AGO 98035.

• Court: Nebraska

Nebraska Attorney General Opinions 1998. AGO 98035. DATE: August 20, 1998SUBJECT: Deadline for Filing of County Petitions Seeking Adjustments to Classes or Subclasses of Property Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-1504.01 (Supp. 1997), as amended by 1998 Neb. Laws, LB 306.REQUESTED BY: Mark P. Reynolds, Chairman Tax Equalization and Review CommissionWRITTEN BY: Don Stenberg, Attorney General L. Jay Bartel, Assistant Attorney General The Tax Equalization and Review Commission ["TERC" or the "Commission"] has requested our opinion concerning the interpretation of an amendment to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-1504.01 (Supp. 1997) altering the date for the filing of petitions by counties requesting an adjustment to a class or subclass of property. Section 77-1504.01, prior to its amendment by 1998 Neb. Laws, LB 306, § 22, provided that petitions by counties seeking adjustments for classes or subclasses of property were to "be filed with the commission on or before August 4." LB 306 amended the statute to provide that such petitions "must be filed with the commission on or before August 1." LB 306 was signed by the Governor on February 12, 1998, and, having been passed with an emergency clause, became effective on February 13, 1998. Your question is whether, due to the amendment to § 77-1504.01 which changed the date by which counties must file petitions requesting the Commission to make adjustments to classes or subclasses of property, the Commission may consider and act on petitions filed after August 1, 1998. A fundamental principle of statutory construction is to attempt to ascertain legislative intent and to give effect to that intent. County of Lancaster v. Maser, 224 Neb. 566, 400 N.W.2d 238 (1987). The reasons for the enactment of a statute, and the purposes and objects of the act, may be guides in attempting to give effect to the intent of lawmakers. State v. Jennings, 195 Neb. 434, 238 N.W.2d 477 (1976). "In the absence of anything indicating to the contrary, statutory language should be given its plain and ordinary meaning." Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 590, 477 N.W.2d 8, 16 (1991). In construing a legislative act, resort may be had to the history of its passage for the purpose of determining legislative intent. Georgetowne Ltd. Partnership v. Geotechnical Services, Inc., 230 Neb. 22, 430 N.W.2d 34 (1988). The plain language of §...