Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •     OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL - STATE OF TEXAS
    JOHN     CORNYN
    May 11,200l
    The Honorable Michael A. Stafford                         Opinion No. JC-0377
    Harris County Attorney
    1019 Congress, 15th Floor                                 Re: Whether a taxing unit may, by a “blanket”
    Houston, Texas 77002-l 700                                resolution,   authorize that tax-foreclosure-sale
    property be resold as directed by the taxing unit’s
    private tax-collection attorneys (RQ-0322-JC)
    Dear Mr. Stafford:
    Your predecessor has asked this office whether a taxing unit may, by a “blanket” or omnibus
    resolution, authorize that tax-foreclosure-sale  property be resold as directed by the taxing unit’s
    private tax-collection attorneys.’ We conclude that a taxing unit is not authorized to adopt such a
    resolution.
    We understand that Harris County, the City of Houston, and the Houston Independent School
    District have entered into an interlocal agreement regarding the sale, management, and resale of
    seized or foreclosed property. Under the agreement, property for which a sufficient bid is not
    received at the original tax sale is bid off to Harris County. The county takes title to the property
    for the use and benefit of itself, the city, and the school district. Approximately 100 such properties
    are subject to resale each month. See Request Letter, note 1, at 1. Under section 34.05(a) of the Tax
    Code, a taxing unit would normally direct, by a resolution, a sheriff or constable to sell a specific
    property. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. $34.05(c) (Vernon Supp. 2001). Instead of making requests
    by separate “property-specific” resolutions for the resale ofproperties as they are acquired, the Harris
    County Commissioners Court proposes to adopt a resolution that “requests, directs, and authorizes
    the Constables of Harris County to re-sell at public sale any and all property struck-off
    to Harris County, as requested by Linebarger Heard Goggan Blair Graham Pena & Sampson,
    LLP.” See Resolution note 1, at 2. The resolution is intended to: (1) provide that all resales be
    conducted publicly under subsections (c) and (d) of section 34.05 of the Tax Code; (2) encompass
    all tax-foreclosed property now held or hereafter acquired; and (3) authorize the resale of a specific
    property as and when a particular constable receives a request from the county’s tax-collection
    attorneys. See Request Letter, note 1, at 1-2; Memorandum, note 1, at 1.
    ‘See Letter from Michael P. Fleming, Harris County Attorney, to Honorable John Comyn, Texas Attorney
    General (Dec. 1,200O) (on file with Opinion Committee) [hereinafter Request Letter]; see also attachments to Request
    Letter (Memorandum;     Resolution Authorizing Re-Sale of Struck-Off Properties [hereinafter Resolution]).
    The Honorable    Michael A. Stafford    - Page 2       JC-0377
    It has been suggested that the county may not adopt such a resolution because section
    34.05(c) requires “property-specific” resolutions either by its terms or because the section 34.05(c)
    resolution is in the nature of a writ of execution “with the attendant deadlines for execution set out
    under” the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. See Memorandum, supra note 1, at 1. We conclude that
    the county may not adopt the blanket resolution described, but for a different reason. In our opinion,
    section 34.05(c) does not require property-specific resolutions. We believe, however, that section
    34.05(c) requires a taxing unit to direct the resale of specific properties. Thus, in the absence of
    legislative authority providing otherwise, a taxing unit may not delegate this authority to its private
    tax-collection attorneys.
    To provide a legal context for your predecessor’s question, we review the Tax Code
    provisions regarding foreclosure and sale of property subject to a tax lien. A taxing unit may file
    suit to foreclose the lien securing payment of a delinquent tax in a court of competent jurisdiction
    for the county in which the tax is imposed. See TEX.TAX CODEANN. 8 33.41 (Vernon Supp. 2001).
    If a judgment in the suit is for foreclosure of the tax lien, the court must order sale of the property
    in satisfaction of the judgment. See 
    id. $ 33.53(a).
