Request By:
Honorable Frederick G. Neikirk
Pulaski County Attorney
104 West Columbia Street
Somerset, Kentucky 42501
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Your problem concerns the county treasurer's publishing of a detailed financial statement of the county pursuant to KRS 424.220. You assume this calls for a complete breakdown of county expenses, i.e., involving each check issued by the county.
You ask whether the county can comply with the law by publishing a condensed financial statement under general headings and file a detailed statement with the county court clerk. The answer is "no".
The statute [KRS 424.220] provides that the statement must show "the amount disbursed, the date of each disbursement, for what purpose expended, and to whom paid, except that only the totals of amounts paid to each individual as salary or commission and public utility bills need to be shown." (Emphasis added).
With the exception of payroll and public utility vouchers, the above language is such that we are led to conclude that all disbursements, with the exceptions as noted, must be reflected in the published financial statement by way of showing each particularized, individual disbursement voucher.
While you make an interesting point that such detailed publication can be expensive, the prime point here is that the legislative policy of detailed publication for the reading public has been expressed. As an aside, it would seem that the chances for apprising the public on a quantum basis of the county's financial transactions are considerably increased by newspaper publication as contrasted with filing in the clerk's office.
KRS 424.220 was first enacted in 1958. However, an earlier form of required published financial statements of local officers handling public money was contained in KRS 61.290 [repealed in 1958].
Justice Bert Combs, in Cooper v. Kentuckian Citizen, Ky., 258 S.W.2d 695 (1953) 697, described the legislative intent behind this kind of law:
"The statute was enacted in 1928 in order to bring the light of publicity on the financial affairs of local governmental units. The legislative intent, implicit in the Act, was to require those officers who administer public funds to publish annually a statement which will inform the taxpayers of the amount of money collected, when and to whom it was expended, and the purpose of which it was expended.
Shelby County Fiscal Court v. Cosine, 174 Ky. 504, 192 S.W. 626."
In Cooper, above, it was argued by appellant that the statute places an unreasonable burden on the public officials and an unnecessary expense on the taxpayers. The court, in rejecting that argument, wrote this at page 697:
"But it is not the prerogative of the courts to weigh the wisdom of the statute. The legislature had the constitutional right to pass it and it is the duty of the courts to enforce it."