Request By:
Mr. Wayne T. Rutherford
Pike County Judge/Executive
Courthouse
Main Street
Pikeville, Kentucky 41501
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
You request our opinion as to whether or not an entertainment permit, issued under KRS Chapter 231, is transferable to a new owner or a lessee.
A "place of entertainment" is defined in KRS 231.010. Assuming that a particular establishment comes within the above mentioned definition, KRS 231.020 requires a permit issued by the county judge/executive. That statute reads:
"No place of entertainment shall be operated outside the corporate limits of a city unless its owner or manager has a permit, issued to him by the county judge/executive in the county in which the place of entertainment is located, granting to him the privilege to operate the place of entertainment in that county."
KRS 231.030 provides that no permit shall be issued to a person who is not of good moral character or who will not, in the judgment of the county judge/executive, obey the laws of the state in carrying on of the business, or who within two n2) years prior to the date of filing of the application has been convicted in Kentucky of maintaining a public nuisance. KRS 231.040 relates to the application for a permit. It must be filed with the county clerk and contain the occupation of the owner or manager for five years immediately preceding the date of filing the application. The notice of filing the application has to be advertised in the newspaper. KRS 231.050 and 231.060. The action of the county judge/executive on such application goes into the county records. The county attorney must investigate the applicant and file a report, recommending granting or denying the permit. Then the county judge/executive holds a public hearing on the application. KRS 231.080.
The court wrote this in Veterans of Foreign Wars v. Scott, Ky., 278 S.W.2d 733 (1955) 735:
"We think it was the intention of the legislature in enacting KRS, Chapter 231 to allow the county judge, through the exercise of a reasonable discretion, to determine whether or not a place of entertainment should be granted a permit under the provisions of KRS 231.020."
However, the key element in this whole matter of passing on the application rests largely on the "personal" aspect of the owner or manager applicant. It can be seen from reading the statutory sections mentioned above that the permit boils down to a strictly personal or individual business, since the legislative guidelines relate to the applicant's "good moral character" and a person who will obey the laws of the state in operating such a place. The guidelines concern data of any conviction of "maintaining a public nuisance. " The guidelines require data as to the occupation of the owner or manager applicant.
Within the framework of the above legislative guidelines which stress the personal or individual aspect of applications, it is our opinion that a permit, once granted to a particular individual, cannot be transferred to a new owner or manager of the place of entertainment. You simply cannot transfer a man's character and work experience to another.
Each new owner or manager situation is a new situation, and requires the application process all over again. This legislative policy is based upon sound considerations of public policy. Not every applicant will be able to qualify.