    On the application of a taxing unit that is party
    to the judgment, the district clerk must prepare an order directing the sheriff or any constable in the
    county to sell the property. See 
    id. 0 33.53(b);
    TEX. R. CIV. P. 622,629. Such an “order of sale, as
    a writ of execution, is a process of the court from which it is issued.” Clint Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Cash
    Inv., Inc., 970 S.W.2d 535,538 (Tex. 1998) (citing TEX.R. CIV. P. 622). “The foreclosure judgment
    and the order of sale establish the [peace officer’s] authority to sell, the manner of sale, and the terms
    of the sale.” Id.; see also 
    id. at 537
    (valid judgment, execution, and sale are required to pass title to
    property at an execution sale).
    Section 34.01 of the Tax Code deals with the initial sale of property ordered sold under the
    court’s judgment and order of sale. See TEX. TAX CODEANN. 8 34.01 (Vernon Supp. 2001) (“Sale
    of Property”). Such property “shall be sold by the officer charged with selling the property, unless
    otherwise directed by the taxing unit that requested the order of sale or by an authorized agent or
    attorney for that unit.” 
    Id. 0 34.01
    (a). The sale must “be conducted in the manner similar property is
    sold under execution except as otherwise provided by” subtitle E of the Tax Code. See 
    id. 0 34.01(a);
    TEX. R. CIV. P. 621-656 (“Executions”). When a sufficient bid at the foreclosure sale is
    not received, the property is “bid off, ” i.e., sold, to the taxing unit that requested the order of sale.
    See TEX. TAX CODEANN. 0 34.01 (a)(j) (V emon Supp. 2001). The taxing unit to which the property
    is bid off takes title to the property in trust for itself and all the other taxing units that have
    established tax liens in the tax suit. See 
    id. fj 34.01(k).
    Section 34.05 deals with the resale by a taxing unit of property to which it has taken title at
    an initial foreclosure sale. See 
    id. 4 34.05
    (“Resale by Taxing Unit”). The “taxing unit may sell the
    property at any time by public or private sale.” 
    Id. 9 34.05(a).
    Subsections (c) and (d) provide for
    the sale of the property at a public sale:
    (c) The taxing unit purchasing the property by resolution of
    its governing body may request the sherzflor a constable to sell the
    The Honorable Michael A. Stafford       - Page 3    JC-0377
    property at a public sale. If the purchasing taxing unit has not sold
    the property within six months after the date on which the owner’s
    right of redemption terminates, any taxing unit that is entitled to
    receive proceeds of the sale by resolution of its governing body may
    request the sheriff or a constable in writing to sell the property at a
    public sale. On receipt of a request made under this subsection, the
    sheriff or constable shall sell the property as provided by Subsection
    (d), unless the property is sold under Subsection (h) [private sale] or
    (i) [sale of property at a lesser amount] before the date set for the
    public sale.
    (d) Except as provided by this subsection, all public sales
    requested as provided by Subsection (c) shall be conducted in the
    mannerprescribed by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure for the sale
    ofproperty under execution. The notice of the sale must contain a
    description of the property to be sold, which must be a legal
    description in the case of real property, the number and style of the
    suit under which the property was sold at the tax foreclosure sale, and
    the date of the tax foreclosure sale. If the commissioners court of a
    county by order specifies the date or time at which or location in the
    county where a public sale requested under Subsection (c) shall be
    conducted, the sale shall be conducted on the date and at the time and
    location specified in the order.
    
    Id. 0 34.05(c),
    (d) (emphasis added).
    The question before us relates to the section 34.05(c) resolution required of the taxing unit
    to request the resale of property at a public sale under section 34.05(d). Your predecessor asked:
    Whether a taxing unit . . . under [section] 34.05(c) may, by a ‘blanket’
    or omnibus resolution, direct that any and all such property be resold
    in the manner provided by [section] 34.05(d) and at such times and
    with respect to such property as might be periodically requested by
    the taxing unit’s law firm.
    Request Letter, supra note 1, at 1. Again, the concern is that section 34.05(c) requires “property-
    specific” resolutions either by its terms or because the section 34.05(c) resolution is in the nature
    of a writ of execution subject to the execution provisions of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. See
    
    id. at 2;
    Memorandum, supra note 1, at l-2.
