Skip to main content

Request By:

Mr. John M. Stephens
Stephens, Combs & Page
First National Bank Building
P.O. Drawer 31
Pikeville, Kentucky 41501

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 regarding a county-wide local option election held in Pike County on August 24, 1982. The county was dry prior to the election and remained dry after the election. You have posed the following questions concerning the election:

(1) May the votes for Pikeville, a fourth-class city, be tabulated separately from the remaining county votes outside the corporate limits of the city?

Answer: No. KRS 242.125(1) authorizes a local option election in any city of the first four classes in a "dry" county. "It does not provide for separate voting by such cities when a county-wide election is called in a 'dry' county." Ball v. Stumbo, Ky., 405 S.W.2d 292 (1966). KRS 242.125(2) authorizes separate votes for such cities when a county-wide election is called for a county that is not entirely dry by reason of a county-wide election. Pike County does not fall within that category. Id.

(2) Since the majority of votes within the city of Pikeville were against prohibition, are the provisions of KRS 242.220 to 242.430 inapplicable to the city without an additional election?

Answer: No. The election held on August 24, 1982 was a county-wide election. With respect to calling a county-wide election, the city of Pikeville is simply a segment of Pike County. Mastin v. Cornett, Ky., 373 S.W.2d 424 (1963). The city of Pikeville may, however, proceed immediately with a separate local option election pursuant to KRS 242.125(1), to take the sense of the people as to discontinuance of prohibition within the city. See OAG 81-271, attached hereto.

(3) At whose expense shall the city-wide election be conducted?

"The cost of the election shall be borne by the county." KRS 242.060.

We trust this information has satisfactorily answered your questions. If we can be of further assistance, please contact us.

LLM Summary
The decision OAG 82-534 addresses several questions regarding a local option election in Pike County, which remained dry after the election. It clarifies that votes for Pikeville cannot be tabulated separately in a county-wide dry election, the city of Pikeville must follow the county-wide election results unless it holds a separate local option election, and the cost of such a city-wide election would be borne by the county. OAG 81-271 is cited to explain the authority and process for Pikeville to conduct its own local option election.
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:
1982 Ky. AG LEXIS 114
Cites:
Neighbors

Support Our Work

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