Skip to main content

Request By:

Mr. H. W. Roberts, Jr.
Suite 200 Clinton Bank Building
Clinton, Kentucky 42031

Opinion

Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General

You raise the question as to whether or not the Hickman County Fiscal Court could make expenditures on a street in a 5th class city.

We concluded in OAG 73-466, copy enclosed, that a fiscal court could make an appropriation of county money in connection with the construction or maintenance of a city street located within the county. This permissibility was occasioned by the 1964 amendment to KRS 178.010, which defines "county roads". Prior to the 1964 amendment this section provided that county roads were all public roads outside of incorporated cities, except primary roads and federal parkways. However, the amendment to this section now reads that county roads are public roads which have been accepted by the fiscal court of the county as a part of the county road system. Thus, we concluded there, as we conclude now, that KRS 178.010 permits a fiscal court to take city streets into the county road system, subject to proper budgetary and financial limitations. However, the fiscal court in entering such a formal order would have to keep in mind that this city of the 5th class, under KRS 94.360, has exclusive jurisdiction or control over the public ways or streets of that city.

Of course, as we pointed out in OAG 73-466, a county is under no obligation or duty to absorb a city street into the county system.

Our position is buttressed by Sections 2 and 3 of House Bill 152 [1978 Session], amending KRS 67.080, to which you referred. These sections enable the fiscal court to pass ordinances relating to roads in the county generally. The so called "Home Rule Bill" [H.B. 152] does not particularize roads as relates to municipalities. In that basic sense it is in conformity with the spirit of KRS 178.010. Thus today, as well as June 17, 1978, [effective date of H.B. 152, Sections 2 and 3], and thereafter, the fiscal court has authority to appropriate money for the construction or maintenance or improvement of any road segment lying within the boundaries of the county.

In general this permissibility would also apply to bridges. See KRS 178.010. Cf. OAG 65-381, copy enclosed, citing cases holding that in certain cases a county may be required to construct or aid in the construction of a bridge, although it might be located within the city limits.

Disclaimer:
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.
Type:
Opinion
Lexis Citation:
1978 Ky. AG LEXIS 476
Cites (Untracked):
  • OAG 65-381
Neighbors

Support Our Work

The Coalition needs your help in safeguarding Kentuckian's right to know about their government.