    Subsection (c) does not expressly require a governing body to adopt a separate resolution to
    request the resale of each property that the taxing unit acquires. And we decline to imply such a
    cumbersome requirement in the absence of any indication in the statute of that intent. See TEX.
    The Honorable    Michael A. Stafford    - Page 4       JC-0377
    GOV’TCODEANN. $311.021(4)            (V emon 1998) (Code Construction Act) (“In enacting a statute, it
    is presumed that. . . a result feasible of execution is intended . . . .“). We do not believe that the use
    of the singular “property” in the statute is significant in this regard. See 
    id. 6j 3
    11.012(b) (“The
    singular includes the plural and the plural includes the singular.“).
    Nor do we believe that such a requirement must be implied because the section 34.05(c)
    resolution is the equivalent of a “writ of execution” subject to the execution provisions of the Texas
    Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 621 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[tlhe
    judgments of the district, county, and justice courts shall be enforced by execution or other
    appropriate process[,]” that must be “returnable in thirty, sixty, or ninety days as requested by the
    plaintiff, his agent or attorney.” TEX. R. CIV. P. 621; see also 
    id. 629 (execution
    must be executed
    by clerk or justice, must bear seal of court if issued by district or county court, must describe
    judgment, and require officer to return within 30, 60, 90 days as directed by plaintiff).              The
    significance of this provision (as it relates to the resale resolution) is that authority of a sheriff or
    constable to sell property under a writ of execution ceases on its return date. See Long v. Castaneda,
    475 S.W.2d 578,583 (Tex. Civ. App.-Corpus Christi 1971, writ ref d n.r.e). Thus, an execution sale
    made after the return date stated in the writ of execution is void and does not pass title of the
    property to its purchaser. See Smith v. Adams, 333 S. W.2d 892,893 (Tex. Civ. App.-Eastland 1960,
    writ ref d n.r.e.).
    We do not believe the execution provisions of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure apply to
    the section 34.05(c) resale resolution. An “execution” or “writ of execution” is “[a] court order
    directing a sheriff or other officer to enforce a judgment, [usually] by seizing and selling the
    judgment debtor’s property.” BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY589-90 ( 7th ed. 1999). Thus the Texas
    Rules of Civil Procedure state that “[a]n execution is a process of the court from which it is issued.”
    TEX. R. CIV. P. 622. The section 34.05(c) resolution follows the sale of property pursuant to a
    previously issued “order of sale,” i.e., a writ of execution, under section 33.53(b) of the Tax Code.
    See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. $9 33.53(b) (Vernon Supp. 2001) (on application of taxing unit party to
    judgment, district clerk must prepare order directing officer to sell property); 34.01(a), (j) (if
    sufficient bid not received, property “bid off’ to taxing unit that requested order of sale). Unlike
    an “order of sale,” issued by the district clerk under section 33.53(b) of the Tax Code, the section
    34.05(c) resale resolution is not a “process” of a district, county, or justice court to enforce its
    judgment.     Instead, it is a directive by the taxing unit that already owns the foreclosed property
    to resell it at a public sale to collect the taxes due and return the property to the tax rolls. See 
    id. 8 34.05.
    While section 34.05(d) requires that the public resale be conducted in the manner provided
    by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedures for execution sales, nothing in this section or another
    provision of section 34.05 indicates that the resolution of the taxing unit requesting the resale must
    conform to the requirements applicable to a writ of execution issued by a court in the exercise of its
    judicial functions. See 
    id. 0 34.05(d).
