Request By:
Honorable Bernard C. McCloud
Mayor, City of Worthington
Worthington, Kentucky
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Walter C. Herdman, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
As Mayor of the city of Worthington, a city of the fifth class, you initially raise the following question:
"1. Four councilmen met and held a meeting with one member being mayor pro-tem in absence of the mayor. Is this a quorum? "
The answer to the above question would be in the affirmative since the person serving as mayor pro tem is a member of the six-man council elected pursuant to KRS 87.010. Four (4) members of the six (6) man council would constitute a quorum as required by KRS 87.030. The fact that he is serving as mayor pro tem is of no consequence with respect to his right to vote on any matter before the council since he is also a member.
Your second question is as follows:
"2. Does mayor pro-tem have the right to vote on all issues even if there are no ties? If so, what if another person other than a councilman was mayor pro-tem, could he vote on issues? Does the statute or law mean no pro-tem has voting power except in case of a tie, the same as a mayor? Can you be a mayor pro-tem and a member of council at the same time?"
Since the mayor can only vote in the case of a tie pursuant to KRS 87.030, the mayor por tem, when serving as mayor, would stand in the same position and only be permitted to vote in the case of a tie, unless as pointed out above the mayor pro tem is a member of the city council, which would be perfectly legal in so far as serving in both capacities, that of councilman and mayor pro tem.
Your third question is as follows:
"3. A motion was made to change time of regular meeting and so voted by majority of council. However, no ordinance was presented or voted on at this time or any other meeting, no ordinance was ever read or approved at any meeting, but, an ordinance was drawn and published later that month. Does not changing a regular meeting require an ordinance being voted on and approved before publishing or going into effect?"
Though the above question 87.030(1) provides that the city council shall hold regular meetings once a month at a time fixed by ordinance. Thus, any attempt to change the time of the regular meeting would have to be pursuant to an amendment to said ordinance which, of course, must be published in order to be effective under the terms of KRS 87.050(3).
Your fourth question is as follows:
"4. If a duty of the mayor is general supervision over affairs of the city (Statute 87.130), does this include supervising of all city employees? Does any councilman have a right to execute orders to employees even though mayor has them working on projects? If councilman does not have authority to issue orders, what action does the mayor have to correct this?"
The city council is vested with the administrative powers of the city, which includes the power to hire and fire city employes as well as supervise their employment activities, however, such supervision could be delegated to other officials such as the mayor. See Griffin v. City of Paducah, Ky., 382 S.W.2d 402 (1964), and OAG's 77-371 and 67-536, copies attached.
Your fifth question is as follows:
"5. Even though the chief of police is in command of police department (Statute 87.130), should not the chief himself be under the supervision of the mayor? Is being in command of the department and supervising the department two separate things? Only authority given to chief of police to supervise is 'chief of police to supervise chain gang.'"
The chief of police of a city of the fifth class is in command of the police department pursuant to KRS 95.730(1). KRS 87.130, he has no specific statutory authority over the police department of a fifth class city, and the comand of the police force in its day to day operation must be exercised by the chief of police. See OAG's 76-570, 64-127 and 68-146, copies attached.