Utah County commissioners withdraw tax sale after ownership errors emerge

In a recent Utah County Commission meeting, significant discussions centered around a tax sale protest filed by Kirk Sanford on behalf of his father, Howard Ray Sanford. The protest concerns a parcel of land that was sold at a tax auction, which the Sanford family claims has been in their possession for over 40 years. The meeting highlighted procedural errors in the tax sale process, particularly regarding notification of the correct property owner.

The commission initially addressed the protest, which argued that the sale should be overturned due to a boundary agreement and the doctrine of boundary by acquiescence. However, it was revealed that the county had failed to notify the rightful owner of the property due to an error in the recording of ownership dating back to 2001. This oversight meant that the property was sold without the correct owner being informed, a requirement under Utah law.

Bert Harvey from the Utah County Clerk Auditor's office explained that the ownership issue stemmed from a quitclaim deed that incorrectly changed the recorded owner to Home Savings Bank, despite the actual ownership being with the Sanford family. This error led to the county notifying the wrong party about the tax sale, which is a critical violation of the notification process.

Paul Jones from the county attorney's office emphasized that the commission has three options regarding the protest: award the property to the bidder, reject all bids and require the property to be resold, or withdraw the property from the sale if it is in the public's best interest. Given the circumstances, he recommended withdrawing the property from the sale due to the failure to notify the correct owner.

Kirk Sanford, representing his family, expressed their surprise at the auction and reiterated their long-standing claim to the property based on historical boundaries defined by fence lines. He presented evidence of the property’s use and the family's historical ties to it, arguing that the county's failure to notify them constituted a significant oversight.

The commission ultimately agreed that the failure to notify the correct owner was a compelling reason to withdraw the property from the sale. They decided to deny the protest based on the grounds presented but acknowledged the need to address the notification issue separately. This decision allows the Sanford family time to resolve the ownership dispute while ensuring that the property is not sold without proper notification in the future.

The meeting underscored the complexities involved in property ownership disputes, particularly in a rapidly growing area like Utah County, where such issues are not uncommon. The commission's actions reflect a commitment to uphold property rights and ensure that all parties are fairly notified in tax sale processes. The next steps will involve further discussions on how to rectify the ownership records and potentially resell the property in compliance with legal requirements.