    In short, while it may be advisable to adopt a separate resolution to request the resale of each
    property that a taxing unit acquires as a result of a “bid off’ at a tax-foreclosure sale, we do not
    believe that a taxing unit is required to do so under section 34.05(c) of the Tax Code. We also agree
    The Honorable    Michael A. Stafford    - Page 5      JC-0377
    with your predecessor that a validly adopted resolution or order of a governmental unit remains in
    effect until set aside or superseded by another order. See Stephens v. Mills Co., 113 S. W.2d 944,946
    (Tex. Civ. App.-Austin       1938, no writ); Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No. O-2504 (1940). Thus, section
    34.05(c) does not prohibit a taxing unit from adopting a standing resolution directing the sheriff or
    a constable to resell at a public sale foreclosed property the taxing unit acquires. However, the more
    significant issue raised with respect to the resolution at issue is the authority of a taxing unit to
    delegate its authority to direct the resale of specific property to its private tax-collection attorneys
    by providing that they instruct the sheriff or a constable as to when specific properties are sold.
    Section 34.05(c) expressly requires the “taxing unit purchasing the property” to “request the
    sheriff or a constable to sell the property at a public sale.” TEX.TAX CODEANN. 0 34.05(c) (Vernon
    Supp. 2001). This provision, by its terms, contemplates that the taxing unit will direct the sheriff or
    a constable regarding the sale of property. See 
    id. Unless expressly
    authorized by the legislature,
    a governmental entity may not delegate its legislatively entrusted authority to another entity. See
    ClearLake City WaterAuth. v. ClearLake Util. Co., 549 S.W.2d385,391 (Tex. 1977) (conservation
    and reclamation district could not enter contract with utility company as to restrict free exercise of
    its statutory governmental powers or to abdicate its governmental functions even for a “reasonable
    time”) (and cases cited therein). Neither section 34.05(c) or any other statutory provision that we
    have found authorizes the taxing unit to delegate its property-resale-request    authority. Section 6.30
    of the Tax Code, which authorizes a taxing unit to contract with attorneys to enforce the collection
    of delinquent taxes, does not on its face vest tax-collection attorneys with the authority to act as
    taxing units’ agents for the purpose of a section 34.05(c) resale. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 0 6.30
    (Vernon 1992). Moreover, when the legislature has intended to authorize a taxing unit’s attorneys
    or other persons to act as agents for the taxing unit in the sale of foreclosed property, it has so
    expressly provided.       Section 34.01(a), dealing with the initial sale of foreclosed property, for
    example, provides that the property “shall be sold by the officer charged with selling the property,
    unless otherwise directed by the taxing unit that requested the order of sale or by an authorized agent
    or attorney for that unit.” 
    Id. 0 34.01
    (a) (V emon Supp. 2001) (emphasis added). Section 34.05(c)
    contains no such provision and it would be inappropriate for this office to insert it into the statute.
    See Cameron v. Terre11 & Garrett, Inc., 618 S.W.2d 535,540 (Tex. 1981) (“[Elvery word excluded
    from a statute must also be presumed to have been excluded for a purpose. Only when it is necessary
    to give effect to the clear legislative intent can we insert additional words or requirements into a
    statutory provision.“); see also Laidlaw Waste Sys., Inc. v. City of Wilmer, 904 S.W.dd 656, 659
    (Tex. 1995) (stating that language excluded from a statute “must . . . be presumed to have been
    excluded for a purpose”). In the absence of legislative authority providing otherwise, a taxing unit
    may not delegate its authority to direct the resale of specific property at a public sale by authorizing
    its private tax-collection attorneys to direct the sheriff or a constable as to when specific properties
    are sold. Accordingly, we conclude that a taxing unit may not adopt the “blanket” resolution.
    The Honorable Michael A. Stafford      - Page 6       JC-0377
    SUMMARY
    A taxing unit may not by a “blanket” resolution authorize
    that tax-foreclosure-sale property be resold as directed by its private
    tax-collection attorneys.      In the absence of legislative authority
    providing otherwise, a taxing unit may not delegate its authority to
    direct the resale of specific property at a public sale by authorizing its
    private tax-collection attorneys to direct the sheriff or a constable as
    to when specific properties are sold.
    JOHN     CORNYN
    Attorney General of Texas
    ANDY TAYLOR
    First Assistant Attorney General
    SUSAN D. GUSKY
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Sheela Rai
    Assistant Attorney General - Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JC-377

Judges: John Cornyn

Filed Date: 7/2/2001

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017