Jan Satterfield Butler County Attorney 214 West Central El Dorado, Kansas 67042
Dear Ms. Satterfield:
You request our interpretation of K.S.A.
K.S.A.
"The owner, lessee or operator of any watercraft dock where any one or more watercraft are docked shall furnish the county clerk or assessor of the county wherein such watercraft dock is located a list of all watercraft docked thereat and a list of the names and addresses of the owners of said watercraft as of January 1 of each year and shall notify the county clerk or assessor of any watercraft docked at such premises after January 1 and before July 1 of each year. Such information shall be furnished in the manner and on forms prescribed by the director of property valuation.
"As used in this section the term `watercraft' shall mean `vessel' as defined by K.S.A. 82a-802, and the term `watercraft dock' shall include marina, wharf, pier, landing place, or boathouse."
K.S.A.
It has been suggested that K.S.A.
"Every person, association, company or corporation who shall own or hold, subject to his or her control, any tangible personal property shall list said property for assessment. . . .
. . . .
"If any person, association, company or corporation shall have in their possession or custody any tangible personal property belonging to others not specifically included in the foregoing, it shall be their duty to list such property with the assessor in the name of the owner thereof."1
The Attorney General concluded that, under this statute, if the country club/lessor of the storage area did not have control, possession or custody of the golf carts, then it was not responsible for listing the golf carts for taxation. Apparently, there was no statute at the time that specifically required country club owners or operators to list the property of those who stored golf carts on the property owned, leased or operated by the club. The general statute requiring listing of property, K.S.A.
"It is a fundamental rule of statutory construction, to which all other rules are subordinate, that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. The legislature is presumed to have expressed its intent through the language of the statutory scheme it enacted. When a statute is plain and unambiguous, the court must give effect to the intention of the legislature as expressed, rather than determine what the law should or should not be. Stated another way, when a statute is plain and unambiguous, the appellate courts will not speculate as to the legislative intent behind it and will not read such a statute so as to add something not readily found in the statute."2
K.S.A.
In conclusion, K.S.A.
Very truly yours,
CARLA J. STOVALL Attorney General of Kansas
Julene L. Miller Deputy Attorney General
CJS:JLM:jm
