City of Anchorage v. Thomas

MATTHEWS, Justice,

dissenting.

This case concerns the meaning of AS 29.53.380 as it existed in 1975. That section then read:

Proceeds of tax sale. Upon sale of foreclosed real or personal property the borough or city shall divide the proceeds less cost of collection, between the borough and the city having unpaid taxes against the property. The division is in proportion to the respective municipal taxes against the property at the time of foreclosure.

The question in this case is whether the term “proceeds” as used in the foregoing section refers to all the money received at the tax sale, or only to that portion of the money received which does not exceed delinquent taxes, penalties, interest and costs.

It is a “fundamental principle of statutory interpretation ... that a statute means what its language reasonably conveys to others.... ” North Slope Borough v. Sohio Petroleum Corp., 585 P.2d 534, 540 (Alaska 1978). In my view, the only reasonable reading of the statute is that the word “proceeds” applies to the total sum received at the sale regardless of whether it is more or less than the delinquent amount. This reading is consistent with the dictionary1 definition of the word “proceeds,”

That which results, proceeds, or accrues from some possession or transaction; esp., the amount realized from a sale of property; as, the proceeds of a sale, of a year’s labor, etc.,

while the majority’s construction is not. If the legislature had wished to direct the payment of a portion of the sale proceeds to the former owner, it would have used language indicating this intention.

Cases from other jurisdictions which have interpreted statutes having no specific provision for the distribution of tax sale proceeds support my interpretation. These cases hold, without exception so far as I know, that where a statute does not speak to the question of distribution of proceeds *275received in excess of a tax delinquency, the municipality is to remain them. See Nelson v. City of New York, 352 U.S. 103, 77 S.Ct. 195, 1 L.Ed.2d 171 (1956); Coleman v. Scheve, 367 A.2d 135 (D.C.App.1976); Kelly v. City of Boston, 204 N.E.2d 123 (Mass.1965); Oosterwyk v. County of Milwaukee, 31 Wis. 513, 143 N.W.2d 497 (Wis.1966).

For these reasons I would reverse the judgment of the superior court.

. Webster’s New International Dictionary of the English Language (2d ed. 1960). The Black’s Law Dictionary (4th ed. rev. 1968) definition of “proceeds” is to the same effect:

Issues; income; yield; receipts; produce; money or articles or other thing of value arising or obtained by the sale of property; the sum, amount, or value of property sold or converted to money or other property.