Request By:
Jim Owen Gaines, President
Property Valuation Administrator
Woodford County
Versailles, Kentucky 40383
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By William S. Riley, Assistant Attorney General
In your recent letter to the Attorney General it is stated that under KRS 132.590(6) the property valuation administrator's office is allowed by the state as compensation for deputies, other authorized personnel, and for other authorized expenditures, 1 1/4 cent on each $100 of the property assessed, including the amount of assessment on which taxes are deferred under the agricultural and horticultural land act but exclusive of livestock and farm machinery on the first $250,000,000 and 1cent on each $100 of the property assessed over $250,000,000.
The question is whether the statute, as written, requires the Kentucky legislature to actually appropriate and include in the budget, as passed by that body, the full amount of such funds so earned or is it permissible for the legislature to appropriate, or the Department of Finance to budget, a lesser amount of funds than the statute sets out.
In order to adequately answer the questions posed, the full subsection in question must be examined. Subsection (6) of KRS 132.590 reads as follows:
"(6) The property valuation administrator's office shall be allowed by the state as compensation for deputies, other authorized personnel, and for other authorized expenditures, one and one-quarter cents ($ .0125) on each one hundred dollars ($100) of the property assessed, including the amount of assessment on which taxes are deferred under the agricultural and horticultural land act but exclusive of livestock and farm machinery, on the first two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,000) and one cent ($ .01) on each one hundred dollars ($100) of the property assessed over two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,000); but the total sum allowed by the state to any property valuation administrator's office as compensation for deputies, other authorized personnel, and for other authorized expenditures shall not exceed the limits set forth in the following table:
Assessed Value of Property of: At LeastBut Less ThanLimit$300,000,000$35,000$300,000,000500,000,00050,000500,000,0002,000,000,000100,0002,000,000,000The amount fixedby the departmentof revenue.
However, each property valuation administrator's office shall be allowed as a minimum such funds that are required to meet the federal minimum wage requirements for one (1) full time deputy. Each property valuation administrator shall submit each biennium to the department of revenue a budget for his office which shall be based upon the state, county and city funds available to his office and show the amount to be expended for deputy and other authorized personnel including employer's share of FICA and state retirement, and other authorized expenses of the office. Each property valuation administrator may appoint any persons approved by the department of revenue to assist him in the discharge of his duties. Each deputy must be more than twenty-one (21) years of age and may be removed at the pleasure of the property valuation administrator. The salaries of deputies and other authorized personnel shall be fixed by the property valuation administrator in accordance with the grade classification system established by the department of revenue and shall be subject to the approval of the department of revenue. Any deputy property valuation administrator employed, or promoted to a higher position may be examined by the department of revenue in accordance with standards of the department of personnel, for the position to which he is being appointed or promoted. No state funds available to any property valuation administrator's office as compensation for deputies and other authorized personnel or for other authorized expenditures shall be paid without authorization of the department of revenue prior to the employment by the property valuation administrator of deputies or other authorized personnel or the incurring of other authorized expenditures. " (Emphasis added)
In the interpretation of a statute, the legislature is presumed to have inserted every part for a purpose. A statute is not to be construed in such manner as to render it partly ineffective or inefficient if another construction will make it effective. Significance and effect should, if possible, without destroying the sense or effect of the law be accorded every part of the act, section, paragraph, sentence or clause, phrase or word. See 73 Am.Jur.2d, Statutes, Section 250.
Our own Court of Appeals, now Supreme Court, stated in Moore v. Alsmiller, 160 S.W.2d 10, 289 Ky. 282 (1942), that in the construction of statutes, the primary rule is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature and that the intention must be determined from the language of the statute itself, if possible. Also see Kentucky Association of Chiropractors, Inc. v. Jefferson County Medical Society, 549 S.W.2d 817 (1977) where the Court stated that in determining the intent of the General Assembly in enacting legislation, the primary rule is to ascertain the intention from the words employed in enacting the statute, rather than surmising what may have been intended but not expressed.
Keeping in mind the above principles, it is apparent from an examination of KRS 132.590(6) that even though it specifies certain monies which are authorized for the PVA's office, for deputies, other authorized personnel and expenditures, such amounts are merely standards that cannot be exceeded in arriving at the amount of money to be appropriated to such offices. It will be noted that each PVA must submit each biennium to the Department of Revenue a budget based upon the state, county and city funds available for deputies, authorized personnel and other authorized expenditures and that state funds cannot be paid without authorization of the Department of Revenue.
It is our opinion, therefore, that the amount set forth in the statute are maximum amounts that cannot be exceeded in appropriations to specific counties. They are not amounts which the legislature is required to appropriate because of the provisions in the statute stating that the PVA's budget must be based upon state, county and city funds available and expenditures of such funds must be based upon the Department of Revenue's approval.