Request By:
Honorable H. Howell Brady, Jr.
General Counsel
Office of Secretary of State
Capitol Building
Frankfort, Kentucky
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Walter C. Herdman, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
This is in answer to your letter of June 13 in which you request an interpretation of KRS 117.085 relating to absent voting as amended in 1978. You relate the following facts and question:
"By enacting House Bill 135, the 1978 Kentucky General Assembly made substantial changes in Kentucky election laws relating to absentee voting. Judging from questions raised at eleven election law seminars held by the State Board of Elections throughout the state, there is considerable confusion as to one aspect of the new law. KRS 117.085, as amended, reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
'Any qualified voter . . . may . . . make application in person or by mail to the county clerk for a special ballot, except that such application shall be restricted to the use of the voter or voter's spouse. ' (Underlined portion indicates amendment made by 1978 House Bill 135.)
"The question most frequently raised is: May a voter telephone (emphasis added) the county clerk's office and request an ' application form for an absentee ballot' be mailed to him or his spouse? "
Our response to your question would be in the affirmative. The provision in KRS 117.085 that the voter may make application to the clerk in person or by mail for an absent ballot can only refer to the return of the application application form, properly filled form, properly filled out by the voter, to the clerk for his absent ballot. This statute could not in our opinion be construed to refer to obtaining the application form by the voter for future submission back to the clerk for his absent ballot.
The use of the application form on the other hand is, by the terms of KRS 117.085, clearly restricted to the individual voter or his or her spouse, which means, we believe, that a voter can obtain at the same time not only an application form for his or herself but also one for his or her spouse by furnishing the clerk with their respective names to enable the clerk to check the registration list and type the names on the application form.
As to the method by which the voter may obtain such application forms, we find no restriction in the language of KRS 117.085 to the effect that the voter must either make a written request or appear in person. Therefore, we believe that if the voter furnishes sufficient identification on the telephone to the satisfaction of the clerk, such method of making application for the form would be legal under the terms of the statute.