Opinion letter to the Honorable Haskell Holman

(Answer by Letter) Blackmar A. March 10, 1970 Honorable Haskell Holman Auditor or Missouri State Capitol Bu.ilding Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 Dear f.1r. Holman: OPINION LETTER NO. 31 Fl LE 0 .$/ You have reouested an opinion or this office on the following question: "When a county court has, by order, under the provisions of paragraph 2, Section 137.230 Cumulative Supplement 1967, adopted a method for securing a full and accurate assessment of property liable to taxation and has in- cluded in the county budget tunda to provide for the expenses thereof , the following ouea- tion arises : "Is it to be interpreted that the county court may employ clerical assistants to aid in the execution or the method adopted and to the ex- tent or assisting the assessor in changing his official records in accordance with the method adopted? " Section 137.230 (2), RSMo SUpp. 1967, provides: "2. In all counties the county court may, in addition to the foregoing provisions tor se- curing a tull and accurate assessment or all property therein liable to taxation, or in lieu thereof, by order entered or record, adopt tor the whole or any designated part or the county any other suitable and efficient means or meth- od t o the same end, whether by procuring mapa, Honorable Haskell Holman plats or abstracts of titles or the lands in the county or designated part thereof or other- wise and may require the assessor, or any other officer, agent or employee of the county to carry out the same, and may provide the means for paying therefor out of the county treasury." In Opinion Letter No. 199, Conley, June 9, 1965, this office held that Section 137.230 does not permit the county court to pay clerical and stenographic expenses incurred by the assessor's office in notifying property owners of increased valuations or assessments in excess or the amounts allowed for clerical and stenographic ex- penses of the county assessor by other statutory sections. In reach- ing that conclusion, the opinion held the purpose of Section 137.230 (2) was to ~rovide " ••• a means or method to 'ferret out' taxable property which may have escaped ita legit1iliate burden or taxation • . . • " The opinion went on to observe that, "· •• Of course, all such necessary expenses and costs incident to such means or methods but limited to that purpose are payable rrom the county treasury. 11 The opinion found that the payment of expenses incurred in notifying property owners of increased valuation or assessment was not inci- dent to t he discovery of the property and t herefore was not a per- mitted expense under Section 137.230. For purposes of this opinion, this office has been informed that the secretarial expenses are to be for transcribing the results of field investigat ions which diseovere property--not fully and ac- curately assessed--to the official records of the assessor. Here we believe that secretarial and clerical expenses are incident to the discovery of the property pursuant to Section 137.230 and there- fore may be properly paid by the county court notwithstanding other statutory provisions which limit the amount the court may expend for clerical and stenographic assistance to the county assessor. We believe that the payment of such expenses are necessary to effectuate the purpose of Section 137.230, R&~o Supp. 1967. Enclosure: Op. Letter No. 199 6-9-65. Conley Yours very truly, J OHN C. DANFORTH Attorney General