Request By:
Mr. Caywood Metcalf
Garrard County Attorney
Courthouse
Lancaster, Kentucky 40444
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
The Garrard County Memorial Hospital was organized and constructed in 1947 under KRS 216.010 through 216.070. Those sections, however, were repealed by Acts 1978, Ch. 118, § 19. That legislation amended the important power statutes of fiscal courts, i.e., KRS 67.080 and 67.083.
Your letter reads in part:
"What bearing did the repeal of those statutes have on the hospital currently as to the following questions?
"1) What statutes now control or affect the operation and existence of the Garrard County Memorial Hospital?
"2) Is the case of
Knox County Fiscal Court v. Knox County General Hospital, Inc., 528 S.W.2d 672 (1975) still controlling?
"3) Under what authority would the Garrard Fiscal Court and/or the Hospital Board levy a voted tax to either remodel the present hospital or build a new hospital?
"4) Does the Fiscal Court still have power to adopt, amend or draw new constitution and by-laws and how much can it delegate to a hospital board to manage and operate the hospital in light of repeal of KRS 216.010 through KRS 216.090?"
Concerning question no. 1, and assuming Garrard County Hospital is still a county hospital, the most important statutes affecting that institution are KRS 67.0801(1), (2) and KRS 67.083(3)(d). You will note that KRS 67.083(3)(d) refers specifically to the fiscal court's making "provision of hospitals." (Emphasis added).
As relates to question no. 2, the case of
Knox Cty. Fiscal Court v. Knox Cty. Gen. Hosp., Inc., Ky., 528 S.W.2d 672 (1975), is still controlling on the point that a county hospital, if it is to remain a county hospital, must be subject to the overall control of that county's fiscal court.
In response to question no. 3, and assuming that the construction costs cannot be funded out of tax revenues available in the accounting year in which the county obligation would be made, the fiscal court can see to it that the question of financing such construction with a loan (without a bond issue) or a government bond issue be presented to the voters pursuant to §§ 157 and 158, Kentucky Constitution. See
Payne v. Covington, 276 Ky. 380, 123 S.W.2d 1045 (1938); and
Bell v. Board of Education of Barren Cty. School Dist., Ky., 343 S.W.2d 804 (1961). See the specific authority of the fiscal court to cause county government obligation bonds to be issued for this hospital construction as treated in KRS 66.010, 66.020, 66.030, 66.040, and 66.045. You and the fiscal court may wish to discuss any such proposed bonds with the State Local Finance Officer, Mr. Robert Purdom. See especially KRS 66.045. Without first notifying the State Local Finance Officer in writing, no bonds may be issued by or on behalf of any local government. See also KRS 66.210 and 66.310, concerning bond approval. We suggest that, if bonds are deemed to be necessary, you consult with bond counsel on such proposed issue.
As relates to question no. 4, the fiscal court, pursuant to KRS 67.080 and 67.083, can enact an ordinance treating the management of the county hospital by a board to be established by fiscal court. However, if the hospital is to remain a county hospital, the ultimate control and authority over the operation of the hospital by the fiscal court must be carefully and scrupulously retained in reality and in such county legislation. While the fiscal court can establish a board to conduct the day-to-day management of the county hospital, the fiscal court must retain for the county full ownership of the hospital property and final control and responsibility for the hospital. Such board membership must be purely and simply at the pleasure of the