Request By:
Mr. Barkley J. Sturgill
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 469
22 Court Street
Prestonsburg, Kentucky 41653
Opinion
Opinion By: David L. Armstrong, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Your letter presents a question relating to the county's advertising for bids for services. It reads in part:
"On May 20, 1983, the Floyd County Fiscal Court passed an order to advertise for bids for an audit of Floyd County, Kentucky, for all county funds for the fiscal year of 1982-83. The advertisement for bids to be accepted on June 7, 1983."
"On June 1, 1983, Burchett & Bottoms, Certified Public Accountants submitted a bid to the Floyd County Fiscal Court for the audit as advertised."
"Subsequently there was no action taken on the bid submitted, and the question is what recourse Burchett and Bottoms, Certified Public Accountants would have to require the Floyd County Fiscal Court to act on their bid or what can be done, if anything, because the fiscal court took no action pursuant to the advertisement. "
KRS 43.070(1)(a) requires the State Auditor's office to audit annually the funds contained in each county's budget. KRS 64.810 permits any county clerk, sheriff, or jailer to employ a certified public accountant to audit the accounts of his office in lieu of the audit conducted by the state auditor, as required by KRS 43.070, if the auditor of public accounts declines to perform the audit or has failed to respond to written notice of intent to employ a C.P.A. within thirty (30) days of receipt of notice. However, that special procedure has no application to the auditing of funds of the county budgets.
We have been informed by the State Auditor's Office that the Floyd County Funds for fiscal year 1982-83 have been audited by that office. We were further informed by that office that the State Auditor did not consent to the auditing of the subject funds by a private C.P.A. firm. According to the State Auditor's office, when the State Auditor's Office cannot audit (for good reason: lack of personnel etc.) a particular county fund, a C.P.A. firm may be used by that county with the permission of the State Auditor's Office. There is no statute covering that. In any event, the State Auditor's Office made the audit.
It is our opinion that the fiscal court, in taking no action on the advertisement, acted properly. We believe that the literal language of KRS 43.070(1)(a) must be observed. H. O. Hurley Co. v. Martin, 267 Ky. 182, 101 S.W.2d 657 (1937).