As Missouri’s legislators count down the hours left in this year’s session of the General Assembly, county government officials are on the sidelines waiting for something not likely to come in the final days — a fix for last year’s controversial law aimed at granting property tax relief to older residents.

The law — Senate Bill (SB) 190 — is designed to freeze property tax rates for residents 62 and older. But it’s implementation — and its effect — is causing major concern for county government officials and public school administrators who are looking at both the high cost of putting the law in place and the cost of potentially having multiple property tax rates year after year.

Gasconade County Collector Shawn Schlottach Thursday morning told the County Commission that a recent meeting of collectors generated “a lot of notes, a lot of discussion” on SB 190, but no more solid information than what has been made available since it was adopted and signed into law last year. The hope for a remedy for the potentially expensive change during this legislative session has faded as state lawmakers have done little of substance during this election year — a development predicted at the start of this year by Presiding Commissioner Tim Schulte, R-Hermann.

Indeed, Schlottach said the legislative sponsor of SB 190, who quickly grew tired of the rumblings from the courthouses across Missouri and vowed not to propose changes to the law, has turned a deaf ear to county officials voicing concern about the cost of the law.

“The costs to implement this bill in some of these counties are hundreds of thousands of dollars,” the county collector said, noting that of the few counties that moved forward to implement the law, it appears all have hit the brakes after learning the cost of the computer software needed to figure and track the various property tax rates. The cost is substantial, she said, considering that the property tax refund might amount only to a few dollars a year.

According to the law, a property owner can apply for what’s referred to as a refund when they become eligible to file for Social Security retirement benefits, which is 62. Initially, the discussion around the law was to give tax relief to residents receiving Social Security benefits; however, it was realized that many people, such as school teachers, don’t receive Social Security and would not be eligible for the tax break. Thus, the law covers residents who are eligible to receive Social Security, whether or not they actually receive Social Security.

What the law does is freeze a taxpayer’s property tax rate charged in the year of his application. A county’s property tax rate often changes from one year to the next — in Gasconade County’s case it does if there is significant gain in sales tax revenue. That means the next year those applying for the tax break would have their rates frozen at that year’s level, which could be higher or lower than the person whose rate was frozen the previous year.

That’s one of the concerns for public school administrators — having to figure separate rates for taxpayers depending on what the rate was in the year in which the tax-relief application was filed.

Also unclear is just how this law will affect other property tax-dependent agencies.

Schlottach and County Assessor Paul Schulte said their offices are getting calls from county residents asking about the tax break.

The Commission agreed with Schlottach that a discussion is needed among county officials to try to sort out what is and isn’t known, given that no answer to the questions is expected from the General Assembly this year.

“With no fix, at this time, we don’t know where to go,” the collector said, adding that her office, the County Clerk’s Office, County Assessor’s Office and the County Commission “need to sit down and have a discussion on how to approach it… and let taxpayers know what’s going to happen.”

Schlottach said she believes one thing that will happen is a legal challenge to the new law.

“Litigation is coming,” she said. “Multiple agencies are lining up to sue.”

Perhaps, but as Schulte noted, the uncertainty is forcing county governments to maintain their wait-and-see position.

“It’s hard to make plans when we don’t know what’s going to happen,” he said.