Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1951 )


Menu:
  • TIX[EAT-I-OI~NEY GENERAL OP ?lYExAs PRICE DANIEL . ATTOR?&YGENESN. October 8, 1951 Hon. Otto P. Moore, Sr. Opinion NO. V-1302 County Attorney Colorado County Re: Legality of r,eservetion & Columbus, Texas minerals by a county upon sale of land which the county Dear Mr. Moore: bought in at a tax foreclosure. You request~the ,opinion of this office upon the ques- tions ~presented in.yo’ur ,letter, which is copied in part as follows: “I hereby request fan official opinion on the fol- lowing questions: “1, Can Colo~radb County, as a ‘purchasing tax- ing unit, after the expiration of the redemption period plus six months, sell the surface only~and retain the minerals of a tract of land which was bought in by the County at a tax foreclosure salve? “2. If the County, canretain the minerals under such tract,‘then what interest, if any; would then State have in such minerals (the %&being the only other taxing unit involved) after the surface is sold and the State us pro rata share of the ‘proceeds have’been paid to the State? “3. If the first question,is anewered in the nega- tive, then can the’ County, or the ~Cpunty”and State to- gether, after the expiration of the redem$ion ,pe riod plus six months, execute a valid mineral:lease on such .. a tract of land which was bought in by the County at a tax foreclosure sale, instead of selling such tract? “4. If the County, or the County and State togeth- er, can execute a valid mineral lease on such a tract of land, what would be the respective, shares of the Gear&g and the State .Ln the bonus and delay rentah d ,mmchl lea se? “The facts are as follow,s: In 1939, Colorado County instituted suit for the collection of taxers delin- quent against a 93 acre tract of land. The State was made 4 party to the suit; there was no other political ‘. bin. Otto P. Moore, Sr., Page 2 (V-1302) subdivision Involved. The suit was prosecuted to judg- ment, order of sale was issued, and at the sale there- under in 1940 the tract was bought in by Colorado Coun- ty and has been h,eld by the County since that time. The County now wishes to sell the surface only of this tract, retaining all minerals. The surfa,ce is grazing land, and we can reasonably expect the sale of the surface only to bring considerably more than the taxes, penal- ties, interest and court costs against the land. The ex- cess proceeds over such taxes, penalty, interest and court costs wou,ld be divided between the State and the ‘County pro rata bnd in proportion fo the amounts of their tax liens. The land is not in a productive miner- al area, and is not now under a mineral lease; however, it is believed that a mineral lease on this land can be sold if same is advertised for leasing.” Under the facts submitted by you, Colorado County be- came the purchasing taxing unit, and as such is vested with author- ity to make a second sale. Section 9 of Article 7345b, V.C.S., reads in part as follows: “If the property be sold to any taxing unit which is a part.y to the judgment under decree of Court in said suit, the titl~e to said property shall be bid in and held by the taxing unit purchasing same for the use and benefit of itself and all other taxing units which are parties to the suit e , .” This section of Article 7345b prescribes the procedure to be followed by the purchasing taxing unit in making a second sale of the property so purchased for the benefit of all the taxing units which were parties to the suit and judgment. The collection of de- linquent taxes and the enforcement of the constitutional and siatu- tory lien to secure the payment thereof is exclusively statutory. This section of the statute further provides: 6. and the purchaser . . . of the property at any such sale shall receive all of the right, title and inter- est in said property as was acquired and is then held by said taxing unit - tinder such tax foreclosure sale to it; . . . It is thus clearly provided by statute that all of the right, title, and interest in said property is to be conveyed by the taxing unit and acquired by the purchaser. This precludes the re- tention by the selling taxing unit of any mineral interest in the land. We agree with you that the answer to your first question is in the negati,ve. This conclusion renders unnecessary an answer to your second question. Hon. Otto P. Moore, Sr,, Page 3 (V-1302) We now pass to yout third question, which raises the authority of the purchasing taxing unit, either alone or in conjunc- tion with the other taxing units involved in the suit and judgment, to execute a mineral lease to the lands so purchased at such tax foreclosure sale by the taxing unit. A careful reading of all of the provisions of Article 7345b. V.C.S.. and other statotts that are cumulative thereto, discloses that there is no statutory authority for the purchasing taxing unit, alone or in conjunction with the other interested taxing units, to execute a mineral lease upon the property p(*rchased at tax foreclosure sale. We agree .with you that under’ present laws there is no authority except to sell, and then as pointed out in our answer to your first question, all right, title, and interest in said property held by the t&ing unit for it- self and for the benefit of the other taxing units must be sold. Therefore, your third question should be answered in the nega- tive. This eliminates the necessity of answering your fourth ques tlon~ SUMMARY :..*The purchasing taxing unit in a tax foreclosure sale, either alone or in conjunction with the other in- terested taxing units, has no authority to sell the sur- face and retain the mineral rights in the land so pur- chased and sold or to execute a mineral lease upon such land. The only autho,rity granted under present laws is to sell all the right, title, and interest whioh the purchasing unit for itself and as trustee for the other interested taxing units has in said property. Art. 7345b, V.C.S. Yours very truly, PRICE DANIEL Attorney General APPROVED: ev, .0--J I&qkg Lo z W. V. Geppert Assistant Taxation Division Jesse P. Luton, Jr. Reviewing Assista~nt Charles D. Mathews First Assistant LPL/mwb

Document Info

Docket Number: V-1302

Judges: Price Daniel

Filed Date: 7/2/1951

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017