Bill Targeting Liens Given Push Forward Panel Wants Law In Effect As Soon As Governor Signs

Lawmakers reacted strongly after perceived threats from witnesses testifying against legislation making it tougher to file “common law” liens against public officials.

Members of the House State Affairs Committee approved the legislation Friday despite the testimony, sending it to the full House for consideration.

Later, committee members took the unusual move of recalling the bill and voting to put it up for amendment to add an emergency clause to put it into effect as soon as it passes the Legislature and the governor signs it.

Most new bills don’t become law until July 1 of the year in which they are passed.

Some committee members even wanted to make the measure retroactive to Jan. 1, but were dissuaded when they were advised that would be an unconstitutional move.

Deputy Attorney General William von Tagen told the committee the common law liens have no legal basis, but it can be costly and cumbersome to have them removed. The liens can cloud home titles or prevent property sales.

The bill sent to the full House on Friday would provide for an expedited court procedure to challenge the liens and allows property owners to recover $5,000 or actual damages, if that’s higher, if a lien is found to be groundless, false or contains “a material misstatement.”

If a lien is found to have no basis, a property owner could be awarded attorney fees and costs for removing it.

The bill also would give county clerks more discretion to refuse to accept the liens. The measure states that clerks don’t have to accept a common law lien against a federal, state or local official based on performance or non-performance of duties, unless accompanied by a specific court order authorizing it.

Constitutionalists Gary DeMott, Bruce Haase and Francis Rife-Miller contended people have a common law right under the U.S. Constitution to file liens against officials who fail to carry out their duties.

Haase said he has a lien against his home in Washington, which prevents him from selling it. He said the lien was filed by the Internal Revenue Service, but he contended that’s unconstitutional.”You’re trying to protect people who don’t need protecting if they function constitutionally,” Haase said.

Some committee members said they interpreted the constitutionalists’ remarks as a threat they would face liens themselves or even physical harm if they supported the bill.

However, a review of television tapes disclosed no direct threats.