Skip to main content

Request By:

Danny E. Darnall
County Attorney
Meade County Courthouse
Brandenburg, Kentucky 40108

Opinion

Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Suzanne Guss, Assistant Attorney General

This is in response to your request for an opinion of this office and our telephone conversation regarding the authority of the County Judge Executive to regulate the traffic in alcoholic beverages. The following questions were presented:

(1) Whether the county judge executive has the authority to act as the local alcoholic beverage control administrator if the fiscal court has failed to pass a resolution declaring that regulation of traffic in alcoholic beverages is necessary.

No. A resolution of this type is a condition precedent to the assumption of authority as alcoholic beverage control administrator by the county judge executive. KRS 241.110 provides:

"(1) The fiscal court of any county in which traffic in alcoholic beverages is not forbidden under KRS Chapter 242 may by resolution declare that regulation of the traffic in that county is necessary. The county judge/executive shall thereupon constitute a county alcoholic beverage control administrator for the county. . . ."

Thus, the resolution triggers the county judge's responsibilities as alcoholic beverage control administrator.

(2) If the fiscal court has failed to pass such resolution what is the scope of authority of the county judge executive regarding regulation of traffic of alcoholic beverages in the county?

None. KRS 67.710 defines the powers and duties of the county judge/executive. Neither the general nor specific powers of the county judge/executive set forth in KRS 67.710 include the authority to regulate traffic in alcoholic beverages. Such "additional power" must be granted by the fiscal court. KRS 67.710; KRS 241.110.

Your final question is a hypothetical question based upon the assumption that the fiscal court has passed a resolution declaring that regulation of traffic in alcoholic beverages is necessary. This office is prohibited from rendering opinions in response to abstract or hypothetical questions 40 KAR 1:020.

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:
1983 Ky. AG LEXIS 433
Neighbors

Support Our Work

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