Request By:
Mr. Robert G. Zweigart
Royse, Zweigart & Kirk
Attorneys at Law
215 Court Street
Maysville, Kentucky 41056
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Alex W. Rose, Assistant Attorney General
You have made inquiry of this office concerning certain questions that have arisen during the course of preparations to file a mass foreclosure suit by the third class city of Maysville to enforce city tax liens. The action you intend to bring is set out in KRS 91.484-.527 as enabled by KRS 92.810. This procedure was approved in OAG 83-159.
Your first question concerns KRS 91.484 which requires the collector of taxes to file a list of delinquent taxes with the director of finance. You indicate that Maysville does not have a director of finance and inquire whether the list must still be compiled and, if so, with whom must it be filed. It is our opinion that the list should still be compiled and that it should be filed with the chief fiscal officer of the city. It should be noted that failure to file the report does not invalidate subsequent proceedings for collection of the tax. KRS 91.484(1).
Your next question concerns the application of that portion of KRS 91.488(3) which requires that the notice of enforcement of lien include "a description of each such parcel by street address and the property valuation administrator's tax parcel number (district, block, lot and sublot) . . ." You indicate that your PVA does not use tax parcel numbers but that the parcels are each identified by a map number and sometimes by an account number. Inclusion in the notice of the street address and the PVA's identifying numbers is substantial compliance with the statute and will be sufficient notice.
You indicate that in most cases the delinquent tax bills in question here were not sold and, therefore, you inquire whether the city is deemed the holder of the tax bills for purposes of KRS 91.484, 91.487, 91.488(1) and 91.488(3). It should be noted that unlike KRS Chapter 134 (tax collection by counties) there is no provision in Chapter 91 for the sale of tax bills and their subsequent conversion into certificates of delinquency. Under this circumstance, logic dictates that the city would be deemed the holder and owner of the delinquent tax bills.
You note that KRS 91.488(1) and KRS 91.488(3) require the listing of any tax authority "owning or holding any tax bill or claiming any right, title or interest . . . or lien . . ." upon the real estate in question. You inquire whether these listings must include the various taxing authorities whose levies are included in the county tax bill or whether the county may simply be listed. In addition, you inquire whether the notice required to be mailed under KRS 91.488(4) must be mailed to each of those taxing authorities or whether it may simply be mailed to the county. A separate listing of each taxing authority and a separate notice to each taxing authority will be a more burdensome procedure. However, the fact remains that each of these taxing authorities has a lien on the real estate by virtue of the operation of KRS 134.420. Thus, it is our opinion that a separate listing for each taxing authority is required. However, since the county attorney and the Revenue Cabinet are the two enforcement entities for these liens pursuant to the provisions of KRS 134.500, mailing of the notice provided for under KRS 91.488(4) to the county attorney and to the Revenue Cabinet is sufficient notice to all taxing authorities represented on the county tax bill.
If you have further questions, please let us know.