Kansas Attorney General Opinion 1992-110

ROBERT T. STEPHAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
August 17, 1992
ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 92-110
Brad L. Jones
Coffey County Attorney
Courthouse, 110 S. Sixth St.
Burlington, KS 66839
Re: Counties and County Officers -- County
Commissioners -- Sale of County Property; Use of
Trade-Ins
Synopsis: A board of county commissioners-may use the
trade-in procedure when disposing of property which
does not exceed $50,000 in value. Cited herein:
K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 19-101a, as amended by L. 1992,
ch. 133, § 13; K.S.A. 19-101c; K.S.A. 1991 Supp.
19-211; K.S.A. 19-212; L. 1987, ch. 96, § 1.
Dear Mr. Jones:
As county attorney of Coffey county, you request our opinion
regarding whether the provisions of K.S.A. 1991 Supp.
19-211(b) permit the board of county commissioners of a county
to dispose of county property, the value of which does not
exceed $50,000.00, by "trading-in" that property in connection
with a publicly advertised purchase of replacement property by
competitive bid; and, if so, whether notice is sufficient if
the solicitation of bids, for a purchase of such replacement
property by a transaction including a "trade-in" of used
county property, is published at least two times in the
official county newspaper, and the notice includes the time,
place and conditions of the competitive bid letting.

Prior to 1989, K.S.A. 19-211 did not provide for the disposal
of property valued at under $25,000. (L. 1987, ch. 96, § 1).
Furthermore, until 1989, K.S.A. 19-211 only pertained to
Shawnee, Sedgwick and Johnson counties. The legislative
intent of the 1989 amendments is relevant to the questions you
pose. (See Minutes, Senate Committee on Local Government,
2-14-92; Minutes, House Committee on Local Government,
3-15-89). The amendments were prompted by the need for
alternative methods for the disposal and sale of county-owned
property. At this time, the legislature felt it was necessary
to make the law apply uniformly statewide.
In addition, the legislature, prompted by county officials,
wanted to provide for the disposal of property valued up to
$50,000. Concerns were raised that the method should operate
expeditiously and efficiently in the interest of both the
county and the public.
The legislative concerns indicate that the provision was to
allow for the most efficient and least time consuming disposal
of county property. The trade-in procedure allows for
efficient disposal of property since the county receives a
discount on the replacement purchase. This is also more
efficient because the county completes both the disposal and
repurchase in one transaction. Therefore, this method
requires less time and effort be spent on the process. Since
the trade-in procedure fulfills the concerns of the
legislature in drafting the statute, we believe it would be
appropriate under K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 19-211.
K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 19-211 does not specifically cover the use
of such property as a trade-in for new property. However,
application of additional statutes dealing with counties
indicate that the trade-in procedure is allowable. The
general powers of a county are found in K.S.A. 19-101.
Relevant to this discussion is the third provision, giving the
county power:
"To sell and convey any real or personal
estate owned by the county, and make such
order respecting the same as may be deemed
conducive to the interest of the
inhabitants;. . . ."
Also pertinent is K.S.A. 19-212, which sets forth the powers
of the county commissioners and reads in part:

From the powers given in these provisions the board of county
commissioners may use a trade-in procedure if it is "conducive
to the interest of the (county's) inhabitants."
You also inquire about the notice of publication requirements
as it pertains to trade-in property. Again, the legislative
intent and concerns seem relevant. The discussion concerning
the publication requirement indicates a desire that the public
be informed of what is happening with county assets. Although
the price may not be available to be placed in the notice,
that is not the only "condition(s) of the sale." By including
in the publication that the property will be used as a
trade-in and stating the specifications, the county can
satisfy the notice requirement. In addition, the purpose of
the requirement, to inform the public, will be achieved.
In conclusion, it is relevant to mention K.S.A. 19-101c, which
states in part:
"The powers granted counties pursuant to
this act . . . shall be liberally
construed for the purpose of giving to
counties the largest measure of self-
government."
This section further supports the board of commissioners of a
county using the trade-in procedure. Liberal construction of
these sections delegates broad power and authority to the
county board of commissioners subject to the limitations
established in K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 19-101a, as amended by L.
1992, ch. 133, § 13.
The usage of the trade-in method of disposal complies with the
purposes of K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 19-211(b). If the board finds
that a trade-in is "conducive to the interest of, the
inhabitants" of the county the broad power given the county
allows the board to use that method.
Very truly yours,
ROBERT T. STEPHAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF KANSAS
Mary Jane Stattelman
Assistant Attorney General
RTS:JLM:MJS:bas