Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Sale Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves amendments to tax‑sale process after floor debate over surplus proceeds
Summary
The Utah Senate passed S.B. 46, adjusting property tax‑sale procedures and reinstating language removed in committee. Debate focused on whether surplus sale proceeds should revert to property owners or be handled through the statetreasurer—s unclaimed property process.
The Utah Senate voted to pass Senate Bill 46, a measure modifying procedures for sales of tax‑delinquent property, after a floor amendment and extended debate over how surplus proceeds are handled.
Senator Bunnell moved to reinstate a line deleted in committee (page 3, line 18), saying the change was intended only to clarify procedure and "the time is 5 years and always has been, and we did not in this bill shorten the length of time" for redemption. The Senate adopted the reinstatement motion and later approved the bill by recorded vote.
The most contested question was whether a county could sell only part of a parcel to satisfy outstanding taxes and whether any surplus above taxes, penalties and administrative costs should be returned to property owners or become state unclaimed property. Senator Peterson pressed for clearer language, asking why paragraph language requiring sales sufficient to cover costs remained if other statute sections allow sales for whatever price is obtained. Brent Gardner, director of the Utah Association of Counties, explained the bill would allow counties to sell at any price above taxes and penalties and that excess proceeds would be handled under the unclaimed property procedures administered by the state treasurer.
Kathy, identified as legal counsel during the floor discussion, told senators that when surplus funds are turned over to the state treasurer they would be handled as unclaimed property and the treasurer would publish notice and seek the last known address to return funds to any claimant. Several senators urged that the bill should explicitly clarify notice steps or that surplus funds known to belong to a known owner be returned directly, but counsel and the association representatives said current unclaimed property law already prescribes notice and reclamation steps.
On the recorded vote the bill passed (25 yeas, 4 nays) and was referred to the House for further action.
The Senate also agreed to send the bill to the committee of the whole for additional explanation and discussion by interested stakeholders during earlier floor colloquy; no additional amendments were adopted at that time. The bill will proceed to the House under the usual interchamber process.
