What's on your ballot

What it doesRenews — does not raise — the existing one-tenth-of-one-percent sales/use tax that funds state parks, historic sites, and soil & water conservation, for another 10 years. First approved in 1984; renewed roughly every decade since (80% approval in 2016). Raises about $140 million a year.

A YES voteContinues the existing tax for 10 more years.

A NO voteLets the tax expire in 2028; the programs would then depend on annual legislative funding.

What each side saysSupporters (including the Missouri Parks Association) say it keeps state parks free to enter and funds voluntary conservation programs for farmers. Some fiscal conservatives argue 40-year-old funding decisions belong in the annual budget, not the constitution.

What it doesRequires every charter county — including Jackson County, the last with an appointed assessor — to elect its county assessor, and requires assessors to meet state training requirements. Jasper and Newton counties already elect assessors; this mainly affects Jackson County (Kansas City area).

A YES voteMakes the Jackson County assessor an elected office, like every other charter county.

A NO voteKeeps the current constitutional carve-out allowing Jackson County to appoint its assessor.

ContextJackson County voters approved making their assessor elected in November 2025 (88%–12%); a statewide amendment is required to override the 2010 provision.

What it doesChanges how citizen-initiated constitutional amendments pass. Today they need a simple statewide majority; under Amendment 4 they would need a majority in each of Missouri's eight congressional districts. Amendments referred by the legislature would still need only a statewide majority. Also adds provisions on petition-signature fraud and prohibits foreign-national spending on ballot measures, and requires the full petition text be available to voters.

A YES voteRequires district-by-district majorities for citizen-initiated constitutional amendments.

A NO voteKeeps the current statewide-majority standard.

What each side saysSupporters argue the constitution should be harder to amend and that rural voters deserve a stronger voice against big-city majorities. Opponents note the higher bar applies only to citizen petitions — not to amendments lawmakers refer — and that several recent voter-approved measures would have failed under this rule.

What it doesDirects the legislature to phase out and eliminate Missouri's individual income tax (currently up to 4.7%) using revenue-growth triggers over a roughly five-year framework — and authorizes the legislature to expand sales and use taxes to goods and services not currently taxed as part of the transition. Requires offsetting reductions in property and other local taxes where local sales-tax revenue rises, with language preserving public-school funding.

A YES voteStarts the income-tax phase-out and grants the legislature the expanded sales-tax authority.

A NO voteKeeps the current tax system. (Courts required the ballot language to make clear a NO vote does not remove the legislature's existing power to cut income taxes by statute.)

What each side saysSupporters, led by Gov. Kehoe, say eliminating the income tax makes Missouri more competitive and lets workers keep more of every paycheck. Opponents — including groups backed by the Missouri Realtors — argue it authorizes the largest sales-tax expansion in state history without further voter approval and could shift costs onto everyday purchases. Worth knowing: in June, the Western District Court of Appeals ruled the legislature's original summary insufficient and rewrote the ballot language voters will see, adding explicit mention of the sales-tax expansion.