Request By:
Mr. Robert L. Caummisar
Attorney at Law
301 West Main Street
Grayson, Kentucky 41143
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Carter County citizens established a library district pursuant to KRS 173.720 in May, 1979. Litigation concerning the establishment has been concluded. The district covers only Carter County.
KRS 173.725(1) provides in part that upon the creation of a library district, the fiscal court of each county in the district shall notify the Department of Library and Archives of such establishment. "The Department of Library and Archives shall then recommend to the county judge executive of each county in the district the names of suitable persons from that county to be appointed to the board." (Emphasis added). The county judge executive is required to make the appointments from the list of persons recommended by the Department of Library and Archives.
On March 24, 1982, the State Library Director, James Nelson, recommended six persons to Hon. Joe Kitchen, Carter County Judge Executive, to serve as trustees (the Department recommends twice as many persons for each county as the county is entitled to have members appointed) .
When the district consists of (1) county, the county judge executive shall appoint five (5) persons from that county as members of the district board. Under KRS 173.725, the Department of Library and Archives and the county judge executive in making recommendation and the appointments shall attempt to assure, to the extent permitted by the county's entitlement to board members, that the board includes members from different geographical areas, and from both cities and unincorporated areas of the county.
The question is: What is meant by the word "suitable" as to persons recommended by the Department for board membership?"
You have written that two of the six recommended and which were appointed on March 25, 1982, were in May, 1979 and throughout the litigation members of the fiscal court which voted unanimously to reject the creation of the library district, and which same fiscal court appealed the adverse circuit court decision three successive times. The other four recommended persons are known opponents of the library as created in May, 1979, and have spoken and acted out their opposition.
Thus your ultimate question is whether the proposed recommended persons to serve on the library board are "suitable" under the law, in view of the fact that such persons as board members are expected to insure the best operation of the library system under their control.
KRS 173.745(1) provides in part that "The board shall establish, equip and maintain libraries or contract with existing libraries for the furnishing of library service for the district and do all things necessary to provide efficient library service." (Emphasis added).
It is our opinion that KRS 173.725 implicitly provides that library district board members must, as a minimal qualification, be willing to accept the mandates of KRS 173.745 as to doing all things necessary to provide efficient library service. In reaching this conclusion we read KRS 173.725 and 173.745 together under the doctrine of pari materia. See