in September 2025, challenging the right of the legislature to write a law that provided property tax freezes in some counties, caps in others and no limits on increases in individual bills in 17 other counties and the city of St. Louis. The lawsuit alleged lawmakers used population and other characteristics to single out individual counties, creating special or local laws prohibited by the Missouri Constitution.
It was the second case challenging the stadium bill passed in a June 2025 special session. On Sept. 1, the Missouri Supreme Court heard an appeal in a separate lawsuit filed by two lawmakers and a conservative activist.
The court must decide whether state Sen. Mike Moon, an Ash Grove Republican, state Rep. Bryant Wolfin, a Ste. Genevieve Republican, and conservative activist Ron Calzone have standing. In January, Limbaugh ruled they did not and dismissed their lawsuit.
If the court finds Moon, Wolfin and Calzone do have standing, their case returns to Limbaugh.
The Missouri Supreme Court will also be asked to reverse Limbaugh in the case decided Wednesday, attorney Jim Layton said. Layton represents one of the individual plaintiffs and several other districts.
“We are disappointed in the decision,” Layton said. “But we always recognized that the questions we presented are ultimately ones for the Supreme Court of Missouri to resolve, and this finally allows us to proceed to that court.”
In their challenge the districts also argued that the uneven application of the caps meant the tax burden could shift from county to county in districts that cross county lines.
The credits, which will be shown on each tax bill as the difference between the previous and current year, mean districts could lose revenue. The taxpayer will see an increase when levies to repay bond issues increase or new taxes are approved by voters.
If the Legislature grants a tax exemption for homesteads, the districts argued, it must reimburse the districts for lost revenue.
The districts also argued that the division of counties among the three categories lacked a rational basis.
Limbaugh rejected those arguments, siding with the attorney general’s office. The officials in one county have no injury from tax elections and actions in another county, he ruled.
The credits don’t divide property into subclasses — residential, commercial, agricultural, personal and state-assessed infrastructure — in ways the law prohibits, Limbaugh ruled.
“In sum, having different tax credits does not change the classification of the property as residential property,” he wrote. “A tax credit goes to the taxpayer, not the property.”
The individual counties were added to the bill during a lengthy, late-night debate as senators consulted local officials about whether their counties should be included in the caps..
In his ruling, Limbaugh found that chronic underassessment in counties across the state, and the spike in tax bills that can follow a catch-up assessment provided a rational basis for the law.
Limbaugh also cited the political pressures facing county assessors, pointing to an affidavit from Stacey Jacobs, administrative secretary of the State Tax Commission.
Assessors are reluctant to update property values, Jacobs said.
“Many of these assessors have expressed concern to (the commission) that reassessment could subject their constituents to massive tax spikes and impact their re-election efforts,” Jacobs said.
The counties that joined the lawsuit are deciding whether to appeal, their attorney, Travis Elliott, said.
Natalie Hoernschemeyer, an attorney for individual plaintiffs and taxing districts who co-counseled the case with Layton, said Limbaugh’s ruling leaves no one with the ability to challenge an unconstitutional law.
“The Missouri Constitution prohibits special laws,” she said, “but that protection depends on someone being able to get through the courthouse door.”
