Request By:
Mr. James William Barnett
Commonwealth Attorney
50th Judicial Circuit
111 South Fourth Street
Danville, Kentucky 40422
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
On behalf of Robert A. Geis, a citizen of Boyle County, you ask for our opinion concerning his right to petition the fiscal court in respect to the county budget.
KRS 68.260 deals with the adoption of the budget by fiscal court. The County Budget Commission is required to cause a copy of the proposed budget to be posted in a conspicuous place in the courthouse near the front door, and to be published pursuant to KRS Chapter 424, at least ten (10) days before final adoption by the fiscal court. Subsection (2) provides that "any taxpayer or group of taxpayers may petition the fiscal court in respect to the budget or any part thereof before final adoption."
Your specific question is whether the county judge, alone, can restrict this right of citizens to question the budget. The answer is "no".
The above statute simply requires the fiscal court, as a body [not the county judge unilaterally or alone], to afford to any interested citizens a reasonable opportunity to question the budget by communicating to the citizens the time and place of the fiscal court's meeting for such purpose prior to the final adoption of the budget. The setting of such a meeting to hear petitions of Boyle County citizens is a matter for the fiscal court. That body can delegate to the county judge the task of communicating or publishing the meeting notice. The fiscal court can reasonably, and by delegating the administrative procedure to the county judge, require petitioning citizens to furnish, prior to the meeting, the fiscal court with data as to the names of petitioners, any organization represented if any, and the part or parts of the budget to be discussed.
While this statute suggests democracy in action, it is apparent that the legislature intended, in order for the fiscal court to do its job, that the public's discussion of the budget be kept within reasonable bounds. There must be a proper balancing of the private right to question and the public's necessity for the orderly work of fiscal court.