Request By:
Honorable James S. Secrest
Allen County Attorney
P.O. Box 35
Scottsville, Kentucky 42164
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
The Sheriff, the County Patrolman, and Constable have requested the fiscal court to procure and pay the premium on personal liability insurance which would protect such officers personally in the event they are found negligent in sttempting to carry out their law enforcement duties, including effecting arrests.
You ask whether or not the Fiscal Court can pay for such coverage.
KRS 67.180 permits a fiscal court, in its discretion, for the protection of the public and its employees, to appropriate county funds to purchase policies of insurance of all kinds deemed advisable, covering vehicles operated by the county, etc., and compensation insurance. The Court, in Ginter v. Montgomery County, Ky., 327 S.W.2d 98 (1959), 99, wrote that the statute is permissive only and imposes no obligation or duty on any fiscal court to purchase such insurance.
Under an appropriate ordinance of the Fiscal Court, pursuant to KRS 67.083 [Home Rule statute], it is our opinion that the Fiscal Court could so provide a permissive basis for paying the premiums on personal liability insurance covering such peace officers in the line of duty. While the insurance would cover their personal liability, still such insurance coverage would be in the public interest since it would protect the public in the employee's performance of their (employees') duties and it would be construed to be a fringe benefit for the peace officer in consideration of public service. See §§ 171 and 3, Kentucky Constitution; and Industrial Develop. Auth. v. Eastern Ky. Reg. Pl. Com'n, Ky., 332 S.W.2d 274 (1960), 276. Such an ordinance would not be in conflict with KRS 67.180, since that statute does not cover insurance of the kind in question.