Nothing authorizes tax levies greater than those approved
Letter to the Editor,
The Honorable County Commissioners of Lincoln County:
I respectively amend my previous request, submitted to the Lincoln County Treasurer, Ms. Nancy Trotter Higgins served personally to designated staff on April 2, 2014. It has come to my attention that to actuate processing and prompt payment of a refund, the order of the county commissioners is operative to said request. In regards to the order, the following state statute is controlling:
15-16-603. Refund of taxes — limitations on refunds.
(1) subject to the provisions in subsections (2) and (3), a board of county commissioners shall order a refund: (a) on a tax, penalty, interest, or cost paid more than once or erroneously or illegally collected if an appeal pursuant to 15-1-402 was not available;
(2) The taxpayer shall prove that a refund is due under subsection (1)(a) or (1)(b).
(3)(a) A refund may not be granted under subsection (1)(a) or (1)(b) unless the taxpayer or a representative of the taxpayer files a written claim with the board of county commissioners within 10 years after the date when the second half of the taxes would have become delinquent if the taxes had not been paid.
Pursuant to the above-referenced statutes, it is the stipulation of the property owner below that the attached request for refund is appropriate in amount for relief and submitted within the 10-year limitation, 15-16-603(3)(a). It is seemingly unquestioned that a property tax amount was “erroneously or illegally collected” on the property tax parcel of the respective owner named below.
Whether the “taking” was erroneous or illegal has not been adjudicated. For purposes of clarification, however, this property owner believes that the “taking” was illegal and contrary to state statutory authorization.
It is the opinion of this author that the property tax payment in question was illegally collected by the duly elected local governmental unit representatives, Lincoln County commissioners, and subsequently approved by state administrative officials with auditing oversight duty.
Approval of increased property tax amounts, exceeding authorized voter approved mill levies is contrary to specific dispositive statute per MCA 15-10-425(5), cl.,2:
However, nothing in this subsection authorizes a governing body to impose more than the approved levy in any fiscal year or to extend the duration of the approved levy.
It is the contention of this property owner that the unauthorized imposition of property tax levies, in the preceding three fiscal years, was contrary to statutory limitation, and is now in dispute with this request for an order for relief.
Statute construction is governed by plain language canons of interpretation by any judicial body; nothing is the operative word in the statute.
Black’s Law Dictionary (9th ed. 2009) did not contain a specific definition of a singular nothing action so another source will suffice: “No thing; not anything; naught.”
An appeal pursuant to 15-1-402 is not available because the payment of property tax liabilities has already been made. Relief in the form of payments “under protest” offers no relief to the property owner in this instance nor would appeal.
The proof of the refund due, under 15-16-603(1)(a), is contained in the request submitted to the county treasurer on April 2, 2014. Said refund request was determined by appropriate county treasurer’s office staff and county clerk and recorder staff.
Officials of Lincoln County, designated by Lincoln County commissioners, have arrived at an appropriate figure which this property owner neither contests but stipulates to. Be advised, however, that interest will begin to accrue after 30 days with no payment received in the form of a refund.
The property owner will not speculate on the relative merits of proffered palliative measures discussed to date by Lincoln County Commissioners.
The property owner below intends to pursue remedy offered by MCA 15-16-604, pending Lincoln County commissioners’ timely response, unless otherwise made whole by the illegal property tax amount collected over the last three fiscal years.
Dale Swapinski
Libby