Request By:
Mr. George G. Harralson, III
Route 2 - Box 40
Princeton, Kentucky 42445
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Walter C. Herdman, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
This is in response to your letter of March 30 in which you relate that the city of Princeton, a member of the joint city-county planning and zoning commission, has not appropriated any funds for the joint operation of the commission. The question is raised as to whether or not it is mandatory on the part of the city to contribute to the joint operation of the commission in view of KRS 100.177 and 83A.130 (2).
In response to your question we initially refer you to KRS 100.127 concerning the written agreement that must be entered into by the city and county in order to establish a joint planning and zoning operation. Subsection (1) reads in part as follows:
". . . Combined planning operations shall be jointly financed, and the agreement shall state the method of proration of financial support. " (Emphasis added).
Our answer below is premised upon the assumption such a written agreement has in fact been entered into.
We next refer to KRS 100.177 which provides that legislative bodies in the planning unit may appropriate out of general revenues for the expenses and accommodations for the work of the commission.
KRS 83A.130 (2) contains the general provision that the council shall, by ordinance, provide for sufficient revenue to operate city government and shall appropriate the funds of the city in a budget which shall provide for the orderly management of city resources.
In view of the specific requirement found in KRS 100.127 to the effect that combined planning operations shall be jointly financed and that the agreement shall state the method of prorating the financial support, we believe the city is obligated to appropriate sufficient funds to meet its responsibility with respect to the joint operation of the commission, taking into consideration any other funds it has or may receive from other sources as also provided in KRS 100.177. As you know, the word "shall" is generally mandatory in its application as defined in KRS 446.010 (29).
It is true that KRS 100.177 uses the word "may" with respect to the city's making appropriations to accommodate the commission; however, the requirements of KRS 100.127 are more direct and binding on the city to fund the program in our opinion. Also, since it is a governmental operation, KRS 83A.130 (12) supports this view by requiring the council to provide sufficient revenue to operate city government.