Request By:
Mr. Patrick C. Hickey
Assistant Solicitor
Office of the City Solicitor
306 City-County Building
Covington, Kentucky 41011
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: James S. Goldberg, Assistant Attorney General
This letter is in response to your correspondence in which you have asked this Office for an opinion concerning the bonding requirements of police officers in second class cities of Kentucky. Specifically, you have asked the following questions:
1) Is a bond a prerequisite to the qualifications of a peace officer?
2) May the Board of Commissioners set the amount of the required bond?
3) Can the City of Covington, as a municipal corporation, serve as surety for the bonding of their own sworn officers?
Under KRS 95.490 (2), concerning the bonding requirements for police officers in second class cities, it is stated:
"The chief of police and each other member of the police force shall give such bond to the city or urban-county government, and with such surety as may be required by ordinance, conditioned that they will faithfully perform the duties of their office and pay over to the persons entitled thereto all moneys that may come into their hands. A lien shall exist on the lands of the chief of police or policemen deputized by him, and their sureties, from the time of executing bond, for all sums of money that come into their hands." See also KRS 62.050.
In addition, KRS 89.490 states:
"The mayor and each commissioner shall execute a bond upon which an action may be maintained by any person interested in the keeping of the covenants therein contained. The bonds shall be approved by the county judge and filed as matters of public record. In cities of the third class the bonds shall be in the penal sum of $10,000, and shall run to the city. In cities of the first, second and fourth classes the bonds shall be in a penal sum fixed by the county judge, and shall run to the Commonwealth. The board of commissioners shall require bonds with adequate surety, in such amounts as it may deem advisable, from any city employe whose duties, in the opinion of the board, require a bond for faithful performance. Premiums on bonds may, in the discretion of the board of commissioners, be paid by the city."
Although KRS 89.490 provides that a second class city may, in the discretion of the board of commissioners, pay the premiums on a police officer's bond, we find no statutory authority for a city of the second class to serve as surety for the bonding of its own sworn police officers.
Therefore, in answer to your questions:
1) The execution of a bond is a prerequisite to the qualifications of a police officer in a city of the second class, under KRS 95.490.
2) Under KRS 89.490, the Board of Commissioners of a city of the second class may set the amount of the required police officer's bond.
3) In the absence of any statutory authority, we do not believe that the City of Covington, as a municipal corporation, may serve as surety for the bonding of its own sworn police officers.
I hope this opinion will satisfactorily answer all your questions. If we can be of any further service, please do not hesitate to call upon us.