Request By:
Mr. Larry D. Noe
Taylor County Attorney
321 East Broadway
P.O. Box 15
Campbellsville, Kentucky 42718
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
OAG 82-601, written to you, concerned a proposed county vehicle sticker license tax. We concluded in that opinion, as you noted, that the Fiscal Court of Taylor County may impose an auto sticker tax under its police power, as found in KRS 67.083(3)(t); however, the proceeds therefrom cannot exceed the amount of revenue reasonably necessary to fund the administrative cost of the regulatory power.
Question No. 1:
"What administrative cost could be covered by the sticker tax?"
The administrative cost would include the expense of classifying, licensing, tagging and supervising vehicles and their drivers. Johnson v. City of Paducah, 285 Ky. 294, 147 S.W.2d 721 (1951) 722. Thus the criterion for determining whether an ordinance levying a license tax upon vehicles is properly within the exercise of the police power is this: The tax must only be sufficient to compensate the county for the issuance of the license, the necessary keeping of the records of such transactions, and the supervisory regulation over the subjects of the license. Further, the tax must not be unreasonable in amount for the county's police supervision provided for by it, nor more than was necessary for the purpose, considering the size of the county and the necessity for the police supervision. Daily v. City of Owensboro, 257 Ky. 281, 77 S.W.2d 939 (1935) 940.
Question No. 2:
"If additional funds over and above the administrative cost were generated could these funds be used to pay salaries and/or buy supplies and equipment to operate an ambulance service?"
As to whether the tax revenues exceed the amount reasonably necessary to administer the sticker ordinance, the court said in Daily v. City of Owensboro, above, that the burden of proof is upon the person attacking the ordinance. The question then becomes one of fact to be determined by the evidence in a court proceeding.
The answer to your question is that if the tax revenue actually exceeds the reasonable cost of administration, as defined above, the tax ordinance is invalid, and thus the excess over and above the reasonable cost of administration would cause the tax to be unconstitutional. On that basis the excess could not be legally spent for any county purpose.
We repeat that there is no legitimate or constitutional way to use the sticker tax for general revenue purposes. If a county government attempts to circumvent the well established law on this point, it can potentially only mean ahead grief for the fiscal court and ultimately the repayment of such tax to the taxpayers, where the rule is violated, as decreed by the courts.
Question No. 3:
"Could the fiscal court impose an automobile vehicle sticker tax under its police power for the purpose of funding a county wide police department for the purpose of regulating those vehicles that regularly travel the county roads within Taylor County?"
As we said earlier herein, the tax must only be sufficient for classifying, licensing, tagging and supervising vehicles and their drivers in connection with the sticker tax ordinance. That would involve the use of a county police force. However, the tax cannot be created merely to fund a county police force. As we have said, there is simply no way to legally circumvent the rule as to necessary administrative cost. See Dailey v. City of Owensboro, 257 Ky. 281, 77 S.W.2d 939 (1935) 940, which stresses that the tax must not be unreasonable in amount for the county's police supervision provided for by it, etc. See reference to that case in discussion under question no. 1.