Request By:
Mr. David H. Bland
Kentucky Jailers Association
McCowans Ferry Road
Versailles, Kentucky 40383
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
KRS 441.008 provides for the development of a jail budget and the disbursement process. Since the adoption of 1982-83 jail budgets, several questions have arisen.
Question No. 1:
"To what extent is a jailer limited in transferring funds from one budget line item to another? Eg. Is he limited to only transfer within major budget categories (personnel, operations, repair and maintenance) or can he transfer both within and between so long as he does not exceed the amount of the total jail budget? "
KRS 441.008 reads:
"(1) KRS 64.345 and 64.350 notwithstanding, by July 1, 1982, and by May 1 of each year thereafter, the fiscal court in consultation with the jailer shall adopt an operating budget for the jail which shall provide for the expenditure of all state, county and other funds for jail operations.
"(2) The county treasurer shall disburse jail operating funds at the direction of the jailer, provided the expenditures are within authorized budget categories, and shall keep books of accounts of all receipts and disbursements and make such reports as are required by the state local finance officer."
At the outset, the statute presents an anomaly, i.e., a deviation from general rules. We refer to that part of the statute permitting the county treasurer to disburse jail operating funds at the direction of the jailer, "provided the expenditures are within authorized budget categories. . ." (Emphasis added). Actually, the jail budget is an integral part of the county budget in connection with the adoption of a budget under the budget process outlined in KRS Chapter 68. Thus the fiscal court adopts a particular budget, including the operating budget for the county jail, in consultation with the jailer as to the jail part of that budget.
Under KRS 441.008, the county treasurer and county jailer can disburse jail operating funds only if the expenditures are within authorized budget categories. See OAG 82-424. There is no statutory authority for a jailer's transferring funds from one jail budget line item to another, regardless of what the categories are.
On the other hand, since the jail budget is an integral part of the overall county budget, the fiscal court has the authority to transfer money set up in the jail budget to another budget fund of the jail budget, in order to provide for an emergency. See KRS 68.290. The fiscal court could transfer money from a jail budget item to a county non-jail budget item to provide for an emergency. However, such transfer would be subject to these conditions: (1) the transfer must not create an emergency for the jail; and (2) the restrictions of KRS 441.007(3) must be carefully observed. That subsection requires that all state and federal and other local government contributions to the jail be spent on the jail operation, as provided in KRS 441.006. It requires that any state contributions to the jail be expended on the jail operation within twelve (12) months of the close of the fiscal year in which such funds were received.
However, in view of the provision in KRS 441.008 that the jail budget be formulated by fiscal court in consultation with the jailer, we believe that by strong implication of KRS 441.008 the fiscal court, in transferring money between jail funds under KRS 68.290, should consult with the jailer on such transfers.
Question No. 2:
"2. In preparing the jail budgets certain revenue or income estimates were made. When outside income sources fell short of the budgeted expenditures, the fiscal courts appropriated local tax dollars to achieve a balanced budget. After the budgets were approved, several counties have realized new and unbudgeted revenues eg. payments from the Corrections Cabinet for state prisoners, room and board payments by prisoners and work release funds.
"Two questions arise:
(a) Doesn't the statute require that the jailer be involved in budgeting these new funds?
(b) Can these new funds be used to displace the local tax funds originally budgeted by the fiscal court?"
KRS 441.008(1) provides in part that the fiscal court in consultation with the jailer shall adopt an operating budget for the jail. By consulting with the jailer, the jailer is given an opportunity to make a contribution to the overall budget process, found in KRS Chapter 68, by the use of his perspective of the jail function and its specific financial needs.
In connection with these new or unanticipated funds, the fiscal court, under KRS 68.280, may make provision for the expenditure of receipts unanticipated in the original budget by preparing an amendment to the budget. The amendment must show the source and amount of the unanticipated receipts and specifying the budget funds that are to be increased thereby. The amendment must be submitted to the State Local Finance Officer subject to the same provisions as the original budget.
It is our opinion that the fiscal court, in preparing a budget amendment, should consult with the jailer, as strongly implied in KRS 441.008. It would be illogical to say that the jailer must be consulted in formulating the original budget, but not on an amendment. In fact, KRS 441.008 should be given a practical interpretation to carry out the manifest purpose of KRS 441.008. The purpose of KRS 441.008, as relates to the jail budget, is to make use of the jailer's input on the jail part of the county budget. Rouse v. Johnson, 234 ky. 473, 28 S.W.2d 745 (1930).
Finally, you ask whether the new funds could displace (free up) county tax revenue budgeted originally for jail purposes?
The answer is yes, provided that the adequate and efficient operation of the jail would in no way be lessened or impaired.