Few local court decisions have generated as much legal controversy and frustration as a 1999 judgment entered by former Circuit Judge Jeff Schaeperkoetter in a case brought by Jack Koehr against a number of county taxing authorities alleging they overcharged taxpayers.
The decision has served as the foundation for at least a half-dozen subsequent lawsuits and could lead to more refunds for county taxpayers.

Long before tax day tea parties became fashionable, Koehr, a former St. Louis city judge who retired to Franklin County, went to court to launch his own tax protest.

Koehr became alarmed when he noticed the assessed valuation of his home outside of Sullivan kept increasing in the late 1990s. He did some research and discovered that the county had increased the tax rate by rounding up from one one-hundredth of a cent to the nearest cent in calculating its tax levies. It was a practice sanctioned by the state auditor and followed by taxing entities across Missouri.
To Koehr, the rounding was a defacto tax increase and a clear violation of the Hancock Amendment, a provision of the Missouri Constitution that prohibits tax increases without a vote of the people.

Judge Schaeperkoetter agreed and entered a judgment requiring a number of taxing entities including Franklin County and the Scenic Regional Library to recalculate their tax rates in 2000 and 2001 to account for the excessive taxes collected in the disputed years. That much is not in dispute.

But just about everything else in Judge Schaeperkoetter's ruling has been debated, contested and litigated over the course of a series of subsequent lawsuits filed by Koehr against many of the same taxing entities. Years after it was written, lawyers are still arguing its meaning and import. They can't even agree if it was a judgment or a settlement agreement.

In those lawsuits, Koehr alleged that the taxing entities failed to follow Schaeperkoetter's judgment in setting their subsequent tax levies. After years of litigation, Koehr prevailed in most of the lawsuits. The Missouri Appeals Court said in essence the county should have followed Judge Schaperkoetter's ruling. The county eventually settled four of the cases in 1996 and agreed to issue $1.9 million worth of tax credits to taxpayers. The Franklin County Library District however refused to settle even though it based its tax levies on those set by the county.

Two weeks ago, the court of appeals cited Judge Schaperkoetter's judgment again in ruling against the Franklin County Library District. The court reversed Circuit Judge Cynthia Eckelkamp who sided with the Library District earlier when the case was tried.

In her ruling, Judge Eckelkamp noted that while it may seem counterintuitive to round very tiny fractions up, the library district was simply following the State Auditor regulations that were in existence at the time. Much of Judge Eckelkamp's 10-page opinion focused on the 1999 judgment issued by Judge Schaeperkoetter, the judge she later replaced on the bench.

Library district officials plan to appeal the appellate court decision. They say they shouldn't be penalized for following state regulations. After all, tax rates at issue in the case were approved and certified by the state auditor.

They resent any insinuation that it was reckless in setting its tax rates in violation of the judgment. They point out with pride that the district provides a lot of services for what is comparatively a low tax rate. The district's 10 cent levy ranks 110th lowest out of 152 library districts. The district consistently rates in the top 20 in a number of key service categories.

Library district officials are frustrated by the appellate court's decision just as county officials were when they were rebuffed by the same court a few years back.

Koehr said the library district, just like the county, could have avoided all of the subsequent litigation had it simply complied with the 1999 judgment. In a statement this week, Koehr denied any vendetta against the library district or the county. He blamed elected county officials and the county counselor for ignoring the judgment and causing the subsequent litigation.

This much is certain. Taxpayers in the library case are footing the bill for this latest round of litigation just as they did in the lawsuits involving the county. That cost has soared to well over half a million dollars making it one of the most expensive taxpayer funded protests in county history.